-
Zeng, Q.; Yu, M.; Yu, W.; Xiong, J.; Shi, Y.; Jiang, M.: Faceted hierarchy : a new graph type to organize scientific concepts and a construction method (2019)
0.29
0.2943934 = product of:
0.5887868 = sum of:
0.047687992 = product of:
0.14306398 = sum of:
0.14306398 = weight(_text_:3a in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.14306398 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
0.25455406 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 400, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=400)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.14306398 = weight(_text_:2f in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.14306398 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
0.25455406 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 400, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=400)
0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02018744 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 400, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=400)
0.07153199 = product of:
0.14306398 = sum of:
0.14306398 = weight(_text_:3a in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.14306398 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
0.25455406 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 400, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=400)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.14306398 = weight(_text_:2f in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.14306398 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
0.25455406 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 400, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=400)
0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02018744 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 400, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=400)
0.14306398 = weight(_text_:2f in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.14306398 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
0.25455406 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 400, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=400)
0.5 = coord(7/14)
- Abstract
- On a scientific concept hierarchy, a parent concept may have a few attributes, each of which has multiple values being a group of child concepts. We call these attributes facets: classification has a few facets such as application (e.g., face recognition), model (e.g., svm, knn), and metric (e.g., precision). In this work, we aim at building faceted concept hierarchies from scientific literature. Hierarchy construction methods heavily rely on hypernym detection, however, the faceted relations are parent-to-child links but the hypernym relation is a multi-hop, i.e., ancestor-to-descendent link with a specific facet "type-of". We use information extraction techniques to find synonyms, sibling concepts, and ancestor-descendent relations from a data science corpus. And we propose a hierarchy growth algorithm to infer the parent-child links from the three types of relationships. It resolves conflicts by maintaining the acyclic structure of a hierarchy.
- Content
- Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Faclanthology.org%2FD19-5317.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0ZZFyq5wWTtNTvNkrvjlGA.
-
Broughton, V.: Facet analysis as a tool for modelling subject domains and terminologies (2011)
0.09
0.09482564 = product of:
0.22125982 = sum of:
0.021217827 = weight(_text_:subject in 4826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021217827 = score(doc=4826,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.19758089 = fieldWeight in 4826, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4826)
0.023791125 = weight(_text_:classification in 4826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023791125 = score(doc=4826,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24880521 = fieldWeight in 4826, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4826)
0.042440403 = product of:
0.08488081 = sum of:
0.08488081 = weight(_text_:bliss in 4826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08488081 = score(doc=4826,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21478812 = queryWeight, product of:
7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.3951839 = fieldWeight in 4826, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4826)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.08488081 = weight(_text_:bliss in 4826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08488081 = score(doc=4826,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21478812 = queryWeight, product of:
7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.3951839 = fieldWeight in 4826, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4826)
0.02513852 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 4826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02513852 = score(doc=4826,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.21506234 = fieldWeight in 4826, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4826)
0.023791125 = weight(_text_:classification in 4826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023791125 = score(doc=4826,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24880521 = fieldWeight in 4826, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4826)
0.42857143 = coord(6/14)
- Abstract
- Facet analysis is proposed as a general theory of knowledge organization, with an associated methodology that may be applied to the development of terminology tools in a variety of contexts and formats. Faceted classifications originated as a means of representing complexity in semantic content that facilitates logical organization and effective retrieval in a physical environment. This is achieved through meticulous analysis of concepts, their structural and functional status (based on fundamental categories), and their inter-relationships. These features provide an excellent basis for the general conceptual modelling of domains, and for the generation of KOS other than systematic classifications. This is demonstrated by the adoption of a faceted approach to many web search and visualization tools, and by the emergence of a facet based methodology for the construction of thesauri. Current work on the Bliss Bibliographic Classification (Second Edition) is investigating the ways in which the full complexity of faceted structures may be represented through encoded data, capable of generating intellectually and mechanically compatible forms of indexing tools from a single source. It is suggested that a number of research questions relating to the Semantic Web could be tackled through the medium of facet analysis.
