Search (229 results, page 1 of 12)

  • × type_ss:"a"
  • × year_i:[2020 TO 2030}
  1. Noever, D.; Ciolino, M.: ¬The Turing deception (2022) 0.38 
    0.3793754 = product of:
  0.9010166 = sum of:
    0.040955298 = product of:
      0.122865885 = sum of:
        0.122865885 = weight(_text_:3a in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.122865885 = score(doc=862,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21861556 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.025786186 = queryNorm
            0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 862, 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=862)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.122865885 = weight(_text_:2f in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.122865885 = score(doc=862,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21861556 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 862, 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=862)
    0.122865885 = weight(_text_:2f in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.122865885 = score(doc=862,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21861556 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 862, 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=862)
    0.122865885 = weight(_text_:2f in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.122865885 = score(doc=862,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21861556 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 862, 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=862)
    0.122865885 = weight(_text_:2f in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.122865885 = score(doc=862,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21861556 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 862, 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=862)
    0.122865885 = weight(_text_:2f in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.122865885 = score(doc=862,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21861556 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 862, 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=862)
    0.122865885 = weight(_text_:2f in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.122865885 = score(doc=862,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21861556 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 862, 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=862)
    0.122865885 = weight(_text_:2f in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.122865885 = score(doc=862,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21861556 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 862, 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=862)
  0.42105263 = coord(8/19)
    Source
    https%3A%2F%2Farxiv.org%2Fabs%2F2212.06721&usg=AOvVaw3i_9pZm9y_dQWoHi6uv0EN
  2. Rölke, H.; Weichselbraun, A.: Ontologien und Linked Open Data (2023) 0.04 
    0.03589256 = product of:
  0.17048967 = sum of:
    0.0151716275 = weight(_text_:web in 788) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0151716275 = score(doc=788,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 788, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=788)
    0.0151716275 = weight(_text_:web in 788) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0151716275 = score(doc=788,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 788, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=788)
    0.041534968 = weight(_text_:semantische in 788) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041534968 = score(doc=788,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13923967 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.399778 = idf(docFreq=542, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.2982984 = fieldWeight in 788, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.399778 = idf(docFreq=542, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=788)
    0.09861144 = weight(_text_:ontologie in 788) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09861144 = score(doc=788,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.18041065 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.996407 = idf(docFreq=109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.5465943 = fieldWeight in 788, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.996407 = idf(docFreq=109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=788)
  0.21052632 = coord(4/19)
    Abstract
    Der Begriff Ontologie stammt ursprünglich aus der Metaphysik, einem Teilbereich der Philosophie, welcher sich um die Erkenntnis der Grundstruktur und Prinzipien der Wirklichkeit bemüht. Ontologien befassen sich dabei mit der Frage, welche Dinge auf der fundamentalsten Ebene existieren, wie sich diese strukturieren lassen und in welchen Beziehungen diese zueinanderstehen. In der Informationswissenschaft hingegen werden Ontologien verwendet, um das Vokabular für die Beschreibung von Wissensbereichen zu formalisieren. Ziel ist es, dass alle Akteure, die in diesen Bereichen tätig sind, die gleichen Konzepte und Begrifflichkeiten verwenden, um eine reibungslose Zusammenarbeit ohne Missverständnisse zu ermöglichen. So definierte zum Beispiel die Dublin Core Metadaten Initiative 15 Kernelemente, die zur Beschreibung von elektronischen Ressourcen und Medien verwendet werden können. Jedes Element wird durch eine eindeutige Bezeichnung (zum Beispiel identifier) und eine zugehörige Konzeption, welche die Bedeutung dieser Bezeichnung möglichst exakt festlegt, beschrieben. Ein Identifier muss zum Beispiel laut der Dublin Core Ontologie ein Dokument basierend auf einem zugehörigen Katalog eindeutig identifizieren. Je nach Katalog kämen daher zum Beispiel eine ISBN (Katalog von Büchern), ISSN (Katalog von Zeitschriften), URL (Web), DOI (Publikationsdatenbank) etc. als Identifier in Frage.
