Search (57 results, page 1 of 3)

  • × theme_ss:"Wissensrepräsentation"
  • × type_ss:"el"
  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  1. Definition of the CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model (2003) 0.12
    0.122677386 = product of:
      0.16356985 = sum of:
        0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 1652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01029941 = score(doc=1652,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 1652, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1652)
        0.13277857 = weight(_text_:standards in 1652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13277857 = score(doc=1652,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.59091425 = fieldWeight in 1652, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1652)
        0.02049187 = product of:
          0.04098374 = sum of:
            0.04098374 = weight(_text_:22 in 1652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04098374 = score(doc=1652,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1652, 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=1652)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.75 = coord(3/4)
    
    Abstract
    This document is the formal definition of the CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model ("CRM"), a formal ontology intended to facilitate the integration, mediation and interchange of heterogeneous cultural heritage information. The CRM is the culmination of more than a decade of standards development work by the International Committee for Documentation (CIDOC) of the International Council of Museums (ICOM). Work on the CRM itself began in 1996 under the auspices of the ICOM-CIDOC Documentation Standards Working Group. Since 2000, development of the CRM has been officially delegated by ICOM-CIDOC to the CIDOC CRM Special Interest Group, which collaborates with the ISO working group ISO/TC46/SC4/WG9 to bring the CRM to the form and status of an International Standard.
    Date
    6. 8.2010 14:22:28
    Editor
    ICOM/CIDOC Documentation Standards Group
    Issue
    Version 3.4.9 - 30.11.2003. Produced by the ICOM/CIDOC Documentation Standards Group, continued by the CIDOC CRM Special Interest Group.
  2. Garshol, L.M.: Living with topic maps and RDF : Topic maps, RDF, DAML, OIL, OWL, TMCL (2003) 0.05
    0.049133226 = product of:
      0.09826645 = sum of:
        0.020812286 = weight(_text_:information in 3886) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020812286 = score(doc=3886,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.23515764 = fieldWeight in 3886, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3886)
        0.077454165 = weight(_text_:standards in 3886) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.077454165 = score(doc=3886,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.34469998 = fieldWeight in 3886, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3886)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    This paper is about the relationship between the topic map and RDF standards families. It compares the two technologies and looks at ways to make it easier for users to live in a world where both technologies are used. This is done by looking at how to convert information back and forth between the two technologies, how to convert schema information, and how to do queries across both information representations. Ways to achieve all of these goals are presented. This paper extends and improves on earlier work on the same subject, described in [Garshol01b]. This paper was first published in the proceedings of XML Europe 2003, 5-8 May 2003, organized by IDEAlliance, London, UK.
  3. Waard, A. de; Fluit, C.; Harmelen, F. van: Drug Ontology Project for Elsevier (DOPE) (2007) 0.04
    0.042682633 = product of:
      0.085365266 = sum of:
        0.02277285 = weight(_text_:information in 758) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02277285 = score(doc=758,freq=22.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.25731003 = fieldWeight in 758, product of:
              4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
                22.0 = termFreq=22.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=758)
        0.06259242 = weight(_text_:standards in 758) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06259242 = score(doc=758,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.27855965 = fieldWeight in 758, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=758)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Innovative research institutes rely on the availability of complete and accurate information about new research and development, and it is the business of information providers such as Elsevier to provide the required information in a cost-effective way. It is very likely that the semantic web will make an important contribution to this effort, since it facilitates access to an unprecedented quantity of data. However, with the unremitting growth of scientific information, integrating access to all this information remains a significant problem, not least because of the heterogeneity of the information sources involved - sources which may use different syntactic standards (syntactic heterogeneity), organize information in very different ways (structural heterogeneity) and even use different terminologies to refer to the same information (semantic heterogeneity). The ability to address these different kinds of heterogeneity is the key to integrated access. Thesauri have already proven to be a core technology to effective information access as they provide controlled vocabularies for indexing information, and thereby help to overcome some of the problems of free-text search by relating and grouping relevant terms in a specific domain. However, currently there is no open architecture which supports the use of these thesauri for querying other data sources. For example, when we move from the centralized and controlled use of EMTREE within EMBASE.com to a distributed setting, it becomes crucial to improve access to the thesaurus by means of a standardized representation using open data standards that allow for semantic qualifications. In general, mental models and keywords for accessing data diverge between subject areas and communities, and so many different ontologies have been developed. An ideal architecture must therefore support the disclosure of distributed and heterogeneous data sources through different ontologies. The aim of the DOPE project (Drug Ontology Project for Elsevier) is to investigate the possibility of providing access to multiple information sources in the area of life science through a single interface.