- Source
- Classification and ontology: formal approaches and access to knowledge: proceedings of the International UDC Seminar, 19-20 September 2011, The Hague, The Netherlands. Eds.: A. Slavic u. E. Civallero
-
Sperber, W.; Ion, P.D.F.: Content analysis and classification in mathematics (2011)
0.04
0.04168817 = product of:
0.1459086 = sum of:
0.02546139 = weight(_text_:subject in 4818) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02546139 = score(doc=4818,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.23709705 = fieldWeight in 4818, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4818)
0.045140486 = weight(_text_:classification in 4818) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.045140486 = score(doc=4818,freq=10.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.4720747 = fieldWeight in 4818, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4818)
0.030166224 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 4818) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030166224 = score(doc=4818,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 4818, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4818)
0.045140486 = weight(_text_:classification in 4818) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.045140486 = score(doc=4818,freq=10.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.4720747 = fieldWeight in 4818, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4818)
0.2857143 = coord(4/14)
- Abstract
- The number of publications in mathematics increases faster each year. Presently far more than 100,000 mathematically relevant journal articles and books are published annually. Efficient and high-quality content analysis of this material is important for mathematical bibliographic services such as ZBMath or MathSciNet. Content analysis has different facets and levels: classification, keywords, abstracts and reviews, and (in the future) formula analysis. It is the opinion of the authors that the different levels have to be enhanced and combined using the methods and technology of the Semantic Web. In the presentation, the problems and deficits of the existing methods and tools, the state of the art and current activities are discussed. As a first step, the Mathematical Subject Classification Scheme (MSC), has been encoded with Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS) and Resource Description Framework (RDF) at its recent revision to MSC2010. The use of SKOS principally opens new possibilities for the enrichment and wider deployment of this classification scheme and for machine-based content analysis of mathematical publications.
- Source
- Classification and ontology: formal approaches and access to knowledge: proceedings of the International UDC Seminar, 19-20 September 2011, The Hague, The Netherlands. Eds.: A. Slavic u. E. Civallero
-
Buizza, G.: Subject analysis and indexing : an "Italian version" of the analytico-synthetic model (2011)
0.03
0.032754723 = product of:
0.114641525 = sum of:
0.044100422 = weight(_text_:subject in 1812) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.044100422 = score(doc=1812,freq=6.0), product of:
0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.41066417 = fieldWeight in 1812, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1812)
0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 1812) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02018744 = score(doc=1812,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 1812, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1812)
0.030166224 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1812) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030166224 = score(doc=1812,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 1812, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1812)
0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 1812) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02018744 = score(doc=1812,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 1812, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1812)
0.2857143 = coord(4/14)
- Abstract
- The paper presents the theoretical foundation of Italian indexing system. A consistent integration of vocabulary control through a thesaurus (semantics) and of role analysis to construct subject strings (syntax) allows to represent the full theme of a work, even if complex, in one string. The conceptual model produces a binary scheme: each aspect (entities, relationships, etc.) consists of a couple of elements, drawing the two lines of semantics and syntax. The meaning of 'concept' and 'theme' is analysed, also in comparison with the FRBR and FRSAD models, with the proposal of an en riched model. A double existence of concepts is suggested: document-independent adn document-dependent.