    Theme
    Semantische Interoperabilität
  3. Schreur, P.E.: ¬The use of Linked Data and artificial intelligence as key elements in the transformation of technical services (2020) 0.03 
    0.029188441 = product of:
  0.1386451 = sum of:
    0.02124028 = weight(_text_:web in 125) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02124028 = score(doc=125,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.25239927 = fieldWeight in 125, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=125)
    0.02124028 = weight(_text_:web in 125) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02124028 = score(doc=125,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.25239927 = fieldWeight in 125, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=125)
    0.03801558 = weight(_text_:services in 125) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03801558 = score(doc=125,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.094670646 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.40155616 = fieldWeight in 125, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=125)
    0.058148954 = weight(_text_:semantische in 125) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.058148954 = score(doc=125,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13923967 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.399778 = idf(docFreq=542, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.41761774 = fieldWeight in 125, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.399778 = idf(docFreq=542, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=125)
  0.21052632 = coord(4/19)
    Abstract
    Library Technical Services have benefited from numerous stimuli. Although initially looked at with suspicion, transitions such as the move from catalog cards to the MARC formats have proven enormously helpful to libraries and their patrons. Linked data and Artificial Intelligence (AI) hold the same promise. Through the conversion of metadata surrogates (cataloging) to linked open data, libraries can represent their resources on the Semantic Web. But in order to provide some form of controlled access to unstructured data, libraries must reach beyond traditional cataloging to new tools such as AI to provide consistent access to a growing world of full-text resources.
    Theme
    Semantische Interoperabilität
  4. Elsweiler, D.; Kruschwitz, U.: Interaktives Information Retrieval (2023) 0.02 
    0.018415805 = product of:
  0.17495014 = sum of:
    0.11805775 = weight(_text_:modellierung in 797) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11805775 = score(doc=797,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18558519 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.1970778 = idf(docFreq=89, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.6361378 = fieldWeight in 797, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          7.1970778 = idf(docFreq=89, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=797)
    0.056892388 = weight(_text_:suche in 797) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056892388 = score(doc=797,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12883182 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.996156 = idf(docFreq=812, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.441602 = fieldWeight in 797, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.996156 = idf(docFreq=812, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=797)
  0.10526316 = coord(2/19)
    Abstract
    Interaktives Information Retrieval (IIR) zielt darauf ab, die komplexen Interaktionen zwischen Nutzer*innen und Systemen im IR zu verstehen. Es gibt umfangreiche Literatur zu Themen wie der formalen Modellierung des Suchverhaltens, der Simulation der Interaktion, den interaktiven Funktionen zur Unterstützung des Suchprozesses und der Evaluierung interaktiver Suchsysteme. Dabei ist die interaktive Unterstützung nicht allein auf die Suche beschränkt, sondern hat ebenso die Hilfe bei Navigation und Exploration zum Ziel.
  5. Sartini, B.; Erp, M. van; Gangemi, A.: Marriage is a peach and a chalice : modelling cultural symbolism on the Semantic Web (2021) 0.02 
    0.017827773 = product of:
  0.112909235 = sum of:
    0.031533636 = weight(_text_:web in 557) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031533636 = score(doc=557,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.37471575 = fieldWeight in 557, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=557)
    0.031533636 = weight(_text_:web in 557) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031533636 = score(doc=557,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.37471575 = fieldWeight in 557, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=557)
    0.049841963 = weight(_text_:semantische in 557) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.049841963 = score(doc=557,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13923967 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.399778 = idf(docFreq=542, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.35795808 = fieldWeight in 557, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.399778 = idf(docFreq=542, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=557)
  0.15789473 = coord(3/19)
    Abstract
    In this work, we fill the gap in the Semantic Web in the context of Cultural Symbolism. Building upon earlier work in \citesartini_towards_2021, we introduce the Simulation Ontology, an ontology that models the background knowledge of symbolic meanings, developed by combining the concepts taken from the authoritative theory of Simulacra and Simulations of Jean Baudrillard with symbolic structures and content taken from "Symbolism: a Comprehensive Dictionary'' by Steven Olderr. We re-engineered the symbolic knowledge already present in heterogeneous resources by converting it into our ontology schema to create HyperReal, the first knowledge graph completely dedicated to cultural symbolism. A first experiment run on the knowledge graph is presented to show the potential of quantitative research on symbolism.
    Theme
    Semantic Web
    Semantische Interoperabilität
  6. Smith, A.: Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS) (2022) 0.02 
    0.017827773 = product of:
  0.112909235 = sum of:
    0.031533636 = weight(_text_:web in 1094) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031533636 = score(doc=1094,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.37471575 = fieldWeight in 1094, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1094)
    0.031533636 = weight(_text_:web in 1094) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031533636 = score(doc=1094,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.37471575 = fieldWeight in 1094, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1094)
    0.049841963 = weight(_text_:semantische in 1094) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.049841963 = score(doc=1094,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13923967 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.399778 = idf(docFreq=542, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.35795808 = fieldWeight in 1094, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.399778 = idf(docFreq=542, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1094)
  0.15789473 = coord(3/19)
    Abstract
    SKOS (Simple Knowledge Organization System) is a recommendation from the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) for representing controlled vocabularies, taxonomies, thesauri, classifications, and similar systems for organizing and indexing information as linked data elements in the Semantic Web, using the Resource Description Framework (RDF). The SKOS data model is centered on "concepts", which can have preferred and alternate labels in any language as well as other metadata, and which are identified by addresses on the World Wide Web (URIs). Concepts are grouped into hierarchies through "broader" and "narrower" relations, with "top concepts" at the broadest conceptual level. Concepts are also organized into "concept schemes", also identified by URIs. Other relations, mappings, and groupings are also supported. This article discusses the history of the development of SKOS and provides notes on adoption, uses, and limitations.
