Search (80 results, page 1 of 4)

0.056505345 = product of:
  0.16951603 = sum of:
    0.16951603 = weight(_text_:systematik in 2471) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16951603 = score(doc=2471,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.355158 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
          0.057548698 = queryNorm
        0.4772975 = fieldWeight in 2471, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2471)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Der vorliegende Artikel möchte einen Ansatz vorstellen, der aufzeigt, wie die Bibliothek der Universität Konstanz - und andere Bibliotheken mit einer Haussystematik - bei ihrer eigenen Systematik bleiben und trotzdem von der Sacherschließungsarbeit anderer Bibliotheken profitieren können. Vorgestellt wird ein Konzept, das zeigt, wie mithilfe von Semantic-Web-Technologie Ähnlichkeitsrelationen zwischen verbaler Sacherschließung, RVK, DDC und hauseigenen Systematiken erstellt werden können, die das Übersetzen von Sacherschließungsinformationen in andere Ordnungssysteme erlauben und damit Automatisierung in der Sacherschließung möglich machen.

0.048832014 = product of:
  0.07324802 = sum of:
    0.023949554 = product of:
      0.07184866 = sum of:
        0.07184866 = weight(_text_:objects in 3109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07184866 = score(doc=3109,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.30587542 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.23489517 = fieldWeight in 3109, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3109)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.049298465 = product of:
      0.09859693 = sum of:
        0.09859693 = weight(_text_:indexing in 3109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09859693 = score(doc=3109,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.2202888 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.4475803 = fieldWeight in 3109, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3109)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

This proposal presents the methodology of indexing with images suggested by De Brito and Caribé (2015). The imagetic model is used as a compatible mechanism with FRSAD for a global information share and use of subject data, both within the library sector and beyond. The conceptual model of imagetic indexing shows how images are related to topics and 'key-images' are interpreted as nomens to implement the FRSAD model. Indexing with images consists of using images instead of key-words or descriptors, to represent and organize information. Implementing the imaged navigation in OPACs denotes multiple advantages derived from this rethinking the OPAC anew, since we are looking forward to sharing concepts within the subject authority data. Images, carrying linguistic objects, permeate inter-social and cultural concepts. In practice it includes translated metadata, symmetrical multilingual thesaurus, or any traditional indexing tools. iOPAC embodies efforts focused on conceptual levels as expected from librarians. Imaged interfaces are more intuitive since users do not need specific training for information retrieval, offering easier comprehension of indexing codes, larger conceptual portability of descriptors (as images), and a better interoperability between discourse codes and indexing competences affecting positively social and cultural interoperability. The imagetic methodology deploys R&D fields for more suitable interfaces taking into consideration users with specific needs such as deafness and illiteracy. This methodology arouse questions about the paradigms of the primacy of orality in information systems and pave the way to a legitimacy of multiple perspectives in document indexing by suggesting a more universal communication system based on images. Interdisciplinarity in neurosciences, linguistics and information sciences would be desirable competencies for further investigations about he nature of cognitive processes in information organization and classification while developing assistive KOS for individuals with communication problems, such autism and deafness.

0.042582624 = product of:
  0.06387393 = sum of:
    0.03592433 = product of:
      0.10777299 = sum of:
        0.10777299 = weight(_text_:objects in 1802) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10777299 = score(doc=1802,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.30587542 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.35234275 = fieldWeight in 1802, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1802)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.027949603 = product of:
      0.055899207 = sum of:
        0.055899207 = weight(_text_:indexing in 1802) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.055899207 = score(doc=1802,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2202888 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.2537542 = fieldWeight in 1802, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1802)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The German subject headings authority file - SWD - provides a terminologically controlled vocabulary, covering all fields of knowledge. The subject headings are determined by the German Rules for the Subject Catalogue. The authority file is produced and updated daily by participating libraries from around Germany, Austria and Switzerland. Over the last twenty years, it grew to an online-accessible database with about 550.000 headings. They are linked to other thesauri, also to French and English equivalents and with notations of the Dewey Decimal Classification. Thus, it allows multilingual access and searching in dispersed, heterogeneously indexed catalogues. The vocabulary is not only used for cataloguing library materials, but also web-resources and objects in archives and museums.

