Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

0.21602866 = product of:
  0.5040669 = sum of:
    0.031791996 = product of:
      0.095375985 = sum of:
        0.095375985 = weight(_text_:3a in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.095375985 = score(doc=5820,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25455406 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.3746787 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.13488202 = weight(_text_:2f in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13488202 = score(doc=5820,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.25455406 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.5298757 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
    0.047687992 = product of:
      0.095375985 = sum of:
        0.095375985 = weight(_text_:3a in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.095375985 = score(doc=5820,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25455406 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.3746787 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.13488202 = weight(_text_:2f in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13488202 = score(doc=5820,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.25455406 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.5298757 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
    0.13488202 = weight(_text_:2f in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13488202 = score(doc=5820,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.25455406 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.5298757 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
    0.019940836 = product of:
      0.039881673 = sum of:
        0.039881673 = weight(_text_:texts in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039881673 = score(doc=5820,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16460659 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.4822793 = idf(docFreq=499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.2422848 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.4822793 = idf(docFreq=499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.42857143 = coord(6/14)

Abstract

This proposal includes plans to improve the quality of relevant entities with a co-learning framework that learns from both entity labels and document labels. We also plan to develop a hybrid ranking system that combines word based and entity based representations together with their uncertainties considered. At last, we plan to enrich the text representations with connections between entities. We propose several ways to infer entity graph representations for texts, and to rank documents using their structure representations. This dissertation overcomes the limitation of word based representations with external and carefully curated information from knowledge bases. We believe this thesis research is a solid start towards the new generation of intelligent, semantic, and structured information retrieval.

Content

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Language and Information Technologies. Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cs.cmu.edu%2F~cx%2Fpapers%2Fknowledge_based_text_representation.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0SaTSvhWLTh__Uz_HtOtl3.

0.0032120824 = product of:
  0.044969153 = sum of:
    0.044969153 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 535) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044969153 = score(doc=535,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.3847152 = fieldWeight in 535, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=535)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Abstract

Literature-based discovery (LBD) research aims at finding effective computational methods for predicting previously unknown connections between clusters of research papers from disparate research areas. Existing methods encompass two general approaches. The first approach searches for these unknown connections by examining the textual contents of research papers. In addition to the existing textual features, the second approach incorporates structural features of scientific literatures, such as citation structures. These approaches, however, have not considered research papers' latent bibliographic metadata structures as important features that can be used for predicting previously unknown relationships between them. This thesis investigates a new graph-based LBD method that exploits the latent bibliographic metadata connections between pairs of research papers. The heterogeneous bibliographic information network is proposed as an efficient graph-based data structure for modeling the complex relationships between these metadata. In contrast to previous approaches, this method seamlessly combines textual and citation information in the form of pathbased metadata features for predicting future co-citation links between research papers from disparate research fields. The results reported in this thesis provide evidence that the method is effective for reconstructing the historical literature-based discovery hypotheses. This thesis also investigates the effects of semantic modeling and topic modeling on the performance of the proposed method. For semantic modeling, a general-purpose word sense disambiguation technique is proposed to reduce the lexical ambiguity in the title and abstract of research papers. The experimental results suggest that the reduced lexical ambiguity did not necessarily lead to a better performance of the method. This thesis discusses some of the possible contributing factors to these results. Finally, topic modeling is used for learning the latent topical relations between research papers. The learned topic model is incorporated into the heterogeneous bibliographic information network graph and allows new predictive features to be learned. The results in this thesis suggest that topic modeling improves the performance of the proposed method by increasing the overall accuracy for predicting the future co-citation links between disparate research papers.

0.0020143287 = product of:
  0.028200602 = sum of:
    0.028200602 = product of:
      0.056401204 = sum of:
        0.056401204 = weight(_text_:texts in 4728) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056401204 = score(doc=4728,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16460659 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.4822793 = idf(docFreq=499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.34264246 = fieldWeight in 4728, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.4822793 = idf(docFreq=499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4728)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Abstract

