Search (141 results, page 1 of 8)

0.048416097 = product of:
  0.09683219 = sum of:
    0.09683219 = sum of:
      0.009471525 = weight(_text_:a in 4577) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.009471525 = score(doc=4577,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 4577, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4577)
      0.087360665 = weight(_text_:22 in 4577) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.087360665 = score(doc=4577,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4577, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4577)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

2. 4.2000 18:01:22

Type

a

0.031588875 = product of:
  0.06317775 = sum of:
    0.06317775 = sum of:
      0.013257373 = weight(_text_:a in 1270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.013257373 = score(doc=1270,freq=12.0), product of:
          0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.24964198 = fieldWeight in 1270, product of:
            3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
              12.0 = termFreq=12.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1270)
      0.04992038 = weight(_text_:22 in 1270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04992038 = score(doc=1270,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1270, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1270)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Current algorithms for finding associations among the attributes describing data in a database have a number of shortcomings. Presents a novel method for association generation, that answers all desiderata. The method is different from all existing algorithms and especially suitable to textual databases with binary attributes. Uses subword trees for quick indexing into the required database statistics. Tests the algorithm on the Reuters-22173 database with satisfactory results

Source

Information systems. 22(1997) nos.5/6, S.333-347

Type

a

0.028787265 = product of:
  0.05757453 = sum of:
    0.05757453 = sum of:
      0.007654148 = weight(_text_:a in 1737) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.007654148 = score(doc=1737,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 1737, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1737)
      0.04992038 = weight(_text_:22 in 1737) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04992038 = score(doc=1737,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1737, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1737)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Defines digital libraries and discusses the effects of new technology on librarians. Examines the different viewpoints of librarians and information technologists on digital libraries. Describes the development of a digital library at the National Drug Intelligence Center, USA, which was carried out in collaboration with information technology experts. The system is based on Web enabled search technology to find information, data visualization and data mining to visualize it and use of SGML as an information standard to store it

Date

22.11.1998 18:57:22

Type

a

0.026575929 = product of:
  0.053151857 = sum of:
    0.053151857 = sum of:
      0.009471525 = weight(_text_:a in 2908) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.009471525 = score(doc=2908,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 2908, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2908)
      0.043680333 = weight(_text_:22 in 2908) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.043680333 = score(doc=2908,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2908, 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=2908)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Focuses on the information modelling side of conceptual modelling. Deals with the exploitation of fact verbalisations after finishing the actual information system. Verbalisations are used as input for the design of the so-called information model. Exploits these verbalisation in 4 directions: considers their use for a conceptual query language, the verbalisation of instances, the description of the contents of a database and for the verbalisation of queries in a computer supported query environment. Provides an example session with an envisioned tool for end user query formulations that exploits the verbalisation

Source

Information systems. 22(1997) nos.5/6, S.349-385

Type

a

0.020074995 = product of:
  0.04014999 = sum of:
    0.04014999 = sum of:
      0.00894975 = weight(_text_:a in 5011) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.00894975 = score(doc=5011,freq=14.0), product of:
          0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.1685276 = fieldWeight in 5011, product of:
            3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
              14.0 = termFreq=14.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5011)
      0.03120024 = weight(_text_:22 in 5011) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03120024 = score(doc=5011,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5011, 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=5011)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The present challenge faced by scientists working with Big Data comes in the overwhelming volume and level of detail provided by current data sets. Exceeding traditional empirical approaches, Big Data opens a new perspective on scientific work in which data comes to play a role in the development of the scientific problematic to be developed. Addressing this reconfiguration of our relationship with data through readings of Wittgenstein, Macherey, and Popper, we propose a picture of science that encourages scientists to engage with the data in a direct way, using the data itself as an instrument for scientific investigation. Using GIS as a theme, we develop the concept of cyber-human systems of thought and understanding to bridge the divide between representative (theoretical) thinking and (non-theoretical) data-driven science. At the foundation of these systems, we invoke the concept of the "semantic pixel" to establish a logical and virtual space linking data and the work of scientists. It is with this discussion of the relationship between analysts in their pursuit of knowledge and the rise of Big Data that this present discussion of the philosophical foundations of Big Data addresses the central questions raised by social informatics research.