Source

Subject access: preparing for the future. Conference on August 20 - 21, 2009 in Florence, the IFLA Classification and Indexing Section sponsored an IFLA satellite conference entitled "Looking at the Past and Preparing for the Future". Eds.: P. Landry et al

0.041219912 = product of:
  0.061829865 = sum of:
    0.04233723 = product of:
      0.12701169 = sum of:
        0.12701169 = weight(_text_:objects in 5757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12701169 = score(doc=5757,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.30587542 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.41523993 = fieldWeight in 5757, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5757)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.019492636 = product of:
      0.03898527 = sum of:
        0.03898527 = weight(_text_:22 in 5757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03898527 = score(doc=5757,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20152573 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5757, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5757)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Cultural heritage institutions are publishing their digital collections over the web as LOD. This is is a new step in the patrimonialization and curatorial processes developed by such institutions. Many of these collections are thematically superimposed and complementary. Frequently, objects in these collections present culturally relevant relationships, such as a book about a painting, or a draft or sketch of a famous painting, etc. LOD technology enables such heritage records to be interlinked, achieving interoperability and adding value to digital collections, thus empowering heritage institutions. An aim of this research is characterizing such culturally relevant relationships and organizing them in a vocabulary. Use cases or examples of relationships between objects suggested by curators or mentioned in literature and in the conceptual models as FRBR/LRM, CIDOC CRM and RiC-CM, were collected and used as examples or inspiration of cultural relevant relationships. Relationships identified are collated and compared for identifying those with the same or similar meaning, synthesized and normalized. A set of thirty-three culturally relevant relationships are identified and formalized as a LOD property vocabulary to be used by digital curators to interlink digital collections. The results presented are provisional and a starting point to be discussed, tested, and enhanced.

Date

4. 3.2020 14:22:41

0.035545453 = product of:
  0.10663636 = sum of:
    0.10663636 = product of:
      0.31990907 = sum of:
        0.31990907 = weight(_text_:3a in 306) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.31990907 = score(doc=306,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4878985 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.65568775 = fieldWeight in 306, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=306)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Content

Vgl.: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5386707&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D5386707.

0.03548552 = product of:
  0.053228278 = sum of:
    0.029936943 = product of:
      0.089810826 = sum of:
        0.089810826 = weight(_text_:objects in 5902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.089810826 = score(doc=5902,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.30587542 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.29361898 = fieldWeight in 5902, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5902)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.023291335 = product of:
      0.04658267 = sum of:
        0.04658267 = weight(_text_:indexing in 5902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04658267 = score(doc=5902,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2202888 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.21146181 = fieldWeight in 5902, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5902)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

With networked information access to heterogeneous data sources, the problem of terminology provision and interoperability of controlled vocabulary schemes such as thesauri becomes increasingly urgent. Solutions are needed to improve the performance of full-text retrieval systems and to guide the design of controlled terminology schemes for use in structured data, including metadata. Thesauri are created in different languages, with different scope and points of view and at different levels of abstraction and detail, to accomodate access to a specific group of collections. In any wider search accessing distributed collections, the user would like to start with familiar terminology and let the system find out the correspondences to other terminologies in order to retrieve equivalent results from all addressed collections. This paper investigates possible semantic differences that may hinder the unambiguous mapping and transition from one thesaurus to another. It focusses on the differences of meaning of terms and their relations as intended by their creators for indexing and querying a specific collection, in contrast to methods investigating the statistical relevance of terms for objects in a collection. It develops a notion of optimal mapping, paying particular attention to the intellectual quality of mappings between terms from different vocabularies and to problems of polysemy. Proposals are made to limit the vagueness introduced by the transition from one vocabulary to another. The paper shows ways in which thesaurus creators can improve their methodology to meet the challenges of networked access of distributed collections created under varying conditions. For system implementers, the discussion will lead to a better understanding of the complexity of the problem