    Theme
    Semantische Interoperabilität
  7. Marcondes, C.H.: Towards a vocabulary to implement culturally relevant relationships between digital collections in heritage institutions (2020) 0.02 
    0.016971033 = product of:
  0.080612406 = sum of:
    0.0151716275 = weight(_text_:web in 5757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0151716275 = score(doc=5757,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 5757, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5757)
    0.0151716275 = weight(_text_:web in 5757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0151716275 = score(doc=5757,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 5757, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5757)
    0.041534968 = weight(_text_:semantische in 5757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041534968 = score(doc=5757,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13923967 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.399778 = idf(docFreq=542, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.2982984 = fieldWeight in 5757, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.399778 = idf(docFreq=542, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5757)
    0.008734181 = product of:
      0.017468361 = sum of:
        0.017468361 = weight(_text_:22 in 5757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017468361 = score(doc=5757,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09029883 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.025786186 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5757, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5757)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.21052632 = coord(4/19)
    Abstract
    Cultural heritage institutions are publishing their digital collections over the web as LOD. This is is a new step in the patrimonialization and curatorial processes developed by such institutions. Many of these collections are thematically superimposed and complementary. Frequently, objects in these collections present culturally relevant relationships, such as a book about a painting, or a draft or sketch of a famous painting, etc. LOD technology enables such heritage records to be interlinked, achieving interoperability and adding value to digital collections, thus empowering heritage institutions. An aim of this research is characterizing such culturally relevant relationships and organizing them in a vocabulary. Use cases or examples of relationships between objects suggested by curators or mentioned in literature and in the conceptual models as FRBR/LRM, CIDOC CRM and RiC-CM, were collected and used as examples or inspiration of cultural relevant relationships. Relationships identified are collated and compared for identifying those with the same or similar meaning, synthesized and normalized. A set of thirty-three culturally relevant relationships are identified and formalized as a LOD property vocabulary to be used by digital curators to interlink digital collections. The results presented are provisional and a starting point to be discussed, tested, and enhanced.
    Date
    4. 3.2020 14:22:41
    Theme
    Semantische Interoperabilität
  8. Rocha Souza, R.; Lemos, D.: a comparative analysis : Knowledge organization systems for the representation of multimedia resources on the Web (2020) 0.02 
    0.016000448 = product of:
  0.10133617 = sum of:
    0.025747105 = weight(_text_:web in 5993) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025747105 = score(doc=5993,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.3059541 = fieldWeight in 5993, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5993)
    0.025747105 = weight(_text_:web in 5993) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025747105 = score(doc=5993,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.3059541 = fieldWeight in 5993, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5993)
    0.049841963 = weight(_text_:semantische in 5993) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.049841963 = score(doc=5993,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13923967 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.399778 = idf(docFreq=542, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.35795808 = fieldWeight in 5993, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.399778 = idf(docFreq=542, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5993)
  0.15789473 = coord(3/19)
    Abstract
    The lack of standardization in the production, organization and dissemination of information in documentation centers and institutions alike, as a result from the digitization of collections and their availability on the internet has called for integration efforts. The sheer availability of multimedia content has fostered the development of many distinct and, most of the time, independent metadata standards for its description. This study aims at presenting and comparing the existing standards of metadata, vocabularies and ontologies for multimedia annotation and also tries to offer a synthetic overview of its main strengths and weaknesses, aiding efforts for semantic integration and enhancing the findability of available multimedia resources on the web. We also aim at unveiling the characteristics that could, should and are perhaps not being highlighted in the characterization of multimedia resources.