  4. Tudhope, D.; Hodge, G.: Terminology registries (2007) 0.04
    0.04211062 = product of:
      0.16844247 = sum of:
        0.16844247 = sum of:
          0.100136235 = weight(_text_:organization in 539) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.100136235 = score(doc=539,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                0.050415643 = queryNorm
              0.55708694 = fieldWeight in 539, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=539)
          0.06830624 = weight(_text_:22 in 539) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.06830624 = score(doc=539,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.050415643 = queryNorm
              0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 539, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=539)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Content
    Präsentation während der Veranstaltung "Networked Knowledge Organization Systems and Services: The 6th European Networked Knowledge Organization Systems (NKOS) Workshop, Workshop at the 11th ECDL Conference, Budapest, Hungary, September 21st 2007".
    Date
    26.12.2011 13:22:07
  5. Schreiber, G.; Amin, A.; Assem, M. van; Boer, V. de; Hardman, L.; Hildebrand, M.; Hollink, L.; Huang, Z.; Kersen, J. van; Niet, M. de; Omelayenko, B.; Ossenbruggen, J. van; Siebes, R.; Taekema, J.; Wielemaker, J.; Wielinga, B.: MultimediaN E-Culture demonstrator (2006) 0.04
    0.038344346 = product of:
      0.07668869 = sum of:
        0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 4648) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01029941 = score(doc=4648,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4648, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4648)
        0.066389285 = weight(_text_:standards in 4648) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.066389285 = score(doc=4648,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.29545712 = fieldWeight in 4648, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4648)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    The main objective of the MultimediaN E-Culture project is to demonstrate how novel semantic-web and presentation technologies can be deployed to provide better indexing and search support within large virtual collections of culturalheritage resources. The architecture is fully based on open web standards in particular XML, SVG, RDF/OWL and SPARQL. One basic hypothesis underlying this work is that the use of explicit background knowledge in the form of ontologies/vocabularies/thesauri is in particular useful in information retrieval in knowledge-rich domains. This paper gives some details about the internals of the demonstrator.
  6. SKOS Simple Knowledge Organization System Reference : W3C Recommendation 18 August 2009 (2009) 0.03
    0.033250365 = product of:
      0.06650073 = sum of:
        0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 4688) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01029941 = score(doc=4688,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4688, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4688)
        0.05620132 = product of:
          0.11240264 = sum of:
            0.11240264 = weight(_text_:organization in 4688) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.11240264 = score(doc=4688,freq=14.0), product of:
                0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.62532854 = fieldWeight in 4688, product of:
                  3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                    14.0 = termFreq=14.0
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4688)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    This document defines the Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS), a common data model for sharing and linking knowledge organization systems via the Web. Many knowledge organization systems, such as thesauri, taxonomies, classification schemes and subject heading systems, share a similar structure, and are used in similar applications. SKOS captures much of this similarity and makes it explicit, to enable data and technology sharing across diverse applications. The SKOS data model provides a standard, low-cost migration path for porting existing knowledge organization systems to the Semantic Web. SKOS also provides a lightweight, intuitive language for developing and sharing new knowledge organization systems. It may be used on its own, or in combination with formal knowledge representation languages such as the Web Ontology language (OWL). This document is the normative specification of the Simple Knowledge Organization System. It is intended for readers who are involved in the design and implementation of information systems, and who already have a good understanding of Semantic Web technology, especially RDF and OWL. For an informative guide to using SKOS, see the [SKOS-PRIMER].