0.034227178 = product of:
  0.10268153 = sum of:
    0.10268153 = sum of:
      0.055899207 = weight(_text_:indexing in 3691) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.055899207 = score(doc=3691,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2202888 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
            0.057548698 = queryNorm
          0.2537542 = fieldWeight in 3691, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3691)
      0.046782322 = weight(_text_:22 in 3691) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.046782322 = score(doc=3691,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20152573 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.057548698 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3691, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3691)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Ideally, intersystem relations complement highly expressive and thoroughly structured relational indexing languages. The relational structures of the participating systems contribute to the meaning of the individual terms or classes. When conceptualizing mapping relations the structural and functional design of the respective systems must be fully taken into account. As intersystem relations may differ considerably from familiar interconcept relations, the creation of an adequate inventory that is general in coverage and specific in depth demands a deep understanding of the requirements and properties of mapping relations. The characteristics of specific mapping relations largely rely on the characteristics of the systems they are intended to connect. The detailed declaration of differences and peculiarities of specific mapping relations is an important prerequisite for modelling these relations. First approaches towards specifying

Date

22. 7.2010 17:11:51

0.034227178 = product of:
  0.10268153 = sum of:
    0.10268153 = sum of:
      0.055899207 = weight(_text_:indexing in 1421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.055899207 = score(doc=1421,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2202888 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
            0.057548698 = queryNorm
          0.2537542 = fieldWeight in 1421, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1421)
      0.046782322 = weight(_text_:22 in 1421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.046782322 = score(doc=1421,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20152573 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.057548698 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1421, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1421)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

To make better use of knowledge organization systems (KOS) for query expansion, we have developed a pattern-based technique for composition ontology mapping in a specific domain. The technique was tested in a two-step mapping. The user's free-text queries were first mapped to Getty's Art & Architecture Thesaurus (AAT) terms. The AAT-based queries were then mapped to a search engine's indexing vocabulary (ARTstor terms). The result indicated that our technique has improved the mapping success rate from 40% to 70%. We discuss also how the technique may be applied to other KOS mapping and how it may be implemented in practical systems.

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik

0.02538961 = product of:
  0.07616883 = sum of:
    0.07616883 = product of:
      0.22850648 = sum of:
        0.22850648 = weight(_text_:3a in 1000) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.22850648 = score(doc=1000,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4878985 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 1000, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1000)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Content

Master thesis Master of Science (Library and Information Studies) (MSc), Universität Wien. Advisor: Christoph Steiner. Vgl.: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/371680244_Vergabe_von_DDC-Sachgruppen_mittels_eines_Schlagwort-Thesaurus. DOI: 10.25365/thesis.70030. Vgl. dazu die Präsentation unter: https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=0CAIQw7AJahcKEwjwoZzzytz_AhUAAAAAHQAAAAAQAg&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwiki.dnb.de%2Fdownload%2Fattachments%2F252121510%2FDA3%2520Workshop-Gabler.pdf%3Fversion%3D1%26modificationDate%3D1671093170000%26api%3Dv2&psig=AOvVaw0szwENK1or3HevgvIDOfjx&ust=1687719410889597&opi=89978449.

0.022820752 = product of:
  0.06846225 = sum of:
    0.06846225 = product of:
      0.1369245 = sum of:
        0.1369245 = weight(_text_:indexing in 962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1369245 = score(doc=962,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.2202888 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.6215682 = fieldWeight in 962, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=962)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

An integrated information retrieval system generally contains multiple databases that are inconsistent in terms of their content and indexing. This paper proposes a rough set-based transfer (RST) model for integration of the concepts of document databases using various indexing languages, so that users can search through the multiple databases using any of the current indexing languages. The RST model aims to effectively create meaningful transfer relations between the terms of two indexing languages, provided a number of documents are indexed with them in parallel. In our experiment, the indexing concepts of two databases respectively using the Thesaurus of Social Science (IZ) and the Schlagwortnormdatei (SWD) are integrated by means of the RST model. Finally, this paper compares the results achieved with a cross-concordance method, a conditional probability based method and the RST model.

0.020740924 = product of:
  0.06222277 = sum of:
    0.06222277 = product of:
      0.1866683 = sum of:
        0.1866683 = weight(_text_:objects in 2965) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1866683 = score(doc=2965,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.30587542 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.6102756 = fieldWeight in 2965, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2965)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Repositories are web portals that provide access to learning objects. Resources can be easily located through the use of metadata, an important factor to increase the ease of searching for digital resources in repositories. However, there are as yet no similarly effective methods in order to increase access to learning objects. The main goal of this paper is to offer an alternative search system to improve access to academic learning objects and publications for several repositories through the use of information visualisation and Simple Knowledge Organization Schemes (SKOS). To this end, we have developed a visual framework and have used the Organic.Edunet and AGRIS as case studies in order to access academic and scientific publication resources respectively. In this paper, we present the results of our work through a test aimed at evaluating the whole visual framework, and offer recommendations on how to integrate this type of visual search into academic repositories based on SKOS.