    Theme
    Semantische Interoperabilität
  9. Rodrigues Barbosa, E.; Godoy Viera, A.F.: Relações semânticas e interoperabilidade em tesauros representados em SKOS : uma revisao sistematica da literatura (2022) 0.02 
    0.016000448 = product of:
  0.10133617 = sum of:
    0.025747105 = weight(_text_:web in 254) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025747105 = score(doc=254,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.3059541 = fieldWeight in 254, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=254)
    0.025747105 = weight(_text_:web in 254) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025747105 = score(doc=254,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.3059541 = fieldWeight in 254, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=254)
    0.049841963 = weight(_text_:semantische in 254) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.049841963 = score(doc=254,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13923967 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.399778 = idf(docFreq=542, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.35795808 = fieldWeight in 254, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.399778 = idf(docFreq=542, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=254)
  0.15789473 = coord(3/19)
    Abstract
    Objetivo: Este estudo tem como objetivo compreender como o modelo de dados Simple Knowledge Organization System e seus modelos de extensão tem sido utilizado para promover a interoperabilidade com outros vocabulários e refinar as relações semânticas em tesauros na web. Metodologia: Utiliza a pesquisa documental nos guias de referência dos modelos de dados utilizados para representar os tesauros na web. Resultados: os modelos de dados têm sido utilizados para representar os termos e suas variações linguísticas, os relacionamentos entre grupos e subgrupos de conceitos, numa perspectiva intra-vocabulários, e os relacionamentos entre conceitos de vocabulários distintos, numa perspectiva inter-vocabulários. Conclusões: O uso do Simple Knowledge Organization System, e dos seus modelos de extensão contribuem para uma melhor estruturação dos conceitos em tesauros. Os modelos de extensão são apropriados para a representação dos relacionamentos de equivalência compostos, ou para a estruturação de grupos e subgrupos de conceitos em tesauros.
    Theme
    Semantische Interoperabilität
  10. Pintscher, L.; Bourgonje, P.; Moreno Schneider, J.; Ostendorff, M.; Rehm, G.: Wissensbasen für die automatische Erschließung und ihre Qualität am Beispiel von Wikidata : die Inhaltserschließungspolitik der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek (2021) 0.02 
    0.015800852 = product of:
  0.10007207 = sum of:
    0.0151716275 = weight(_text_:web in 366) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0151716275 = score(doc=366,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 366, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=366)
    0.0151716275 = weight(_text_:web in 366) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0151716275 = score(doc=366,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 366, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=366)
    0.069728814 = weight(_text_:ontologie in 366) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.069728814 = score(doc=366,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18041065 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.996407 = idf(docFreq=109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.38650054 = fieldWeight in 366, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.996407 = idf(docFreq=109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=366)
  0.15789473 = coord(3/19)
    Abstract
    Wikidata ist eine freie Wissensbasis, die allgemeine Daten über die Welt zur Verfügung stellt. Sie wird von Wikimedia entwickelt und betrieben, wie auch das Schwesterprojekt Wikipedia. Die Daten in Wikidata werden von einer großen Community von Freiwilligen gesammelt und gepflegt, wobei die Daten sowie die zugrundeliegende Ontologie von vielen Projekten, Institutionen und Firmen als Basis für Applikationen und Visualisierungen, aber auch für das Training von maschinellen Lernverfahren genutzt werden. Wikidata nutzt MediaWiki und die Erweiterung Wikibase als technische Grundlage der kollaborativen Arbeit an einer Wissensbasis, die verlinkte offene Daten für Menschen und Maschinen zugänglich macht. Ende 2020 beschreibt Wikidata über 90 Millionen Entitäten unter Verwendung von über 8 000 Eigenschaften, womit insgesamt mehr als 1,15 Milliarden Aussagen über die beschriebenen Entitäten getroffen werden. Die Datenobjekte dieser Entitäten sind mit äquivalenten Einträgen in mehr als 5 500 externen Datenbanken, Katalogen und Webseiten verknüpft, was Wikidata zu einem der zentralen Knotenpunkte des Linked Data Web macht. Mehr als 11 500 aktiv Editierende tragen neue Daten in die Wissensbasis ein und pflegen sie. Diese sind in Wiki-Projekten organisiert, die jeweils bestimmte Themenbereiche oder Aufgabengebiete adressieren. Die Daten werden in mehr als der Hälfte der Inhaltsseiten in den Wikimedia-Projekten genutzt und unter anderem mehr als 6,5 Millionen Mal am Tag über den SPARQL-Endpoint abgefragt, um sie in externe Applikationen und Visualisierungen einzubinden.