Date

7. 3.2019 16:32:22

Type

a

0.01938208 = product of:
  0.03876416 = sum of:
    0.03876416 = sum of:
      0.0075639198 = weight(_text_:a in 668) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0075639198 = score(doc=668,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.14243183 = fieldWeight in 668, product of:
            3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
              10.0 = termFreq=10.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=668)
      0.03120024 = weight(_text_:22 in 668) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03120024 = score(doc=668,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 668, 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=668)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

20th century massification of higher education and research in academia is said to have produced structurally stratified higher education systems in many countries. Most manifestly, the research mission of universities appears to be divisive. Authors have claimed that the Swedish system, while formally unified, has developed into a binary state, and statistics seem to support this conclusion. This article makes use of a comprehensive statistical data source on Swedish higher education institutions to illustrate stratification, and uses literature on Swedish research policy history to contextualize the statistics. Highlighting the opportunities as well as constraints of the data, the article argues that there is great merit in combining statistics with a qualitative analysis when studying the structural characteristics of national higher education systems. Not least the article shows that it is an over-simplification to describe the Swedish system as binary; the stratification is more complex. On basis of the analysis, the article also argues that while global trends certainly influence national developments, higher education systems have country-specific features that may enrich the understanding of how systems evolve and therefore should be analyzed as part of a broader study of the increasingly globalized academic system.

Date

22. 3.2013 19:43:01

Type

a

0.018982807 = product of:
  0.037965614 = sum of:
    0.037965614 = sum of:
      0.006765375 = weight(_text_:a in 1605) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.006765375 = score(doc=1605,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 1605, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1605)
      0.03120024 = weight(_text_:22 in 1605) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03120024 = score(doc=1605,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1605, 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=1605)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Numerous studies have explored the possibility of uncovering information from web search queries but few have examined the factors that affect web query data sources. We conducted a study that investigated this issue by comparing Google Trends and Baidu Index. Data from these two services are based on queries entered by users into Google and Baidu, two of the largest search engines in the world. We first compared the features and functions of the two services based on documents and extensive testing. We then carried out an empirical study that collected query volume data from the two sources. We found that data from both sources could be used to predict the quality of Chinese universities and companies. Despite the differences between the two services in terms of technology, such as differing methods of language processing, the search volume data from the two were highly correlated and combining the two data sources did not improve the predictive power of the data. However, there was a major difference between the two in terms of data availability. Baidu Index was able to provide more search volume data than Google Trends did. Our analysis showed that the disadvantage of Google Trends in this regard was due to Google's smaller user base in China. The implication of this finding goes beyond China. Google's user bases in many countries are smaller than that in China, so the search volume data related to those countries could result in the same issue as that related to China.

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.1, S.13-22

Type

a

0.01482369 = product of:
  0.02964738 = sum of:
    0.02964738 = sum of:
      0.0046871896 = weight(_text_:a in 1507) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0046871896 = score(doc=1507,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.088261776 = fieldWeight in 1507, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1507)
      0.02496019 = weight(_text_:22 in 1507) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02496019 = score(doc=1507,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1507, 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=1507)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Wir werden einmal die Grundlagen des Text-Mining-Systems bei IBM darstellen, dann werden wir das Projekt etwas umfangreicher und deutlicher darstellen, da kennen wir uns aus. Von daher haben wir zwei Teile, einmal Heidelberg, einmal Hamburg. Noch einmal zur Technologie. Text-Mining ist eine von IBM entwickelte Technologie, die in einer besonderen Ausformung und Programmierung für uns zusammengestellt wurde. Das Projekt hieß bei uns lange Zeit DocText Miner und heißt seit einiger Zeit auf Vorschlag von IBM DocCat, das soll eine Abkürzung für Document-Categoriser sein, sie ist ja auch nett und anschaulich. Wir fangen an mit Text-Mining, das bei IBM in Heidelberg entwickelt wurde. Die verstehen darunter das automatische Indexieren als eine Instanz, also einen Teil von Text-Mining. Probleme werden dabei gezeigt, und das Text-Mining ist eben eine Methode zur Strukturierung von und der Suche in großen Dokumentenmengen, die Extraktion von Informationen und, das ist der hohe Anspruch, von impliziten Zusammenhängen. Das letztere sei dahingestellt. IBM macht das quantitativ, empirisch, approximativ und schnell. das muss man wirklich sagen. Das Ziel, und das ist ganz wichtig für unser Projekt gewesen, ist nicht, den Text zu verstehen, sondern das Ergebnis dieser Verfahren ist, was sie auf Neudeutsch a bundle of words, a bag of words nennen, also eine Menge von bedeutungstragenden Begriffen aus einem Text zu extrahieren, aufgrund von Algorithmen, also im Wesentlichen aufgrund von Rechenoperationen. Es gibt eine ganze Menge von linguistischen Vorstudien, ein wenig Linguistik ist auch dabei, aber nicht die Grundlage der ganzen Geschichte. Was sie für uns gemacht haben, ist also die Annotierung von Pressetexten für unsere Pressedatenbank. Für diejenigen, die es noch nicht kennen: Gruner + Jahr führt eine Textdokumentation, die eine Datenbank führt, seit Anfang der 70er Jahre, da sind z.Z. etwa 6,5 Millionen Dokumente darin, davon etwas über 1 Million Volltexte ab 1993. Das Prinzip war lange Zeit, dass wir die Dokumente, die in der Datenbank gespeichert waren und sind, verschlagworten und dieses Prinzip haben wir auch dann, als der Volltext eingeführt wurde, in abgespeckter Form weitergeführt. Zu diesen 6,5 Millionen Dokumenten gehören dann eben auch ungefähr 10 Millionen Faksimileseiten, weil wir die Faksimiles auch noch standardmäßig aufheben.

