Search (111 results, page 1 of 6)

0.08711834 = sum of:
  0.062046222 = product of:
    0.24818489 = sum of:
      0.24818489 = weight(_text_:3a in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.24818489 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.44159594 = queryWeight, product of:
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05208721 = 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)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.025072116 = product of:
    0.050144233 = sum of:
      0.050144233 = weight(_text_:w in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.050144233 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.19849424 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05208721 = queryNorm
          0.2526231 = fieldWeight in 400, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=400)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Faclanthology.org%2FD19-5317.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0ZZFyq5wWTtNTvNkrvjlGA.

0.07707235 = product of:
  0.1541447 = sum of:
    0.1541447 = sum of:
      0.08357372 = weight(_text_:w in 6089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08357372 = score(doc=6089,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.19849424 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05208721 = queryNorm
          0.42103854 = fieldWeight in 6089, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=6089)
      0.07057098 = weight(_text_:22 in 6089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07057098 = score(doc=6089,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18240054 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05208721 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 6089, 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=6089)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Pages

S.11-22

0.04624341 = product of:
  0.09248682 = sum of:
    0.09248682 = sum of:
      0.050144233 = weight(_text_:w in 987) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.050144233 = score(doc=987,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.19849424 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05208721 = queryNorm
          0.2526231 = fieldWeight in 987, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=987)
      0.04234259 = weight(_text_:22 in 987) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04234259 = score(doc=987,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18240054 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05208721 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 987, 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=987)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

23. 7.2017 13:49:22

0.043012477 = sum of:
  0.01794036 = product of:
    0.07176144 = sum of:
      0.07176144 = weight(_text_:authors in 1285) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07176144 = score(doc=1285,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2374559 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05208721 = queryNorm
          0.30220953 = fieldWeight in 1285, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1285)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.025072116 = product of:
    0.050144233 = sum of:
      0.050144233 = weight(_text_:w in 1285) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.050144233 = score(doc=1285,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.19849424 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05208721 = queryNorm
          0.2526231 = fieldWeight in 1285, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1285)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.043012477 = sum of:
  0.01794036 = product of:
    0.07176144 = sum of:
      0.07176144 = weight(_text_:authors in 4818) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07176144 = score(doc=4818,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2374559 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05208721 = queryNorm
          0.30220953 = fieldWeight in 4818, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4818)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.025072116 = product of:
    0.050144233 = sum of:
      0.050144233 = weight(_text_:w in 4818) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.050144233 = score(doc=4818,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.19849424 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05208721 = queryNorm
          0.2526231 = fieldWeight in 4818, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4818)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

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.

0.03667523 = product of:
  0.07335046 = sum of:
    0.07335046 = sum of:
      0.03342949 = weight(_text_:w in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03342949 = score(doc=2654,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.19849424 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05208721 = queryNorm
          0.16841541 = fieldWeight in 2654, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2654)
      0.039920975 = weight(_text_:22 in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.039920975 = score(doc=2654,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.18240054 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05208721 = queryNorm
          0.21886435 = fieldWeight in 2654, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2654)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In order to transfer the Chinese Classified Thesaurus (CCT) into a machine-processable format and provide CCT-based Web services, a pilot study has been conducted in which a variety of selected CCT classes and mapped thesaurus entries are encoded with SKOS. OWL and RDFS are also used to encode the same contents for the purposes of feasibility and cost-benefit comparison. CCT is a collected effort led by the National Library of China. It is an integration of the national standards Chinese Library Classification (CLC) 4th edition and Chinese Thesaurus (CT). As a manually created mapping product, CCT provides for each of the classes the corresponding thesaurus terms, and vice versa. The coverage of CCT includes four major clusters: philosophy, social sciences and humanities, natural sciences and technologies, and general works. There are 22 main-classes, 52,992 sub-classes and divisions, 110,837 preferred thesaurus terms, 35,690 entry terms (non-preferred terms), and 59,738 pre-coordinated headings (Chinese Classified Thesaurus, 2005) Major challenges of encoding this large vocabulary comes from its integrated structure. CCT is a result of the combination of two structures (illustrated in Figure 1): a thesaurus that uses ISO-2788 standardized structure and a classification scheme that is basically enumerative, but provides some flexibility for several kinds of synthetic mechanisms Other challenges include the complex relationships caused by differences of granularities of two original schemes and their presentation with various levels of SKOS elements; as well as the diverse coordination of entries due to the use of auxiliary tables and pre-coordinated headings derived from combining classes, subdivisions, and thesaurus terms, which do not correspond to existing unique identifiers. The poster reports the progress, shares the sample SKOS entries, and summarizes problems identified during the SKOS encoding process. Although OWL Lite and OWL Full provide richer expressiveness, the cost-benefit issues and the final purposes of encoding CCT raise questions of using such approaches.