  11. Menzel, S.; Schnaitter, H.; Zinck, J.; Petras, V.; Neudecker, C.; Labusch, K.; Leitner, E.; Rehm, G.: Named Entity Linking mit Wikidata und GND : das Potenzial handkuratierter und strukturierter Datenquellen für die semantische Anreicherung von Volltexten (2021) 0.01 
    0.014055632 = product of:
  0.1335285 = sum of:
    0.07194068 = weight(_text_:semantische in 373) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07194068 = score(doc=373,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.13923967 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.399778 = idf(docFreq=542, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.516668 = fieldWeight in 373, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          5.399778 = idf(docFreq=542, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=373)
    0.061587818 = weight(_text_:suche in 373) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.061587818 = score(doc=373,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.12883182 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.996156 = idf(docFreq=812, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.4780482 = fieldWeight in 373, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.996156 = idf(docFreq=812, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=373)
  0.10526316 = coord(2/19)
    Abstract
    Named Entities (benannte Entitäten) - wie Personen, Organisationen, Orte, Ereignisse und Werke - sind wichtige inhaltstragende Komponenten eines Dokuments und sind daher maßgeblich für eine gute inhaltliche Erschließung. Die Erkennung von Named Entities, deren Auszeichnung (Annotation) und Verfügbarmachung für die Suche sind wichtige Instrumente, um Anwendungen wie z. B. die inhaltliche oder semantische Suche in Texten, dokumentübergreifende Kontextualisierung oder das automatische Textzusammenfassen zu verbessern. Inhaltlich präzise und nachhaltig erschlossen werden die erkannten Named Entities eines Dokuments allerdings erst, wenn sie mit einer oder mehreren Quellen verknüpft werden (Grundprinzip von Linked Data, Berners-Lee 2006), die die Entität eindeutig identifizieren und gegenüber gleichlautenden Entitäten disambiguieren (vergleiche z. B. Berlin als Hauptstadt Deutschlands mit dem Komponisten Irving Berlin). Dazu wird die im Dokument erkannte Entität mit dem Entitätseintrag einer Normdatei oder einer anderen zuvor festgelegten Wissensbasis (z. B. Gazetteer für geografische Entitäten) verknüpft, gewöhnlich über den persistenten Identifikator der jeweiligen Wissensbasis oder Normdatei. Durch die Verknüpfung mit einer Normdatei erfolgt nicht nur die Disambiguierung und Identifikation der Entität, sondern es wird dadurch auch Interoperabilität zu anderen Systemen hergestellt, in denen die gleiche Normdatei benutzt wird, z. B. die Suche nach der Hauptstadt Berlin in verschiedenen Datenbanken bzw. Portalen. Die Entitätenverknüpfung (Named Entity Linking, NEL) hat zudem den Vorteil, dass die Normdateien oftmals Relationen zwischen Entitäten enthalten, sodass Dokumente, in denen Named Entities erkannt wurden, zusätzlich auch im Kontext einer größeren Netzwerkstruktur von Entitäten verortet und suchbar gemacht werden können
    Theme
    Semantische Interoperabilität
  12. Steeg, F.; Pohl, A.: ¬Ein Protokoll für den Datenabgleich im Web am Beispiel von OpenRefine und der Gemeinsamen Normdatei (GND) (2021) 0.01 
    0.013333706 = product of:
  0.08444681 = sum of:
    0.021455921 = weight(_text_:web in 367) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021455921 = score(doc=367,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.25496176 = fieldWeight in 367, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=367)
    0.021455921 = weight(_text_:web in 367) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021455921 = score(doc=367,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.25496176 = fieldWeight in 367, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=367)
    0.041534968 = weight(_text_:semantische in 367) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041534968 = score(doc=367,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13923967 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.399778 = idf(docFreq=542, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.2982984 = fieldWeight in 367, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.399778 = idf(docFreq=542, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=367)
  0.15789473 = coord(3/19)
    Abstract
    Normdaten spielen speziell im Hinblick auf die Qualität der Inhaltserschließung bibliografischer und archivalischer Ressourcen eine wichtige Rolle. Ein konkretes Ziel der Inhaltserschließung ist z. B., dass alle Werke über Hermann Hesse einheitlich zu finden sind. Hier bieten Normdaten eine Lösung, indem z. B. bei der Erschließung einheitlich die GND-Nummer 11855042X für Hermann Hesse verwendet wird. Das Ergebnis ist eine höhere Qualität der Inhaltserschließung vor allem im Sinne von Einheitlichkeit und Eindeutigkeit und, daraus resultierend, eine bessere Auffindbarkeit. Werden solche Entitäten miteinander verknüpft, z. B. Hermann Hesse mit einem seiner Werke, entsteht ein Knowledge Graph, wie ihn etwa Google bei der Inhaltserschließung des Web verwendet (Singhal 2012). Die Entwicklung des Google Knowledge Graph und das hier vorgestellte Protokoll sind historisch miteinander verbunden: OpenRefine wurde ursprünglich als Google Refine entwickelt, und die Funktionalität zum Abgleich mit externen Datenquellen (Reconciliation) wurde ursprünglich zur Einbindung von Freebase entwickelt, einer der Datenquellen des Google Knowledge Graph. Freebase wurde später in Wikidata integriert. Schon Google Refine wurde zum Abgleich mit Normdaten verwendet, etwa den Library of Congress Subject Headings (Hooland et al. 2013).