- Series
- IFLA series on bibliographic control; vol. 42
- 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
-
Frické, M.: Logical division (2016)
0.03
0.028953599 = product of:
0.10133759 = sum of:
0.030006537 = weight(_text_:subject in 3183) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030006537 = score(doc=3183,freq=4.0), product of:
0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.27942157 = fieldWeight in 3183, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3183)
0.023791125 = weight(_text_:classification in 3183) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023791125 = score(doc=3183,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24880521 = fieldWeight in 3183, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3183)
0.0237488 = product of:
0.0474976 = sum of:
0.0474976 = weight(_text_:schemes in 3183) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0474976 = score(doc=3183,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16067243 = queryWeight, product of:
5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.2956176 = fieldWeight in 3183, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3183)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.023791125 = weight(_text_:classification in 3183) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023791125 = score(doc=3183,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24880521 = fieldWeight in 3183, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3183)
0.2857143 = coord(4/14)
- Abstract
- Division is obviously important to Knowledge Organization. Typically, an organizational infrastructure might acknowledge three types of connecting relationships: class hierarchies, where some classes are subclasses of others, partitive hierarchies, where some items are parts of others, and instantiation, where some items are members of some classes (see Z39.19 ANSI/NISO 2005 as an example). The first two of these involve division (the third, instantiation, does not involve division). Logical division would usually be a part of hierarchical classification systems, which, in turn, are central to shelving in libraries, to subject classification schemes, to controlled vocabularies, and to thesauri. Partitive hierarchies, and partitive division, are often essential to controlled vocabularies, thesauri, and subject tagging systems. Partitive hierarchies also relate to the bearers of information; for example, a journal would typically have its component articles as parts and, in turn, they might have sections as their parts, and, of course, components might be arrived at by partitive division (see Tillett 2009 as an illustration). Finally, verbal division, disambiguating homographs, is basic to controlled vocabularies. Thus Division is a broad and relevant topic. This article, though, is going to focus on Logical Division.
-
Buxton, A.: Ontologies and classification of chemicals : can they help each other? (2011)
0.03
0.026176075 = product of:
0.12215501 = sum of:
0.021217827 = weight(_text_:subject in 4817) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021217827 = score(doc=4817,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.19758089 = fieldWeight in 4817, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4817)
0.05046859 = weight(_text_:classification in 4817) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05046859 = score(doc=4817,freq=18.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.5277955 = fieldWeight in 4817, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4817)
0.05046859 = weight(_text_:classification in 4817) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05046859 = score(doc=4817,freq=18.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.5277955 = fieldWeight in 4817, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4817)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- The chemistry schedule in the Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) is badly in need of revision. In many places it is enumerative rather than synthetic (giving rules for constructing numbers for any compound required). In principle, chemistry should be the ideal subject for a synthetic classification but many common compounds have complex formulae and a synthetic system becomes unwieldy. Also, all compounds belong to several hierarchies, e.g. chloroquin is a heterocycle, an aromatic compound, amine, antimalarial drug, etc. and rules need to be drawn up as to which ones take precedence and which ones should be taken into account in classifying a compound. There are obvious similarities between a classification and an ontology. This paper looks at existing ontologies for chemistry, especially ChEBI which is one of the largest, to examine how a classification and an ontology might draw on each other and what the problem areas are. An ontology might help in creating an index to a classification (for chemicals not listed or to provide access by facets not used in the classification) and a classification could provide a hierarchy to use in an ontology.
- Source
- Classification and ontology: formal approaches and access to knowledge: proceedings of the International UDC Seminar, 19-20 September 2011, The Hague, The Netherlands. Eds.: A. Slavic u. E. Civallero
-
Green, R.; Panzer, M.: Relations in the notational hierarchy of the Dewey Decimal Classification (2011)
0.02
0.024857301 = product of:
0.11600074 = sum of:
0.041207436 = weight(_text_:classification in 4823) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041207436 = score(doc=4823,freq=12.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.43094325 = fieldWeight in 4823, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4823)
0.033585876 = product of:
0.06717175 = sum of:
0.06717175 = weight(_text_:schemes in 4823) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06717175 = score(doc=4823,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16067243 = queryWeight, product of:
5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.41806644 = fieldWeight in 4823, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4823)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.041207436 = weight(_text_:classification in 4823) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041207436 = score(doc=4823,freq=12.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.43094325 = fieldWeight in 4823, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4823)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- As part of a larger assessment of relationships in the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) system, this study investigates the semantic nature of relationships in the DDC notational hierarchy. The semantic relationship between each of a set of randomly selected classes and its parent class in the notational hierarchy is examined against a set of relationship types (specialization, class-instance, several flavours of whole-part).The analysis addresses the prevalence of specific relationship types, their lexical expression, difficulties encountered in assigning relationship types, compatibility of relationships found in the DDC with those found in other knowledge organization systems (KOS), and compatibility of relationships found in the DDC with those in a shared formalism like the Web Ontology Language (OWL). Since notational hierarchy is an organizational mechanism shared across most classification schemes and is often considered to provide an easy solution for ontological transformation of a classification system, the findings of the study are likely to generalize across classification schemes with respect to difficulties that might be encountered in such a transformation process.