  7. Lacasta, J.; Nogueras-Iso, J.; López-Pellicer, F.J.; Muro-Medrano, P.R.; Zarazaga-Soria, F.J.: ThManager : an open source tool for creating and visualizing SKOS (2007) 0.02
    0.023531828 = product of:
      0.047063656 = sum of:
        0.012015978 = weight(_text_:information in 2349) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012015978 = score(doc=2349,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 2349, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2349)
        0.03504768 = product of:
          0.07009536 = sum of:
            0.07009536 = weight(_text_:organization in 2349) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07009536 = score(doc=2349,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.38996086 = fieldWeight in 2349, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2349)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Knowledge Organization Systems denotes formally represented knowledge that is used within the context of Digital Libraries to improve data sharing and information retrieval. To increase their use, and to reuse them when possible, it is vital to manage them adequately and to provide them in a standard interchange format. Simple Knowledge Organization Systems (SKOS) seems to be the most promising representation for the type of knowledge models used in digital libraries, but there is a lack of tools that are able to properly manage it. This work presents a tool that fills this gap, facilitating their use in different environments and using SKOS as an interchange format.
  8. Jacobs, I.: From chaos, order: W3C standard helps organize knowledge : SKOS Connects Diverse Knowledge Organization Systems to Linked Data (2009) 0.02
    0.022726912 = product of:
      0.045453824 = sum of:
        0.010406143 = weight(_text_:information in 3062) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010406143 = score(doc=3062,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.11757882 = fieldWeight in 3062, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3062)
        0.03504768 = product of:
          0.07009536 = sum of:
            0.07009536 = weight(_text_:organization in 3062) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07009536 = score(doc=3062,freq=16.0), product of:
                0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.38996086 = fieldWeight in 3062, product of:
                  4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                    16.0 = termFreq=16.0
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3062)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    18 August 2009 -- Today W3C announces a new standard that builds a bridge between the world of knowledge organization systems - including thesauri, classifications, subject headings, taxonomies, and folksonomies - and the linked data community, bringing benefits to both. Libraries, museums, newspapers, government portals, enterprises, social networking applications, and other communities that manage large collections of books, historical artifacts, news reports, business glossaries, blog entries, and other items can now use Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS) to leverage the power of linked data. As different communities with expertise and established vocabularies use SKOS to integrate them into the Semantic Web, they increase the value of the information for everyone.
    Content
    SKOS Adapts to the Diversity of Knowledge Organization Systems A useful starting point for understanding the role of SKOS is the set of subject headings published by the US Library of Congress (LOC) for categorizing books, videos, and other library resources. These headings can be used to broaden or narrow queries for discovering resources. For instance, one can narrow a query about books on "Chinese literature" to "Chinese drama," or further still to "Chinese children's plays." Library of Congress subject headings have evolved within a community of practice over a period of decades. By now publishing these subject headings in SKOS, the Library of Congress has made them available to the linked data community, which benefits from a time-tested set of concepts to re-use in their own data. This re-use adds value ("the network effect") to the collection. When people all over the Web re-use the same LOC concept for "Chinese drama," or a concept from some other vocabulary linked to it, this creates many new routes to the discovery of information, and increases the chances that relevant items will be found. As an example of mapping one vocabulary to another, a combined effort from the STITCH, TELplus and MACS Projects provides links between LOC concepts and RAMEAU, a collection of French subject headings used by the Bibliothèque Nationale de France and other institutions. SKOS can be used for subject headings but also many other approaches to organizing knowledge. Because different communities are comfortable with different organization schemes, SKOS is designed to port diverse knowledge organization systems to the Web. "Active participation from the library and information science community in the development of SKOS over the past seven years has been key to ensuring that SKOS meets a variety of needs," said Thomas Baker, co-chair of the Semantic Web Deployment Working Group, which published SKOS. "One goal in creating SKOS was to provide new uses for well-established knowledge organization systems by providing a bridge to the linked data cloud." SKOS is part of the Semantic Web technology stack. Like the Web Ontology Language (OWL), SKOS can be used to define vocabularies. But the two technologies were designed to meet different needs. SKOS is a simple language with just a few features, tuned for sharing and linking knowledge organization systems such as thesauri and classification schemes. OWL offers a general and powerful framework for knowledge representation, where additional "rigor" can afford additional benefits (for instance, business rule processing). To get started with SKOS, see the SKOS Primer.