    Theme
    Semantische Interoperabilität
  13. Binding, C.; Gnoli, C.; Tudhope, D.: Migrating a complex classification scheme to the semantic web : expressing the Integrative Levels Classification using SKOS RDF (2021) 0.01 
    0.013333706 = product of:
  0.08444681 = sum of:
    0.021455921 = weight(_text_:web in 600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021455921 = score(doc=600,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.25496176 = fieldWeight in 600, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=600)
    0.021455921 = weight(_text_:web in 600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021455921 = score(doc=600,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.25496176 = fieldWeight in 600, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=600)
    0.041534968 = weight(_text_:semantische in 600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041534968 = score(doc=600,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13923967 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.399778 = idf(docFreq=542, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.2982984 = fieldWeight in 600, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.399778 = idf(docFreq=542, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=600)
  0.15789473 = coord(3/19)
    Theme
    Semantic Web
    Semantische Interoperabilität
  14. Asubiaro, T.V.; Onaolapo, S.: ¬A comparative study of the coverage of African journals in Web of Science, Scopus, and CrossRef (2023) 0.01 
    0.013114684 = product of:
  0.08305967 = sum of:
    0.037162744 = weight(_text_:web in 992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.037162744 = score(doc=992,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.4416067 = fieldWeight in 992, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=992)
    0.037162744 = weight(_text_:web in 992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.037162744 = score(doc=992,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.4416067 = fieldWeight in 992, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=992)
    0.008734181 = product of:
      0.017468361 = sum of:
        0.017468361 = weight(_text_:22 in 992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017468361 = score(doc=992,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09029883 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.025786186 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 992, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=992)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.15789473 = coord(3/19)
    Abstract
    This is the first study that evaluated the coverage of journals from Africa in Web of Science, Scopus, and CrossRef. A list of active journals published in each of the 55 African countries was compiled from Ulrich's periodicals directory and African Journals Online (AJOL) website. Journal master lists for Web of Science, Scopus, and CrossRef were searched for the African journals. A total of 2,229 unique active African journals were identified from Ulrich (N = 2,117, 95.0%) and AJOL (N = 243, 10.9%) after removing duplicates. The volume of African journals in Web of Science and Scopus databases is 7.4% (N = 166) and 7.8% (N = 174), respectively, compared to the 45.6% (N = 1,017) covered in CrossRef. While making up only 17.% of all the African journals, South African journals had the best coverage in the two most authoritative databases, accounting for 73.5% and 62.1% of all the African journals in Web of Science and Scopus, respectively. In contrast, Nigeria published 44.5% of all the African journals. The distribution of the African journals is biased in favor of Medical, Life and Health Sciences and Humanities and the Arts in the three databases. The low representation of African journals in CrossRef, a free indexing infrastructure that could be harnessed for building an African-centric research indexing database, is concerning.
    Date
    22. 6.2023 14:09:06
    Object
    Web of Science
  15. Tay, A.: ¬The next generation discovery citation indexes : a review of the landscape in 2020 (2020) 0.01 
    0.011416489 = product of:
  0.072304435 = sum of:
    0.03003829 = weight(_text_:web in 40) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03003829 = score(doc=40,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.35694647 = fieldWeight in 40, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=40)
    0.03003829 = weight(_text_:web in 40) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03003829 = score(doc=40,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.35694647 = fieldWeight in 40, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=40)
    0.012227853 = product of:
      0.024455706 = sum of:
        0.024455706 = weight(_text_:22 in 40) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024455706 = score(doc=40,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09029883 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.025786186 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 40, 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=40)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.15789473 = coord(3/19)
    Abstract
    Conclusion There is a reason why Google Scholar and Web of Science/Scopus are kings of the hills in their various arenas. They have strong brand recogniton, a head start in development and a mass of eyeballs and users that leads to an almost virtious cycle of improvement. Competing against such well established competitors is not easy even when one has deep pockets (Microsoft) or a killer idea (scite). It will be interesting to see how the landscape will look like in 2030. Stay tuned for part II where I review each particular index.