- Source
- Classification and ontology: formal approaches and access to knowledge: proceedings of the International UDC Seminar, 19-20 September 2011, The Hague, The Netherlands. Eds.: A. Slavic u. E. Civallero
-
Kleineberg, M.: ¬The blind men and the elephant : towards an organization of epistemic contexts (2013)
0.02
0.01662617 = product of:
0.07758879 = sum of:
0.030006537 = weight(_text_:subject in 1074) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030006537 = score(doc=1074,freq=4.0), product of:
0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.27942157 = fieldWeight in 1074, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1074)
0.023791125 = weight(_text_:classification in 1074) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023791125 = score(doc=1074,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24880521 = fieldWeight in 1074, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1074)
0.023791125 = weight(_text_:classification in 1074) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023791125 = score(doc=1074,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24880521 = fieldWeight in 1074, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1074)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- In the last two decades of knowledge organization (KO) research, there has been an increasing interest in the context-dependent nature of human knowledge. Contextualism maintains that knowledge is not available in a neutral and objective way, but is always interwoven with the process of knowledge production and the prerequisites of the knower. As a first step towards a systematic organization of epistemic contexts, the concept of knowledge will be considered in its ontological (WHAT) and epistemological (WHO) including methodological (HOW) dimensions. In current KO research, however, either the contextualism is not fully implemented (classification-as-ontology) or the ambition for a context-transcending universal KOS seems to have been abandoned (classification-as-epistemology). Based on a combined ontology and epistemology it will be argued that a phenomena-based approach to KO as stipulated by the León Manifesto, for example, requires a revision of the underlying phenomenon concept as a relation between the known object (WHAT) and the knowing subject (WHO), which is constituted by the application of specific methods (HOW). While traditional subject indexing of documents often relies on the organizing principle "levels of being" (WHAT), for a future context indexing, two novel principles are proposed, namely "levels of knowing" (WHO) and "integral methodological pluralism" (HOW).
-
Madalli, D.P.; Balaji, B.P.; Sarangi, A.K.: Music domain analysis for building faceted ontological representation (2014)
0.01
0.01314472 = product of:
0.061342027 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1437) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1437,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1437, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1437)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1437) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1437,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1437, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1437)
0.014238005 = product of:
0.02847601 = sum of:
0.02847601 = weight(_text_:22 in 1437) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02847601 = score(doc=1437,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1437, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1437)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- This paper describes to construct faceted ontologies for domain modeling. Building upon the faceted theory of S.R. Ranganathan (1967), the paper intends to address the faceted classification approach applied to build domain ontologies. As classificatory ontologies are employed to represent the relationships of entities and objects on the web, the faceted approach helps to analyze domain representation in an effective way for modeling. Based on this perspective, an ontology of the music domain has been analyzed that would serve as a case study.