The amount and complexity of information available in a digital form is already huge and new information is being produced every day. Retrieving information relevant to address a particular need becomes a significant issue. This work utilizes knowledge organization systems (KOS), such as thesauri and ontologies and applies information extraction (IE) and computational linguistics (CL) techniques to organize, manage and retrieve information stored in digital collections in the agricultural domain. Two real world applications of the approach have been developed and are available and actively used by the public. An ontology is used to manage the Water Conservation Digital Library holding a dynamic collection of various types of digital resources in the domain of urban water conservation in Florida, USA. The ontology based back-end powers a fully operational web interface, available at http://library.conservefloridawater.org. The system has demonstrated numerous benefits of the ontology application, including accurate retrieval of resources, information sharing and reuse, and has proved to effectively facilitate information management. The major difficulty encountered with the approach is that large and dynamic number of concepts makes it difficult to keep the ontology consistent and to accurately catalog resources manually. To address the aforementioned issues, a combination of IE and CL techniques, such as Vector Space Model and probabilistic parsing, with the use of Agricultural Thesaurus were adapted to automatically extract concepts important for each of the texts in the Best Management Practices (BMP) Publication Library--a collection of documents in the domain of agricultural BMPs in Florida available at http://lyra.ifas.ufl.edu/LIB. A new approach of domain-specific concept discovery with the use of Internet search engine was developed. Initial evaluation of the results indicates significant improvement in precision of information extraction. The approach presented in this work focuses on problems unique to agriculture and natural resources domain, such as domain specific concepts and vocabularies, but should be applicable to any collection of texts in digital format. It may be of potential interest for anyone who needs to effectively manage a collection of digital resources.

0.0015003269 = product of:
  0.021004576 = sum of:
    0.021004576 = weight(_text_:subject in 1077) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021004576 = score(doc=1077,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.1955951 = fieldWeight in 1077, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1077)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Abstract

My thesis discusses two related problems that have taken center stage in the recent literature on concepts: 1) What are the individuation conditions of concepts? Under what conditions is a concept Cv(1) the same concept as a concept Cv(2)? 2) What are the possession conditions of concepts? What conditions must be satisfied for a thinker to have a concept C? The thesis defends a novel account of concepts, which I call "pluralist-contextualist": 1) Pluralism: Different concepts have different kinds of individuation and possession conditions: some concepts are individuated more "coarsely", have less demanding possession conditions and are widely shared, while other concepts are individuated more "finely" and not shared. 2) Contextualism: When a speaker ascribes a propositional attitude to a subject S, or uses his ascription to explain/predict S's behavior, the speaker's intentions in the relevant context determine the correct individuation conditions for the concepts involved in his report. In chapters 1-3 I defend a contextualist, non-Millian theory of propositional attitude ascriptions. Then, I show how contextualism can be used to offer a novel perspective on the problem of concept individuation/possession. More specifically, I employ contextualism to provide a new, more effective argument for Fodor's "publicity principle": if contextualism is true, then certain specific concepts must be shared in order for interpersonally applicable psychological generalizations to be possible. In chapters 4-5 I raise a tension between publicity and another widely endorsed principle, the "Fregean constraint" (FC): subjects who are unaware of certain identity facts and find themselves in so-called "Frege cases" must have distinct concepts for the relevant object x. For instance: the ancient astronomers had distinct concepts (HESPERUS/PHOSPHORUS) for the same object (the planet Venus). First, I examine some leading theories of concepts and argue that they cannot meet both of our constraints at the same time. Then, I offer principled reasons to think that no theory can satisfy (FC) while also respecting publicity. (FC) appears to require a form of holism, on which a concept is individuated by its global inferential role in a subject S and can thus only be shared by someone who has exactly the same inferential dispositions as S. This explains the tension between publicity and (FC), since holism is clearly incompatible with concept shareability. To solve the tension, I suggest adopting my pluralist-contextualist proposal: concepts involved in Frege cases are holistically individuated and not public, while other concepts are more coarsely individuated and widely shared; given this "plurality" of concepts, we will then need contextual factors (speakers' intentions) to "select" the specific concepts to be employed in our intentional generalizations in the relevant contexts. In chapter 6 I develop the view further by contrasting it with some rival accounts. First, I examine a very different kind of pluralism about concepts, which has been recently defended by Daniel Weiskopf, and argue that it is insufficiently radical. Then, I consider the inferentialist accounts defended by authors like Peacocke, Rey and Jackson. Such views, I argue, are committed to an implausible picture of reference determination, on which our inferential dispositions fix the reference of our concepts: this leads to wrong predictions in all those cases of scientific disagreement where two parties have very different inferential dispositions and yet seem to refer to the same natural kind.

5.811431E-4 = product of:
  0.008136002 = sum of:
    0.008136002 = product of:
      0.016272005 = sum of:
        0.016272005 = weight(_text_:22 in 4399) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016272005 = score(doc=4399,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 4399, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4399)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22