Source

Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas

0.03482994 = sum of:
  0.020715743 = product of:
    0.08286297 = sum of:
      0.08286297 = weight(_text_:authors in 1634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08286297 = score(doc=1634,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.2374559 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05208721 = queryNorm
          0.34896153 = fieldWeight in 1634, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1634)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.014114196 = product of:
    0.028228393 = sum of:
      0.028228393 = weight(_text_:22 in 1634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.028228393 = score(doc=1634,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18240054 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05208721 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1634, 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=1634)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - Ontologies are prone to wide semantic variability due to subjective points of view of their composers. The purpose of this paper is to propose a new approach for maximal unification of diverse ontologies for controversial domains by their relations. Design/methodology/approach - Effective matching or unification of multiple ontologies for a specific domain is crucial for the success of many semantic web applications, such as semantic information retrieval and organization, document tagging, summarization and search. To this end, numerous automatic and semi-automatic techniques were proposed in the past decade that attempt to identify similar entities, mostly classes, in diverse ontologies for similar domains. Apparently, matching individual entities cannot result in full integration of ontologies' semantics without matching their inter-relations with all other-related classes (and instances). However, semantic matching of ontological relations still constitutes a major research challenge. Therefore, in this paper the authors propose a new paradigm for assessment of maximal possible matching and unification of ontological relations. To this end, several unification rules for ontological relations were devised based on ontological reference rules, and lexical and textual entailment. These rules were semi-automatically implemented to extend a given ontology with semantically matching relations from another ontology for a similar domain. Then, the ontologies were unified through these similar pairs of relations. The authors observe that these rules can be also facilitated to reveal the contradictory relations in different ontologies. Findings - To assess the feasibility of the approach two experiments were conducted with different sets of multiple personal ontologies on controversial domains constructed by trained subjects. The results for about 50 distinct ontology pairs demonstrate a good potential of the methodology for increasing inter-ontology agreement. Furthermore, the authors show that the presented methodology can lead to a complete unification of multiple semantically heterogeneous ontologies. Research limitations/implications - This is a conceptual study that presents a new approach for semantic unification of ontologies by a devised set of rules along with the initial experimental evidence of its feasibility and effectiveness. However, this methodology has to be fully automatically implemented and tested on a larger dataset in future research. Practical implications - This result has implication for semantic search, since a richer ontology, comprised of multiple aspects and viewpoints of the domain of knowledge, enhances discoverability and improves search results. Originality/value - To the best of the knowledge, this is the first study to examine and assess the maximal level of semantic relation-based ontology unification.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

0.03482994 = sum of:
  0.020715743 = product of:
    0.08286297 = sum of:
      0.08286297 = weight(_text_:authors in 179) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08286297 = score(doc=179,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.2374559 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05208721 = queryNorm
          0.34896153 = fieldWeight in 179, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=179)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.014114196 = product of:
    0.028228393 = sum of:
      0.028228393 = weight(_text_:22 in 179) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.028228393 = score(doc=179,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18240054 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05208721 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 179, 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=179)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose The open science movement calls for transparent and retraceable research processes. While infrastructures to support these practices in qualitative research are lacking, the design needs to consider different approaches and workflows. The paper bases on the definition of ontologies as shared conceptualizations of knowledge (Borst, 1999). The authors argue that participatory design is a good way to create these shared conceptualizations by giving domain experts and future users a voice in the design process via interviews, workshops and observations. Design/methodology/approach This paper presents a novel approach for creating ontologies in the field of open science using participatory design. As a case study the creation of an ontology for qualitative coding schemas is presented. Coding schemas are an important result of qualitative research, and reuse can yield great potential for open science making qualitative research more transparent, enhance sharing of coding schemas and teaching of qualitative methods. The participatory design process consisted of three parts: a requirement analysis using interviews and an observation, a design phase accompanied by interviews and an evaluation phase based on user tests as well as interviews. Findings The research showed several positive outcomes due to participatory design: higher commitment of users, mutual learning, high quality feedback and better quality of the ontology. However, there are two obstacles in this approach: First, contradictive answers by the interviewees, which needs to be balanced; second, this approach takes more time due to interview planning and analysis. Practical implications The implication of the paper is in the long run to decentralize the design of open science infrastructures and to involve parties affected on several levels. Originality/value In ontology design, several methods exist by using user-centered design or participatory design doing workshops. In this paper, the authors outline the potentials for participatory design using mainly interviews in creating an ontology for open science. The authors focus on close contact to researchers in order to build the ontology upon the expert's knowledge.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