- 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
-
Mahesh, K.: Highly expressive tagging for knowledge organization in the 21st century (2014)
0.01
0.012375482 = product of:
0.05775225 = sum of:
0.023791125 = weight(_text_:classification in 1434) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023791125 = score(doc=1434,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24880521 = fieldWeight in 1434, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1434)
0.023791125 = weight(_text_:classification in 1434) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023791125 = score(doc=1434,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24880521 = fieldWeight in 1434, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1434)
0.010170003 = product of:
0.020340007 = sum of:
0.020340007 = weight(_text_:22 in 1434) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020340007 = score(doc=1434,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1434, 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=1434)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- Knowledge organization of large-scale content on the Web requires substantial amounts of semantic metadata that is expensive to generate manually. Recent developments in Web technologies have enabled any user to tag documents and other forms of content thereby generating metadata that could help organize knowledge. However, merely adding one or more tags to a document is highly inadequate to capture the aboutness of the document and thereby to support powerful semantic functions such as automatic classification, question answering or true semantic search and retrieval. This is true even when the tags used are labels from a well-designed classification system such as a thesaurus or taxonomy. There is a strong need to develop a semantic tagging mechanism with sufficient expressive power to capture the aboutness of each part of a document or dataset or multimedia content in order to enable applications that can benefit from knowledge organization on the Web. This article proposes a highly expressive mechanism of using ontology snippets as semantic tags that map portions of a document or a part of a dataset or a segment of a multimedia content to concepts and relations in an ontology of the domain(s) of interest.
- 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
-
Putkey, T.: Using SKOS to express faceted classification on the Semantic Web (2011)
0.01
0.0121596735 = product of:
0.08511771 = sum of:
0.042558856 = weight(_text_:classification in 311) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042558856 = score(doc=311,freq=20.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.4450763 = fieldWeight in 311, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=311)
0.042558856 = weight(_text_:classification in 311) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042558856 = score(doc=311,freq=20.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.4450763 = fieldWeight in 311, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=311)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- This paper looks at Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS) to investigate how a faceted classification can be expressed in RDF and shared on the Semantic Web. Statement of the Problem Faceted classification outlines facets as well as subfacets and facet values. Hierarchical relationships and associative relationships are established in a faceted classification. RDF is used to describe how a specific URI has a relationship to a facet value. Not only does RDF decompose "information into pieces," but by incorporating facet values RDF also given the URI the hierarchical and associative relationships expressed in the faceted classification. Combining faceted classification and RDF creates more knowledge than if the two stood alone. An application understands the subjectpredicate-object relationship in RDF and can display hierarchical and associative relationships based on the object (facet) value. This paper continues to investigate if the above idea is indeed useful, used, and applicable. If so, how can a faceted classification be expressed in RDF? What would this expression look like? Literature Review This paper used the same articles as the paper A Survey of Faceted Classification: History, Uses, Drawbacks and the Semantic Web (Putkey, 2010). In that paper, appropriate resources were discovered by searching in various databases for "faceted classification" and "faceted search," either in the descriptor or title fields. Citations were also followed to find more articles as well as searching the Internet for the same terms. To retrieve the documents about RDF, searches combined "faceted classification" and "RDF, " looking for these words in either the descriptor or title.
-
Ghosh, S.; Panigrahi, P.: Use of Ranganathan's analytico-synthetic approach in developing a domain ontology in library and information science (2015)
0.01
0.011773554 = product of:
0.08241487 = sum of:
0.041207436 = weight(_text_:classification in 2798) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041207436 = score(doc=2798,freq=12.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.43094325 = fieldWeight in 2798, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2798)
0.041207436 = weight(_text_:classification in 2798) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041207436 = score(doc=2798,freq=12.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.43094325 = fieldWeight in 2798, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2798)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- Classification is the basis of knowledge organization. Ontology, a comparatively new concept used as a tool for knowledge organization, establishes connections between terms and concepts enhancing the scope and usefulness of library classification. Ranganathan had invented the strong theory of the analytico-synthetic method in classification and devised Colon Classification. In this study a domain ontology on library and information science has been developed by implementing Raganathan's faceted approach of classification. The hierarchical relationships among terms have been established primarily keeping conformity with that of Ranganathan's Colon Classification (7th edition). But to accommodate new vocabularies, DDC 23rd edition and UDC Standard edition are consulted. The Protégé ontology editor has been used. The study carefully examines the steps in which the analytico-synthetic method have been followed. Ranganathan's Canon of Characteristics and its relevant Canons have been followed for defining the class-subclass hierarchy. It concludes by identifying the drawbacks as well as the merits faced while developing the ontology. This paper proves the relevance and importance of Ranganathan's philosophy in developing ontology based knowledge organization.