  9. Beppler, F.D.; Fonseca, F.T.; Pacheco, R.C.S.: Hermeneus: an architecture for an ontology-enabled information retrieval (2008) 0.02
    0.021761026 = product of:
      0.043522052 = sum of:
        0.02303018 = weight(_text_:information in 3261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02303018 = score(doc=3261,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.2602176 = fieldWeight in 3261, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3261)
        0.02049187 = product of:
          0.04098374 = sum of:
            0.04098374 = weight(_text_:22 in 3261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04098374 = score(doc=3261,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3261, 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=3261)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Ontologies improve IR systems regarding its retrieval and presentation of information, which make the task of finding information more effective, efficient, and interactive. In this paper we argue that ontologies also greatly improve the engineering of such systems. We created a framework that uses ontology to drive the process of engineering an IR system. We developed a prototype that shows how a domain specialist without knowledge in the IR field can build an IR system with interactive components. The resulting system provides support for users not only to find their information needs but also to extend their state of knowledge. This way, our approach to ontology-enabled information retrieval addresses both the engineering aspect described here and also the usability aspect described elsewhere.
    Date
    28.11.2016 12:43:22
  10. Bittner, T.; Donnelly, M.; Winter, S.: Ontology and semantic interoperability (2006) 0.02
    0.020545345 = product of:
      0.04109069 = sum of:
        0.02059882 = weight(_text_:information in 4820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02059882 = score(doc=4820,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 4820, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4820)
        0.02049187 = product of:
          0.04098374 = sum of:
            0.04098374 = weight(_text_:22 in 4820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04098374 = score(doc=4820,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4820, 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=4820)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    One of the major problems facing systems for Computer Aided Design (CAD), Architecture Engineering and Construction (AEC) and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) applications today is the lack of interoperability among the various systems. When integrating software applications, substantial di culties can arise in translating information from one application to the other. In this paper, we focus on semantic di culties that arise in software integration. Applications may use di erent terminologies to describe the same domain. Even when appli-cations use the same terminology, they often associate di erent semantics with the terms. This obstructs information exchange among applications. To cir-cumvent this obstacle, we need some way of explicitly specifying the semantics for each terminology in an unambiguous fashion. Ontologies can provide such specification. It will be the task of this paper to explain what ontologies are and how they can be used to facilitate interoperability between software systems used in computer aided design, architecture engineering and construction, and geographic information processing.
    Date
    3.12.2016 18:39:22
  11. Knorz, G.; Rein, B.: Semantische Suche in einer Hochschulontologie : Ontologie-basiertes Information-Filtering und -Retrieval mit relationalen Datenbanken (2005) 0.02
    0.01796158 = product of:
      0.03592316 = sum of:
        0.012015978 = weight(_text_:information in 4324) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012015978 = score(doc=4324,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 4324, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4324)
        0.023907183 = product of:
          0.047814365 = sum of:
            0.047814365 = weight(_text_:22 in 4324) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.047814365 = score(doc=4324,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4324, 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=4324)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Date
    11. 2.2011 18:22:25
  12. Urs, S.R.; Angrosh, M.A.: Ontology-based knowledge organization systems in digital libraries : a comparison of experiments in OWL and KAON ontologies (2006 (?)) 0.02
    0.017380109 = product of:
      0.034760218 = sum of:
        0.020598818 = weight(_text_:information in 2799) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020598818 = score(doc=2799,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.23274568 = fieldWeight in 2799, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2799)
        0.014161401 = product of:
          0.028322803 = sum of:
            0.028322803 = weight(_text_:organization in 2799) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.028322803 = score(doc=2799,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.15756798 = fieldWeight in 2799, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2799)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Grounded on a strong belief that ontologies enhance the performance of information retrieval systems, there has been an upsurge of interest in ontologies. Its importance is identified in diverse research fields such as knowledge engineering, knowledge representation, qualitative modeling, language engineering, database design, information integration, object-oriented analysis, information retrieval and extraction, knowledge management and agent-based systems design (Guarino, 1998). While the role-played by ontologies, automatically lends a place of legitimacy for these tools, research in this area gains greater significance in the wake of various challenges faced in the contemporary digital environment. With the objective of overcoming various pitfalls associated with current search mechanisms, ontologies are increasingly used for developing efficient information retrieval systems. An indicator of research interest in the area of ontology is the Swoogle, a search engine for Semantic Web documents, terms and data found on the Web (Ding, Li et al, 2004). Given the complex nature of the digital content archived in digital libraries, ontologies can be employed for designing efficient forms of information retrieval in digital libraries. Knowledge representation assumes greater significance due to its crucial role in ontology development. These systems aid in developing intelligent information systems, wherein the notion of intelligence implies the ability of the system to find implicit consequences of its explicitly represented knowledge (Baader and Nutt, 2003). Knowledge representation formalisms such as 'Description Logics' are used to obtain explicit knowledge representation of the subject domain. These representations are developed into ontologies, which are used for developing intelligent information systems. Against this backdrop, the paper examines the use of Description Logics for conceptually modeling a chosen domain, which would be utilized for developing domain ontologies. The knowledge representation languages identified for this purpose are Web Ontology Language (OWL) and KArlsruhe ONtology (KAON) language. Drawing upon the various technical constructs in developing ontology-based information systems, the paper explains the working of the prototypes and also presents a comparative study of the two prototypes.