0.028674982 = sum of:
  0.011960239 = product of:
    0.047840957 = sum of:
      0.047840957 = weight(_text_:authors in 4893) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.047840957 = score(doc=4893,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2374559 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05208721 = queryNorm
          0.20147301 = fieldWeight in 4893, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4893)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.016714744 = product of:
    0.03342949 = sum of:
      0.03342949 = weight(_text_:w in 4893) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03342949 = score(doc=4893,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.19849424 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05208721 = queryNorm
          0.16841541 = fieldWeight in 4893, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4893)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Content Management Systems (CMSs) are used in almost every industry by millions of end-user organizations. In contrast to the 90s, they are no longer used as isolated applications in one organization but they support critical core operations in business ecosystems. Content management today is more interactive and more integrative: interactive because end-users are increasingly content creators themselves and integrative because content elements can be embedded into various other applications. The authors of this book investigate how Semantic Technologies can increase interactivity and integration capabilities of CMSs and discuss their business value to millions of end-user organizations. This book has therefore the objective, to reflect existing applications as well as to discuss and present new applications for CMSs that use Semantic Technologies. An evaluation of 27 CMSs concludes this book and provides a basis for IT executives that plan to adopt or replace a CMS in the near future.

Editor

Maass, W.

0.025072116 = product of:
  0.050144233 = sum of:
    0.050144233 = product of:
      0.100288466 = sum of:
        0.100288466 = weight(_text_:w in 2071) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.100288466 = score(doc=2071,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19849424 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05208721 = queryNorm
            0.5052462 = fieldWeight in 2071, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2071)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.025072116 = product of:
  0.050144233 = sum of:
    0.050144233 = product of:
      0.100288466 = sum of:
        0.100288466 = weight(_text_:w in 105) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.100288466 = score(doc=105,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19849424 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05208721 = queryNorm
            0.5052462 = fieldWeight in 105, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=105)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.025072116 = product of:
  0.050144233 = sum of:
    0.050144233 = product of:
      0.100288466 = sum of:
        0.100288466 = weight(_text_:w in 4612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.100288466 = score(doc=4612,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19849424 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05208721 = queryNorm
            0.5052462 = fieldWeight in 4612, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4612)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.02281513 = sum of:
  0.010465209 = product of:
    0.041860837 = sum of:
      0.041860837 = weight(_text_:authors in 1633) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041860837 = score(doc=1633,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2374559 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05208721 = queryNorm
          0.17628889 = fieldWeight in 1633, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1633)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.012349921 = product of:
    0.024699843 = sum of:
      0.024699843 = weight(_text_:22 in 1633) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.024699843 = score(doc=1633,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18240054 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05208721 = queryNorm
          0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 1633, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1633)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to improve the conceptual-based search by incorporating structural ontological information such as concepts and relations. Generally, Semantic-based information retrieval aims to identify relevant information based on the meanings of the query terms or on the context of the terms and the performance of semantic information retrieval is carried out through standard measures-precision and recall. Higher precision leads to the (meaningful) relevant documents obtained and lower recall leads to the less coverage of the concepts. Design/methodology/approach - In this paper, the authors enhance the existing ontology-based indexing proposed by Kohler et al., by incorporating sibling information to the index. The index designed by Kohler et al., contains only super and sub-concepts from the ontology. In addition, in our approach, we focus on two tasks; query expansion and ranking of the expanded queries, to improve the efficiency of the ontology-based search. The aforementioned tasks make use of ontological concepts, and relations existing between those concepts so as to obtain semantically more relevant search results for a given query. Findings - The proposed ontology-based indexing technique is investigated by analysing the coverage of concepts that are being populated in the index. Here, we introduce a new measure called index enhancement measure, to estimate the coverage of ontological concepts being indexed. We have evaluated the ontology-based search for the tourism domain with the tourism documents and tourism-specific ontology. The comparison of search results based on the use of ontology "with and without query expansion" is examined to estimate the efficiency of the proposed query expansion task. The ranking is compared with the ORank system to evaluate the performance of our ontology-based search. From these analyses, the ontology-based search results shows better recall when compared to the other concept-based search systems. The mean average precision of the ontology-based search is found to be 0.79 and the recall is found to be 0.65, the ORank system has the mean average precision of 0.62 and the recall is found to be 0.51, while the concept-based search has the mean average precision of 0.56 and the recall is found to be 0.42. Practical implications - When the concept is not present in the domain-specific ontology, the concept cannot be indexed. When the given query term is not available in the ontology then the term-based results are retrieved. Originality/value - In addition to super and sub-concepts, we incorporate the concepts present in same level (siblings) to the ontological index. The structural information from the ontology is determined for the query expansion. The ranking of the documents depends on the type of the query (single concept query, multiple concept queries and concept with relation queries) and the ontological relations that exists in the query and the documents. With this ontological structural information, the search results showed us better coverage of concepts with respect to the query.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