-
Giunchiglia, F.; Dutta, B.; Maltese, V.: From knowledge organization to knowledge representation (2014)
0.01
0.011756477 = product of:
0.054863557 = sum of:
0.021217827 = weight(_text_:subject in 1369) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021217827 = score(doc=1369,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.19758089 = fieldWeight in 1369, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1369)
0.016822865 = weight(_text_:classification in 1369) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016822865 = score(doc=1369,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 1369, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1369)
0.016822865 = weight(_text_:classification in 1369) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016822865 = score(doc=1369,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 1369, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1369)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- So far, within the library and information science (LIS) community, knowledge organization (KO) has developed its own very successful solutions to document search, allowing for the classification, indexing and search of millions of books. However, current KO solutions are limited in expressivity as they only support queries by document properties, e.g., by title, author and subject. In parallel, within the artificial intelligence and semantic web communities, knowledge representation (KR) has developed very powerful end expressive techniques, which via the use of ontologies support queries by any entity property (e.g., the properties of the entities described in a document). However, KR has not scaled yet to the level of KO, mainly because of the lack of a precise and scalable entity specification methodology. In this paper we present DERA, a new methodology inspired by the faceted approach, as introduced in KO, that retains all the advantages of KR and compensates for the limitations of KO. DERA guarantees at the same time quality, extensibility, scalability and effectiveness in search.
-
Zhitomirsky-Geffet, M.; Erez, E.S.; Bar-Ilan, J.: Toward multiviewpoint ontology construction by collaboration of non-experts and crowdsourcing : the case of the effect of diet on health (2017)
0.01
0.011756477 = product of:
0.054863557 = sum of:
0.021217827 = weight(_text_:subject in 3439) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021217827 = score(doc=3439,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.19758089 = fieldWeight in 3439, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3439)
0.016822865 = weight(_text_:classification in 3439) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016822865 = score(doc=3439,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 3439, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3439)
0.016822865 = weight(_text_:classification in 3439) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016822865 = score(doc=3439,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 3439, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3439)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- Domain experts are skilled in buliding a narrow ontology that reflects their subfield of expertise based on their work experience and personal beliefs. We call this type of ontology a single-viewpoint ontology. There can be a variety of such single viewpoint ontologies that represent a wide spectrum of subfields and expert opinions on the domain. However, to have a complete formal vocabulary for the domain they need to be linked and unified into a multiviewpoint model while having the subjective viewpoint statements marked and distinguished from the objectively true statements. In this study, we propose and implement a two-phase methodology for multiviewpoint ontology construction by nonexpert users. The proposed methodology was implemented for the domain of the effect of diet on health. A large-scale crowdsourcing experiment was conducted with about 750 ontological statements to determine whether each of these statements is objectively true, viewpoint, or erroneous. Typically, in crowdsourcing experiments the workers are asked for their personal opinions on the given subject. However, in our case their ability to objectively assess others' opinions was examined as well. Our results show substantially higher accuracy in classification for the objective assessment approach compared to the results based on personal opinions.