Date

22. 4.2003 11:45:36

Type

a

0.01383317 = product of:
  0.02766634 = sum of:
    0.02766634 = sum of:
      0.00270615 = weight(_text_:a in 2403) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.00270615 = score(doc=2403,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.050957955 = fieldWeight in 2403, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2403)
      0.02496019 = weight(_text_:22 in 2403) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02496019 = score(doc=2403,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2403, 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=2403)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

3. 5.1997 8:44:22

Type

a

0.01383317 = product of:
  0.02766634 = sum of:
    0.02766634 = sum of:
      0.00270615 = weight(_text_:a in 5234) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.00270615 = score(doc=5234,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.050957955 = fieldWeight in 5234, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5234)
      0.02496019 = weight(_text_:22 in 5234) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02496019 = score(doc=5234,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 5234, 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=5234)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 1.2018 11:33:49

Type

a

0.010795224 = product of:
  0.021590449 = sum of:
    0.021590449 = sum of:
      0.0028703054 = weight(_text_:a in 1178) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0028703054 = score(doc=1178,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.054049075 = fieldWeight in 1178, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1178)
      0.018720143 = weight(_text_:22 in 1178) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.018720143 = score(doc=1178,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 1178, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1178)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

"Ob man als Terrorist einen Anschlag gegen die Vereinigten Staaten plant, als Kassierer Scheine aus der Kasse unterschlägt oder für bestimmte Produkte besonders gerne Geld ausgibt - einen Unterschied macht Data-Mining-Software da nicht. Solche Programme analysieren riesige Daten- mengen und fällen statistische Urteile. Mit diesen Methoden wollen nun die For- scher des "Information Awaren in den Vereinigten Staaten Spuren von Terroristen in den Datenbanken von Behörden und privaten Unternehmen wie Kreditkartenfirmen finden. 200 Millionen Dollar umfasst der Jahresetat für die verschiedenen Forschungsprojekte. Dass solche Software in der Praxis funktioniert, zeigen die steigenden Umsätze der Anbieter so genannter Customer-Relationship-Management-Software. Im vergangenen Jahr ist das Potenzial für analytische CRM-Anwendungen laut dem Marktforschungsinstitut IDC weltweit um 22 Prozent gewachsen, bis zum Jahr 2006 soll es in Deutschland mit einem jährlichen Plus von 14,1 Prozent so weitergehen. Und das trotz schwacher Konjunktur - oder gerade deswegen. Denn ähnlich wie Data-Mining der USRegierung helfen soll, Terroristen zu finden, entscheiden CRM-Programme heute, welche Kunden für eine Firma profitabel sind. Und welche es künftig sein werden, wie Manuela Schnaubelt, Sprecherin des CRM-Anbieters SAP, beschreibt: "Die Kundenbewertung ist ein zentraler Bestandteil des analytischen CRM. Sie ermöglicht es Unternehmen, sich auf die für sie wichtigen und richtigen Kunden zu fokussieren. Darüber hinaus können Firmen mit speziellen Scoring- Verfahren ermitteln, welche Kunden langfristig in welchem Maße zum Unternehmenserfolg beitragen." Die Folgen der Bewertungen sind für die Betroffenen nicht immer positiv: Attraktive Kunden profitieren von individuellen Sonderangeboten und besonderer Zuwendung. Andere hängen vielleicht so lauge in der Warteschleife des Telefonservice, bis die profitableren Kunden abgearbeitet sind. So könnte eine praktische Umsetzung dessen aussehen, was SAP-Spreche-rin Schnaubelt abstrakt beschreibt: "In vielen Unternehmen wird Kundenbewertung mit der klassischen ABC-Analyse durchgeführt, bei der Kunden anhand von Daten wie dem Umsatz kategorisiert werden. A-Kunden als besonders wichtige Kunden werden anders betreut als C-Kunden." Noch näher am geplanten Einsatz von Data-Mining zur Terroristenjagd ist eine Anwendung, die heute viele Firmen erfolgreich nutzen: Sie spüren betrügende Mitarbeiter auf. Werner Sülzer vom großen CRM-Anbieter NCR Teradata beschreibt die Möglichkeiten so: "Heute hinterlässt praktisch jeder Täter - ob Mitarbeiter, Kunde oder Lieferant - Datenspuren bei seinen wirtschaftskriminellen Handlungen. Es muss vorrangig darum gehen, einzelne Spuren zu Handlungsmustern und Täterprofilen zu verdichten. Das gelingt mittels zentraler Datenlager und hoch entwickelter Such- und Analyseinstrumente." Von konkreten Erfolgen sprich: Entlas-sungen krimineller Mitarbeiter-nach Einsatz solcher Programme erzählen Unternehmen nicht gerne. Matthias Wilke von der "Beratungsstelle für Technologiefolgen und Qualifizierung" (BTQ) der Gewerkschaft Verdi weiß von einem Fall 'aus der Schweiz. Dort setzt die Handelskette "Pick Pay" das Programm "Lord Lose Prevention" ein. Zwei Monate nach Einfüh-rung seien Unterschlagungen im Wert von etwa 200 000 Franken ermittelt worden. Das kostete mehr als 50 verdächtige Kassiererinnen und Kassierer den Job.