0.02089343 = product of:
  0.04178686 = sum of:
    0.04178686 = product of:
      0.08357372 = sum of:
        0.08357372 = weight(_text_:w in 3058) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08357372 = score(doc=3058,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19849424 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05208721 = queryNorm
            0.42103854 = fieldWeight in 3058, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3058)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.02089343 = product of:
  0.04178686 = sum of:
    0.04178686 = product of:
      0.08357372 = sum of:
        0.08357372 = weight(_text_:w in 715) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08357372 = score(doc=715,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19849424 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05208721 = queryNorm
            0.42103854 = fieldWeight in 715, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=715)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Grundlagen der praktischen Information und Dokumentation. Handbuch zur Einführung in die Informationswissenschaft und -praxis. 6., völlig neu gefaßte Ausgabe. Hrsg. von R. Kuhlen, W. Semar u. D. Strauch. Begründet von Klaus Laisiepen, Ernst Lutterbeck, Karl-Heinrich Meyer-Uhlenried

0.020683441 = product of:
  0.041366883 = sum of:
    0.041366883 = product of:
      0.082733765 = sum of:
        0.082733765 = weight(_text_:w in 4733) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.082733765 = score(doc=4733,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.19849424 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05208721 = queryNorm
            0.41680688 = fieldWeight in 4733, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4733)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.020682074 = product of:
  0.04136415 = sum of:
    0.04136415 = product of:
      0.1654566 = sum of:
        0.1654566 = weight(_text_:3a in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1654566 = score(doc=701,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.44159594 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05208721 = queryNorm
            0.3746787 = fieldWeight in 701, 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=701)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Vgl.: http%3A%2F%2Fdigbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fvolltexte%2Fdocuments%2F1627&ei=tAtYUYrBNoHKtQb3l4GYBw&usg=AFQjCNHeaxKkKU3-u54LWxMNYGXaaDLCGw&sig2=8WykXWQoDKjDSdGtAakH2Q&bvm=bv.44442042,d.Yms.

0.020682074 = product of:
  0.04136415 = sum of:
    0.04136415 = product of:
      0.1654566 = sum of:
        0.1654566 = weight(_text_:3a in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1654566 = score(doc=5820,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.44159594 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05208721 = 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)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

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.

0.017728664 = product of:
  0.035457328 = sum of:
    0.035457328 = product of:
      0.070914656 = sum of:
        0.070914656 = weight(_text_:w in 1680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.070914656 = score(doc=1680,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.19849424 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05208721 = queryNorm
            0.35726303 = fieldWeight in 1680, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1680)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Last word ontological thought and practice is exemplified on an axiomatic framework [a model for an Integrative Cross-Language Ontology (ICLO), cf. Poli, R., Schmitz-Esser, W., forthcoming 2007] that is highly general, based on natural language, multilingual, can be implemented as topic maps and may be openly enhanced by software available for particular languages. Basics of ontological modelling, conditions for construction and maintenance, and the most salient points in application are addressed, such as cross-language text mining and knowledge generation. The rationale is to open the eyes for the tremendous potential of terminology-based ontologies for principled Knowledge Organization and the interchange and reuse of formalized knowledge.

0.017728664 = product of:
  0.035457328 = sum of:
    0.035457328 = product of:
      0.070914656 = sum of:
        0.070914656 = weight(_text_:w in 4762) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.070914656 = score(doc=4762,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.19849424 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05208721 = queryNorm
            0.35726303 = fieldWeight in 4762, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4762)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Vgl.: http://aclweb.org/anthology-new/W/W11/W11-0106.pdf. Vgl. für den Proceedingsband: http://aclweb.org/anthology-new/W/W11/W11-0100.pdf, bzw.: http://www.meaningfactory.com/bos/pubs/BosPulman2011.pdf.