    Theme
    Information Gateway
  13. Schreiber, G.; Amin, A.; Assem, M. van; Boer, V. de; Hardman, L.; Hildebrand, M.; Omelayenko, B.; Ossenbruggen, J. van; Wielemaker, J.; Wielinga, B.; Tordai, A.; Aroyoa, L.: Semantic annotation and search of cultural-heritage collections : the MultimediaN E-Culture demonstrator (2008) 0.02
    0.016597321 = product of:
      0.066389285 = sum of:
        0.066389285 = weight(_text_:standards in 4646) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.066389285 = score(doc=4646,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.29545712 = fieldWeight in 4646, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4646)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    In this article we describe a SemanticWeb application for semantic annotation and search in large virtual collections of cultural-heritage objects, indexed with multiple vocabularies. During the annotation phase we harvest, enrich and align collection metadata and vocabularies. The semantic-search facilities support keyword-based queries of the graph (currently 20M triples), resulting in semantically grouped result clusters, all representing potential semantic matches of the original query. We show two sample search scenario's. The annotation and search software is open source and is already being used by third parties. All software is based on establishedWeb standards, in particular HTML/XML, CSS, RDF/OWL, SPARQL and JavaScript.
  14. Zeng, M.L.; Zumer, M.: Introducing FRSAD and mapping it with SKOS and other models (2009) 0.02
    0.015770756 = product of:
      0.03154151 = sum of:
        0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 3150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01029941 = score(doc=3150,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 3150, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3150)
        0.021242103 = product of:
          0.042484205 = sum of:
            0.042484205 = weight(_text_:organization in 3150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.042484205 = score(doc=3150,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.23635197 = fieldWeight in 3150, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3150)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    The Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Records (FRSAR) Working Group was formed in 2005 as the third IFLA working group of the FRBR family to address subject authority data issues and to investigate the direct and indirect uses of subject authority data by a wide range of users. This paper introduces the Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD), the model developed by the FRSAR Working Group, and discusses it in the context of other related conceptual models defined in the specifications during recent years, including the British Standard BS8723-5: Structured vocabularies for information retrieval - Guide Part 5: Exchange formats and protocols for interoperability, W3C's SKOS Simple Knowledge Organization System Reference, and OWL Web Ontology Language Reference. These models enable the consideration of the functions of subject authority data and concept schemes at a higher level that is independent of any implementation, system, or specific context, while allowing us to focus on the semantics, structures, and interoperability of subject authority data.
  15. Broughton, V.: Facet analysis as a fundamental theory for structuring subject organization tools (2007) 0.01
    0.014161401 = product of:
      0.056645606 = sum of:
        0.056645606 = product of:
          0.11329121 = sum of:
            0.11329121 = weight(_text_:organization in 537) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.11329121 = score(doc=537,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.6302719 = fieldWeight in 537, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=537)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    The presentation will examine the potential of facet analysis as a basis for determining status and relationships of concepts in subject based tools using a controlled vocabulary, and the extent to which it can be used as a general theory of knowledge organization as opposed to a methodology for structuring classifications only.
    Content
    Präsentation während der Veranstaltung "Networked Knowledge Organization Systems and Services: The 6th European Networked Knowledge Organization Systems (NKOS) Workshop, Workshop at the 11th ECDL Conference, Budapest, Hungary, September 21st 2007".