Type

a

0.00334869 = product of:
  0.00669738 = sum of:
    0.00669738 = product of:
      0.01339476 = sum of:
        0.01339476 = weight(_text_:a in 3940) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01339476 = score(doc=3940,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.25222903 = fieldWeight in 3940, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3940)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a

0.0032090992 = product of:
  0.0064181983 = sum of:
    0.0064181983 = product of:
      0.012836397 = sum of:
        0.012836397 = weight(_text_:a in 4286) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012836397 = score(doc=4286,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.24171482 = fieldWeight in 4286, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4286)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Geolocated social media data provide a powerful source of information about places and regional human behavior. Because only a small amount of social media data have been geolocation-annotated, inference techniques play a substantial role to increase the volume of annotated data. Conventional research in this area has been based on the text content of posts from a given user or the social network of the user, with some recent crossovers between the text- and network-based approaches. This paper proposes a novel approach to categorize highly-mentioned users (celebrities) into Local and Global types, and consequently use Local celebrities as location indicators. A label propagation algorithm is then used over the refined social network for geolocation inference. Finally, we propose a hybrid approach by merging a text-based method as a back-off strategy into our network-based approach. Empirical experiments over three standard Twitter benchmark data sets demonstrate that our approach outperforms state-of-the-art user geolocation methods.

Type

a

0.0031642143 = product of:
  0.0063284286 = sum of:
    0.0063284286 = product of:
      0.012656857 = sum of:
        0.012656857 = weight(_text_:a in 2155) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012656857 = score(doc=2155,freq=28.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.23833402 = fieldWeight in 2155, product of:
              5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
                28.0 = termFreq=28.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2155)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The recent interest in Big Data has generated a broad range of new academic, corporate, and policy practices along with an evolving debate among its proponents, detractors, and skeptics. While the practices draw on a common set of tools, techniques, and technologies, most contributions to the debate come either from a particular disciplinary perspective or with a focus on a domain-specific issue. A close examination of these contributions reveals a set of common problematics that arise in various guises and in different places. It also demonstrates the need for a critical synthesis of the conceptual and practical dilemmas surrounding Big Data. The purpose of this article is to provide such a synthesis by drawing on relevant writings in the sciences, humanities, policy, and trade literature. In bringing these diverse literatures together, we aim to shed light on the common underlying issues that concern and affect all of these areas. By contextualizing the phenomenon of Big Data within larger socioeconomic developments, we also seek to provide a broader understanding of its drivers, barriers, and challenges. This approach allows us to identify attributes of Big Data that require more attention-autonomy, opacity, generativity, disparity, and futurity-leading to questions and ideas for moving beyond dilemmas.