    Date
    17.11.2020 12:22:59
    Object
    Web of Science
  16. Singh, A.; Sinha, U.; Sharma, D.k.: Semantic Web and data visualization (2020) 0.01 
    0.010840886 = product of:
  0.10298842 = sum of:
    0.05149421 = weight(_text_:web in 79) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05149421 = score(doc=79,freq=36.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.6119082 = fieldWeight in 79, product of:
          6.0 = tf(freq=36.0), with freq of:
            36.0 = termFreq=36.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=79)
    0.05149421 = weight(_text_:web in 79) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05149421 = score(doc=79,freq=36.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.6119082 = fieldWeight in 79, product of:
          6.0 = tf(freq=36.0), with freq of:
            36.0 = termFreq=36.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=79)
  0.10526316 = coord(2/19)
    Abstract
    With the terrific growth of data volume and data being produced every second on millions of devices across the globe, there is a desperate need to manage the unstructured data available on web pages efficiently. Semantic Web or also known as Web of Trust structures the scattered data on the Internet according to the needs of the user. It is an extension of the World Wide Web (WWW) which focuses on manipulating web data on behalf of Humans. Due to the ability of the Semantic Web to integrate data from disparate sources and hence makes it more user-friendly, it is an emerging trend. Tim Berners-Lee first introduced the term Semantic Web and since then it has come a long way to become a more intelligent and intuitive web. Data Visualization plays an essential role in explaining complex concepts in a universal manner through pictorial representation, and the Semantic Web helps in broadening the potential of Data Visualization and thus making it an appropriate combination. The objective of this chapter is to provide fundamental insights concerning the semantic web technologies and in addition to that it also elucidates the issues as well as the solutions regarding the semantic web. The purpose of this chapter is to highlight the semantic web architecture in detail while also comparing it with the traditional search system. It classifies the semantic web architecture into three major pillars i.e. RDF, Ontology, and XML. Moreover, it describes different semantic web tools used in the framework and technology. It attempts to illustrate different approaches of the semantic web search engines. Besides stating numerous challenges faced by the semantic web it also illustrates the solutions.
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  17. Mehra, B.; Jabery, B.S.: "Don't Say Gay" in Alabama : a taxonomic framework of LGBTQ+ information support services in public libraries - An exploratory website content analysis of critical resistance (2023) 0.01 
    0.009807254 = product of:
  0.06211261 = sum of:
    0.021455921 = weight(_text_:web in 1019) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021455921 = score(doc=1019,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.25496176 = fieldWeight in 1019, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1019)
    0.021455921 = weight(_text_:web in 1019) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021455921 = score(doc=1019,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.25496176 = fieldWeight in 1019, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1019)
    0.019200768 = weight(_text_:services in 1019) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019200768 = score(doc=1019,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.094670646 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.2028165 = fieldWeight in 1019, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1019)
  0.15789473 = coord(3/19)
    Abstract
    The American state of Alabama has recently developed a national notoriety as a toxic place for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning/queer (LGBTQ+) people owing to several laws that have supported human rights violations and denied their civil liberties. This case study assesses how Alabama's public libraries are providing culturally relevant web access and coverage to LGBTQ+ information to meet their needs/concerns in a region that is oppressive to sexual and gender minorities. In the process, it illustrates public libraries' emerging role as simultaneously impotent to the majority's infringements, while finding creative ways to serve as counter narrative spaces of resistance representing "voices" of, and from, the margins. This exploratory assessment is based on documenting web-based information for LGBTQ+ people in Alabama's 230 public libraries and identifies seven intersectional examples of information offerings, categorized into three groupings: (a) information sources (collections, resources); (b) information policy/planning (assigned role, strategic representation); (c) connections (internal, external, news/events). It provides a taxonomic framework with representative examples that challenge the regional stereotype of solely deficit marginalization. The discussion provides new opportunities to build collaborations of sharing within Alabama's public library networks to better address LGBTQ+ concerns and inequities in their local and regional communities.