0.018193126 = product of:
  0.054579377 = sum of:
    0.054579377 = product of:
      0.109158754 = sum of:
        0.109158754 = weight(_text_:22 in 8365) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.109158754 = score(doc=8365,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20152573 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 8365, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=8365)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 6.2015 16:08:38

0.01613671 = product of:
  0.04841013 = sum of:
    0.04841013 = product of:
      0.09682026 = sum of:
        0.09682026 = weight(_text_:indexing in 3393) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09682026 = score(doc=3393,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.2202888 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.4395151 = fieldWeight in 3393, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3393)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Digital Libraries currently face the challenge of integrating many different types of research information (e.g. publications, primary data, expert's profiles, institutional profiles, project information etc.) according to their scientific users' needs. To date no general, integrated model for knowledge organization and retrieval in Digital Libraries exists. This causes the problem of structural and semantic heterogeneity due to the wide range of metadata standards, indexing vocabularies and indexing approaches used for different types of information. The research presented in this paper focuses on areas in which activities are being undertaken in the field of Digital Libraries in order to treat semantic interoperability problems. We present a model for the integrated retrieval of factual and textual data which combines multiple approaches to semantic interoperability und sets them into context. Embedded in the research cycle, traditional content indexing methods for publications meet the newer, but rarely used ontology-based approaches which seem to be better suited for representing complex information like the one contained in survey data. The benefits of our model are (1) easy re-use of available knowledge organisation systems and (2) reduced efforts for domain modelling with ontologies.

0.015619576 = product of:
  0.046858728 = sum of:
    0.046858728 = product of:
      0.14057618 = sum of:
        0.14057618 = weight(_text_:objects in 553) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14057618 = score(doc=553,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.30587542 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.4595864 = fieldWeight in 553, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=553)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Currently, a number of efforts are being carried out to integrate collections from different institutions and containing heterogeneous material. Examples of such projects are The European Library [1] and the Memory of the Netherlands [2]. A crucial point for the success of these is the availability to provide a unified access on top of the different collections, e.g. using one single vocabulary for querying or browsing the objects they contain. This is made difficult by the fact that the objects from different collections are often described using different vocabularies - thesauri, classification schemes - and are therefore not interoperable at the semantic level. To solve this problem, one can turn to semantic links - mappings - between the elements of the different vocabularies. If one knows that a concept C from a vocabulary V is semantically equivalent to a concept to a concept D from vocabulary W, then an appropriate search engine can return all the objects that were indexed against D for a query for objects described using C. We thus have an access to other collections, using a single one vocabulary. This is however an ideal situation, and hard alignment work is required to reach it. Several projects in the past have tried to implement such a solution, like MACS [3] and Renardus [4]. They have demonstrated very interesting results, but also highlighted the difficulty of aligning manually all the different vocabularies involved in practical cases, which sometimes contain hundreds of thousands of concepts. To alleviate this problem, a number of tools have been proposed in order to provide with candidate mappings between two input vocabularies, making alignment a (semi-) automatic task. Recently, the Semantic Web community has produced a lot of these alignment tools'. Several techniques are found, depending on the material they exploit: labels of concepts, structure of vocabularies, collection objects and external knowledge sources. Throughout our presentation, we will present a concrete heterogeneity case where alignment techniques have been applied to build a (pilot) browser, developed in the context of the STITCH project [5]. This browser enables a unified access to two collections of illuminated manuscripts, using the description vocabulary used in the first collection, Mandragore [6], or the one used by the second, Iconclass [7]. In our talk, we will also make the point for using unified representations the vocabulary semantic and lexical information. Additionally to ease the use of the alignment tools that have these vocabularies as input, turning to a standard representation format helps designing applications that are more generic, like the browser we demonstrate. We give pointers to SKOS [8], an open and web-enabled format currently developed by the Semantic Web community.