  16. Schmitz-Esser, W.; Sigel, A.: Introducing terminology-based ontologies : Papers and Materials presented by the authors at the workshop "Introducing Terminology-based Ontologies" (Poli/Schmitz-Esser/Sigel) at the 9th International Conference of the International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), Vienna, Austria, July 6th, 2006 (2006) 0.01
    0.009198101 = product of:
      0.036792405 = sum of:
        0.036792405 = product of:
          0.07358481 = sum of:
            0.07358481 = weight(_text_:organization in 1285) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07358481 = score(doc=1285,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.40937364 = fieldWeight in 1285, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1285)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    This work-in-progress communication contains the papers and materials presented by Winfried Schmitz-Esser and Alexander Sigel in the joint workshop (with Roberto Poli) "Introducing Terminology-based Ontologies" at the 9th International Conference of the International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), Vienna, Austria, July 6th, 2006.
    Content
    Inhalt: 1. From traditional Knowledge Organization Systems (authority files, classifications, thesauri) towards ontologies on the web (Alexander Sigel) (Tutorial. Paper with Slides interspersed) pp. 3-53 2. Introduction to Integrative Cross-Language Ontology (ICLO): Formalizing and interrelating textual knowledge to enable intelligent action and knowledge sharing (Winfried Schmitz-Esser) pp. 54-113 3. First Idea Sketch on Modelling ICLO with Topic Maps (Alexander Sigel) (Work in progress paper. Topic maps available from the author) pp. 114-130
  17. SKOS2OWL : Online tool for deriving OWL ontologies from SKOS categorization schemas (2007) 0.01
    0.008850876 = product of:
      0.035403505 = sum of:
        0.035403505 = product of:
          0.07080701 = sum of:
            0.07080701 = weight(_text_:organization in 4691) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07080701 = score(doc=4691,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.39391994 = fieldWeight in 4691, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4691)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    SKOS2OWL is an online tool that converts hierarchical classifications available in the W3C SKOS (Simple Knowledge Organization Systems) format into RDF-S or OWL ontologies. In many cases, the resulting ontologies can be used directly. If not, they can be refined using standard ontology engineering tools like e.g. Protégé.
  18. Panzer, M.: Towards the "webification" of controlled subject vocabulary : a case study involving the Dewey Decimal Classification (2007) 0.01
    0.00876192 = product of:
      0.03504768 = sum of:
        0.03504768 = product of:
          0.07009536 = sum of:
            0.07009536 = weight(_text_:organization in 538) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07009536 = score(doc=538,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.38996086 = fieldWeight in 538, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=538)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Content
    Präsentation während der Veranstaltung "Networked Knowledge Organization Systems and Services: The 6th European Networked Knowledge Organization Systems (NKOS) Workshop, Workshop at the 11th ECDL Conference, Budapest, Hungary, September 21st 2007".
  19. OWL Web Ontology Language Test Cases (2004) 0.01
    0.0068306234 = product of:
      0.027322493 = sum of:
        0.027322493 = product of:
          0.054644987 = sum of:
            0.054644987 = weight(_text_:22 in 4685) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.054644987 = score(doc=4685,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4685, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4685)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    14. 8.2011 13:33:22
  20. Scheir, P.; Pammer, V.; Lindstaedt, S.N.: Information retrieval on the Semantic Web : does it exist? (2007) 0.01
    0.006717136 = product of:
      0.026868545 = sum of:
        0.026868545 = weight(_text_:information in 4329) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026868545 = score(doc=4329,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.3035872 = fieldWeight in 4329, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4329)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Plenty of contemporary attempts to search exist that are associated with the area of Semantic Web. But which of them qualify as information retrieval for the Semantic Web? Do such approaches exist? To answer these questions we take a look at the nature of the Semantic Web and Semantic Desktop and at definitions for information and data retrieval. We survey current approaches referred to by their authors as information retrieval for the Semantic Web or that use Semantic Web technology for search.
    Source
    Lernen - Wissen - Adaption : workshop proceedings / LWA 2007, Halle, September 2007. Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Institute for Informatics, Databases and Information Systems. Hrsg.: Alexander Hinneburg

Languages

  • e 50
  • d 7

Types