  18. Kempf, A.O.: Thesauri (2023) 0.01 
    0.009738026 = product of:
  0.09251125 = sum of:
    0.049841963 = weight(_text_:semantische in 782) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.049841963 = score(doc=782,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13923967 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.399778 = idf(docFreq=542, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.35795808 = fieldWeight in 782, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.399778 = idf(docFreq=542, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=782)
    0.042669293 = weight(_text_:suche in 782) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042669293 = score(doc=782,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12883182 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.996156 = idf(docFreq=812, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.3312015 = fieldWeight in 782, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.996156 = idf(docFreq=812, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=782)
  0.10526316 = coord(2/19)
    Abstract
    In der Informationswissenschaft stehen Thesauri für kontrollierte und strukturierte Vokabulare, in denen Begriffe, verstanden als geistige Einheiten, durch Bezeichnungen der natürlichen Sprache repräsentiert werden. Jedem Begriff werden eine Vorzugsbenennung, ein sog. Deskriptor, der bei der Inhaltserschließung als Schlagwort vergeben wird, und weitere bedeutungsgleiche oder -ähnliche Bezeichnungen, sog. Nicht-Deskriptoren, als Zugangsvokabular bzw. alternative Sucheinstiege zugewiesen. Dieser Art werden der Variabilität und der Mehrdeutigkeit natürlicher Sprache Rechnung getragen. Darüber hinaus werden zwischen Begriffen bzw. ihren Bezeichnungen spezifische, reziproke Relationen kenntlich gemacht (s. Abschnitt 1), die die Bedeutungsbeziehungen bzw. das "semantische Gefüge" zwischen den Begriffen aufzeigen. Diese Kernprinzipien dieser Wissensorganisationsmethode dienen sowohl auf Seiten der Inhaltserschließenden als auch auf Seiten der in einem Informationssystem Recherchierenden in unterschiedlicher Weise der Benutzerführung und Suchunterstützung. Als Grundlage für semantisches Retrieval etwa sorgen sie bei automatischer Erweiterung der Suchanfrage um die hinterlegten Nicht-Deskriptoren für eine erfolgreiche Suche weitgehend unabhängig vom konkreten Suchterm.
  19. Wang, H.; Song, Y.-Q.; Wang, L.-T.: Memory model for web ad effect based on multimodal features (2020) 0.01 
    0.009034072 = product of:
  0.085823685 = sum of:
    0.042911842 = weight(_text_:web in 5512) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042911842 = score(doc=5512,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.5099235 = fieldWeight in 5512, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5512)
    0.042911842 = weight(_text_:web in 5512) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042911842 = score(doc=5512,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.5099235 = fieldWeight in 5512, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5512)
  0.10526316 = coord(2/19)
    Abstract
    Web ad effect evaluation is a challenging problem in web marketing research. Although the analysis of web ad effectiveness has achieved excellent results, there are still some deficiencies. First, there is a lack of an in-depth study of the relevance between advertisements and web content. Second, there is not a thorough analysis of the impacts of users and advertising features on user browsing behaviors. And last, the evaluation index of the web advertisement effect is not adequate. Given the above problems, we conducted our work by studying the observer's behavioral pattern based on multimodal features. First, we analyze the correlation between ads and links with different searching results and further assess the influence of relevance on the observer's attention to web ads using eye-movement features. Then we investigate the user's behavioral sequence and propose the directional frequent-browsing pattern algorithm for mining the user's most commonly used browsing patterns. Finally, we offer the novel use of "memory" as a new measure of advertising effectiveness and further build an advertising memory model with integrated multimodal features for predicting the efficacy of web ads. A large number of experiments have proved the superiority of our method.
  20. Ostani, M.M.; Sohrabi, M.C.; Taheri, S.M.; Asemi, A.: Localization of Schema.org for manuscript description in the Iranian-Islamic information context (2021) 0.01 
    0.0078237355 = product of:
  0.07432549 = sum of:
    0.037162744 = weight(_text_:web in 585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.037162744 = score(doc=585,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.4416067 = fieldWeight in 585, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=585)
    0.037162744 = weight(_text_:web in 585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.037162744 = score(doc=585,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08415349 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.025786186 = queryNorm
        0.4416067 = fieldWeight in 585, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=585)
  0.10526316 = coord(2/19)
    Abstract
    This study aims to assess the localization of Schema.org for manuscript description in the Iranian-Islamic information context using documentary and qualitative content analysis. The schema.org introduces schemas for different Web content objects so as to generate structured data. Given that the structure of Schema.org is ontological, the inheritance of the manuscript types from the properties of their parent types, as well as the localization and description of the specific properties of the manuscripts in the Iranian-Islamic information context were investigated in order to improve their indexability and semantic visibility in the Web search engines. The proposed properties specific to the manuscript type and the six proposed properties to be added to the "CreativeWork" type are found to be consistent with other schema properties. In turn, these properties lead to the localization of the existing schema for the manuscript type compatibility with the Iranian-Islamic information context. This schema is also applicable to centers with published records on the Web, and if markup with these properties, their indexability and semantic visibility in Web search engines increases accordingly. The generation of structured data in the Web environment through this schema is deemed to promote the concept of the Semantic Web, and make data and knowledge retrieval easier.

Authors

Languages

  • e 177
  • d 51
  • pt 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • el 34
  • p 1
  • More… Less…

Themes