-
Gnoli, C.; Pullman, T.; Cousson, P.; Merli, G.; Szostak, R.: Representing the structural elements of a freely faceted classification (2011)
0.01
0.010747734 = product of:
0.07523414 = sum of:
0.03761707 = weight(_text_:classification in 4825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03761707 = score(doc=4825,freq=10.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.39339557 = fieldWeight in 4825, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4825)
0.03761707 = weight(_text_:classification in 4825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03761707 = score(doc=4825,freq=10.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.39339557 = fieldWeight in 4825, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4825)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- Freely faceted classifications allow for free combination of concepts across all knowledge domains, and for sorting of the resulting compound classmarks. Starting from work by the Classification Research Group, the Integrative Levels Classification (ILC) project has produced a first edition of a general freely faceted scheme. The system is managed as a MySQL database, and can be browsed through a Web interface. The ILC database structure provides a case for identifying and representing the structural elements of any freely faceted classification. These belong to both the notational and the verbal planes. Notational elements include: arrays, chains, deictics, facets, foci, place of definition of foci, examples of combinations, subclasses of a faceted class, groupings, related classes; verbal elements include: main caption, synonyms, descriptions, included terms, related terms, notes. Encoding of some of these elements in an international mark-up format like SKOS can be problematic, especially as this does not provide for faceted structures, although approximate SKOS equivalents are identified for most of them.
- Source
- Classification and ontology: formal approaches and access to knowledge: proceedings of the International UDC Seminar, 19-20 September 2011, The Hague, The Netherlands. Eds.: A. Slavic u. E. Civallero
-
Mengle, S.S.R.; Goharian, N.: Detecting relationships among categories using text classification (2010)
0.01
0.009613066 = product of:
0.06729146 = sum of:
0.03364573 = weight(_text_:classification in 3462) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03364573 = score(doc=3462,freq=8.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.35186368 = fieldWeight in 3462, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3462)
0.03364573 = weight(_text_:classification in 3462) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03364573 = score(doc=3462,freq=8.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.35186368 = fieldWeight in 3462, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3462)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- Discovering relationships among concepts and categories is crucial in various information systems. The authors' objective was to discover such relationships among document categories. Traditionally, such relationships are represented in the form of a concept hierarchy, grouping some categories under the same parent category. Although the nature of hierarchy supports the identification of categories that may share the same parent, not all of these categories have a relationship with each other - other than sharing the same parent. However, some non-sibling relationships exist that although are related to each other are not identified as such. The authors identify and build a relationship network (relationship-net) with categories as the vertices and relationships as the edges of this network. They demonstrate that using a relationship-net, some nonobvious category relationships are detected. Their approach capitalizes on the misclassification information generated during the process of text classification to identify potential relationships among categories and automatically generate relationship-nets. Their results demonstrate a statistically significant improvement over the current approach by up to 73% on 20 News groups 20NG, up to 68% on 17 categories in the Open Directories Project (ODP17), and more than twice on ODP46 and Special Interest Group on Information Retrieval (SIGIR) data sets. Their results also indicate that using misclassification information stemming from passage classification as opposed to document classification statistically significantly improves the results on 20NG (8%), ODP17 (5%), ODP46 (73%), and SIGIR (117%) with respect to F1 measure. By assigning weights to relationships and by performing feature selection, results are further optimized.
-
Green, R.: See-also relationships in the Dewey Decimal Classification (2011)
0.01
0.009516451 = product of:
0.06661515 = sum of:
0.033307575 = weight(_text_:classification in 4615) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033307575 = score(doc=4615,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.34832728 = fieldWeight in 4615, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4615)
0.033307575 = weight(_text_:classification in 4615) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033307575 = score(doc=4615,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.34832728 = fieldWeight in 4615, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4615)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- This paper investigates the semantics of topical, associative see-also relationships in schedule and table entries of the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) system. Based on the see-also relationships in a random sample of 100 classes containing one or more of these relationships, a semi-structured inventory of sources of see-also relationships is generated, of which the most important are lexical similarity, complementarity, facet difference, and relational configuration difference. The premise that see-also relationships based on lexical similarity may be language-specific is briefly examined. The paper concludes with recommendations on the continued use of see-also relationships in the DDC.