0.015594108 = product of:
  0.046782322 = sum of:
    0.046782322 = product of:
      0.093564644 = sum of:
        0.093564644 = weight(_text_:22 in 126) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.093564644 = score(doc=126,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20152573 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 126, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=126)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Content

Vortrag anlässlich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".

0.015594108 = product of:
  0.046782322 = sum of:
    0.046782322 = product of:
      0.093564644 = sum of:
        0.093564644 = weight(_text_:22 in 4786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.093564644 = score(doc=4786,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20152573 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 4786, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4786)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 9.2008 19:30:41

0.015527557 = product of:
  0.04658267 = sum of:
    0.04658267 = product of:
      0.09316534 = sum of:
        0.09316534 = weight(_text_:indexing in 3152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09316534 = score(doc=3152,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2202888 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.42292362 = fieldWeight in 3152, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3152)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Subject access: preparing for the future. Conference on August 20 - 21, 2009 in Florence, the IFLA Classification and Indexing Section sponsored an IFLA satellite conference entitled "Looking at the Past and Preparing for the Future". Eds.: P. Landry et al

0.015527557 = product of:
  0.04658267 = sum of:
    0.04658267 = product of:
      0.09316534 = sum of:
        0.09316534 = weight(_text_:indexing in 977) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09316534 = score(doc=977,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.2202888 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.42292362 = fieldWeight in 977, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=977)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The research study as reported here is an attempt to explore the possibilities of an AI/ML-based semi-automated indexing system in a library setup to handle large volumes of documents. It uses the Python virtual environment to install and configure an open source AI environment (named Annif) to feed the LOD (Linked Open Data) dataset of Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) as a standard KOS (Knowledge Organisation System). The framework deployed the Turtle format of LCSH after cleaning the file with Skosify, applied an array of backend algorithms (namely TF-IDF, Omikuji, and NN-Ensemble) to measure relative performance, and selected Snowball as an analyser. The training of Annif was conducted with a large set of bibliographic records populated with subject descriptors (MARC tag 650$a) and indexed by trained LIS professionals. The training dataset is first treated with MarcEdit to export it in a format suitable for OpenRefine, and then in OpenRefine it undergoes many steps to produce a bibliographic record set suitable to train Annif. The framework, after training, has been tested with a bibliographic dataset to measure indexing efficiencies, and finally, the automated indexing framework is integrated with data wrangling software (OpenRefine) to produce suggested headings on a mass scale. The entire framework is based on open-source software, open datasets, and open standards.

0.015371497 = product of:
  0.04611449 = sum of:
    0.04611449 = product of:
      0.09222898 = sum of:
        0.09222898 = weight(_text_:indexing in 2190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09222898 = score(doc=2190,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.2202888 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.41867304 = fieldWeight in 2190, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2190)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

With the establishment of global information spaces that are characterized by heterogeneity new kinds of knowledge organization systems (KOS) are needed to facilitate efficient subject access to available information resources. KOS need not to be built bottom-up. Internationalization and localization of common KOS enable making use of all different kinds of existing data from subject indexing for retrieval purposes and help creating a user-friendly tool that supports cross-national query modification and hermeneutic processes of information seeking as well as precise topical queries.

Source

New pespectives on subject indexing and classification: essays in honour of Magda Heiner-Freiling. Red.: K. Knull-Schlomann, u.a

0.013175569 = product of:
  0.039526705 = sum of:
    0.039526705 = product of:
      0.07905341 = sum of:
        0.07905341 = weight(_text_:indexing in 2191) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07905341 = score(doc=2191,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.2202888 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.057548698 = queryNorm
            0.3588626 = fieldWeight in 2191, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2191)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Most online library catalogues are not well equipped for subject search. On the one hand it is difficult to navigate the structures of the thesauri and classification systems used for indexing. Further, there is little or no support for the integration of crosswalks between different controlled vocabularies, so that a subject search query formulated using one controlled vocabulary will not find resources indexed with another knowledge organisation system even if there exists a crosswalk between them. In this paper we will look at SemanticWeb technologies and a prototype system leveraging those technologies in order to enhance the subject search possibilities in heterogeneously indexed repositories. Finally, we will have a brief look at different initiatives aimed at integrating library data into the SemanticWeb.

Source

New pespectives on subject indexing and classification: essays in honour of Magda Heiner-Freiling. Red.: K. Knull-Schlomann, u.a