-
Moreira, W.; Martínez-Ávila, D.: Concept relationships in knowledge organization systems : elements for analysis and common research among fields (2018)
0.01
0.009516451 = product of:
0.06661515 = sum of:
0.033307575 = weight(_text_:classification in 5166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033307575 = score(doc=5166,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.34832728 = fieldWeight in 5166, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5166)
0.033307575 = weight(_text_:classification in 5166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033307575 = score(doc=5166,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.34832728 = fieldWeight in 5166, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5166)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- Knowledge organization systems have been studied in several fields and for different and complementary aspects. Among the aspects that concentrate common interests, in this article we highlight those related to the terminological and conceptual relationships among the components of any knowledge organization system. This research aims to contribute to the critical analysis of knowledge organization systems, especially ontologies, thesauri, and classification systems, by the comprehension of its similarities and differences when dealing with concepts and their ways of relating to each other as well as to the conceptual design that is adopted.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 56(2018) no.1, S.19-39
-
Gnoli, C.: Fundamentos ontológicos de la organización del conocimiento : la teoría de los niveles integrativos aplicada al orden de cita (2011)
0.01
0.009405181 = product of:
0.043890845 = sum of:
0.016974261 = weight(_text_:subject in 2659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016974261 = score(doc=2659,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.15806471 = fieldWeight in 2659, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2659)
0.013458292 = weight(_text_:classification in 2659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013458292 = score(doc=2659,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.14074548 = fieldWeight in 2659, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2659)
0.013458292 = weight(_text_:classification in 2659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013458292 = score(doc=2659,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.14074548 = fieldWeight in 2659, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2659)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- The field of knowledge organization (KO) can be described as composed of the four distinct but connected layers of theory, systems, representation, and application. This paper focuses on the relations between KO theory and KO systems. It is acknowledged how the structure of KO systems is the product of a mixture of ontological, epistemological, and pragmatical factors. However, different systems give different priorities to each factor. A more ontologically-oriented approach, though not offering quick solutions for any particular group of users, will produce systems of wide and long-lasting application as they are based on general, shareable principles. I take the case of the ontological theory of integrative levels, which has been considered as a useful source for general classifications for several decades, and is currently implemented in the Integrative Levels Classification system. The theory produces a sequence of main classes modelling a natural order between phenomena. This order has interesting effects also on other features of the system, like the citation order of concepts within compounds. As it has been shown by facet analytical theory, it is useful that citation order follow a principle of inversion, as compared to the order of the same concepts in the schedules. In the light of integrative levels theory, this principle also acquires an ontological meaning: phenomena of lower level should be cited first, as most often they act as specifications of higher-level ones. This ontological principle should be complemented by consideration of the epistemological treatment of phenomena: in case a lower-level phenomenon is the main theme, it can be promoted to the leading position in the compound subject heading. The integration of these principles is believed to produce optimal results in the ordering of knowledge contents.
-
Soergel, D.: Towards a relation ontology for the Semantic Web (2011)
0.01
0.008156957 = product of:
0.057098698 = sum of:
0.028549349 = weight(_text_:classification in 4342) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028549349 = score(doc=4342,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.29856625 = fieldWeight in 4342, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4342)
0.028549349 = weight(_text_:classification in 4342) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028549349 = score(doc=4342,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.29856625 = fieldWeight in 4342, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4342)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- The Semantic Web consists of data structured for use by computer programs, such as data sets made available under the Linked Open Data initiative. Much of this data is structured following the entity-relationship model encoded in RDF for syntactic interoperability. For semantic interoperability, the semantics of the relationships used in any given dataset needs to be made explicit. Ultimately this requires an inventory of these relationships structured around a relation ontology. This talk will outline a blueprint for such an inventory, including a format for the description/definition of binary and n-ary relations, drawing on ideas put forth in the classification and thesaurus community over the last 60 years, upper level ontologies, systems like FrameNet, the Buffalo Relation Ontology, and an analysis of linked data sets.
- Source
- Classification and ontology: formal approaches and access to knowledge: proceedings of the International UDC Seminar, 19-20 September 2011, The Hague, The Netherlands. Eds.: A. Slavic u. E. Civallero