Type

a

0.0031324127 = product of:
  0.0062648254 = sum of:
    0.0062648254 = product of:
      0.012529651 = sum of:
        0.012529651 = weight(_text_:a in 2909) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012529651 = score(doc=2909,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.23593865 = fieldWeight in 2909, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2909)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Rough set theory is a mathematical tool to deal with vagueness and uncertainty. To apply the theory, it needs to be associated with efficient and effective computational methods. A relation can be used to represent a decison table for use in decision making. By using this kind of table, rough set theory can be applied successfully to rough classification and knowledge discovery. Presents computational methods for using rough sets to identify classes in datasets, finding dependencies in relations, and discovering rules which are hidden in databases. Illustrates the methods with a running example from a database of car test results

Footnote

Contribution to a special issue devoted to knowledge discovery and data mining

Type

a

0.0031324127 = product of:
  0.0062648254 = sum of:
    0.0062648254 = product of:
      0.012529651 = sum of:
        0.012529651 = weight(_text_:a in 3028) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012529651 = score(doc=3028,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.23593865 = fieldWeight in 3028, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3028)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This paper describes a system to semi-automatically extend and refine ontologies by mining textual data from the Web sites of international online media. Expanding a seed ontology creates a semantic network through co-occurrence analysis, trigger phrase analysis, and disambiguation based on the WordNet lexical dictionary. Spreading activation then processes this semantic network to find the most probable candidates for inclusion in an extended ontology. Approaches to identifying hierarchical relationships such as subsumption, head noun analysis and WordNet consultation are used to confirm and classify the found relationships. Using a seed ontology on "climate change" as an example, this paper demonstrates how spreading activation improves the result by naturally integrating the mentioned methods.

Type

a

0.0030444188 = product of:
  0.0060888375 = sum of:
    0.0060888375 = product of:
      0.012177675 = sum of:
        0.012177675 = weight(_text_:a in 916) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012177675 = score(doc=916,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.22931081 = fieldWeight in 916, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=916)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In this paper, we present a topic discovery system aimed to reveal the implicit knowledge present in news streams. This knowledge is expressed as a hierarchy of topic/subtopics, where each topic contains the set of documents that are related to it and a summary extracted from these documents. Summaries so built are useful to browse and select topics of interest from the generated hierarchies. Our proposal consists of a new incremental hierarchical clustering algorithm, which combines both partitional and agglomerative approaches, taking the main benefits from them. Finally, a new summarization method based on Testor Theory has been proposed to build the topic summaries. Experimental results in the TDT2 collection demonstrate its usefulness and effectiveness not only as a topic detection system, but also as a classification and summarization tool.

Type

a

0.0030444188 = product of:
  0.0060888375 = sum of:
    0.0060888375 = product of:
      0.012177675 = sum of:
        0.012177675 = weight(_text_:a in 4226) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012177675 = score(doc=4226,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.22931081 = fieldWeight in 4226, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4226)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Many powerful methods and tools exist for extracting meaning from scientific publications, their texts, and their citation links. However, existing proposals often neglect a fundamental aspect of learning: that understanding and learning require an active and constructive exploration of a domain. In this paper, we describe a new method and a tool that use data mining and interactivity to turn the typical search and retrieve dialogue, in which the user asks questions and a system gives answers, into a dialogue that also involves sense-making, in which the user has to become active by constructing a bibliography and a domain model of the search term(s). This model starts from an automatically generated and annotated clustering solution that is iteratively modified by users. The tool is part of an integrated authoring system covering all phases from search through reading and sense-making to writing. Two evaluation studies demonstrate the usability of this interactive and constructive approach, and they show that clusters and groups represent identifiable sub-topics.

Type

a

0.0029000505 = product of:
  0.005800101 = sum of:
    0.005800101 = product of:
      0.011600202 = sum of:
        0.011600202 = weight(_text_:a in 2897) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011600202 = score(doc=2897,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.21843673 = fieldWeight in 2897, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2897)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Data dependencies are used in database schema design to enforce the correctness of a database as well as to reduce redundant data. These dependencies are usually determined from the semantics of the attributes and are then enforced upon the relations. Describes a bottom-up procedure for discovering multivalued dependencies in observed data without knowing a priori the relationships among the attributes. The proposed algorithm is an application of the technique designed for learning conditional independencies in probabilistic reasoning. A prototype system for automated database schema design has been implemented. Experiments were carried out to demonstrate both the effectiveness and efficiency of the method

Footnote

Contribution to a special issue devoted to knowledge discovery and data mining

Type

a

0.0029000505 = product of:
  0.005800101 = sum of:
    0.005800101 = product of:
      0.011600202 = sum of:
        0.011600202 = weight(_text_:a in 2338) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011600202 = score(doc=2338,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.21843673 = fieldWeight in 2338, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2338)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Hundreds of thousands of hashtags are generated every day on Twitter. Only a few will burst and become trending topics. In this article, we provide the definition of a bursting hashtag and conduct a systematic study of a series of challenging prediction problems that span the entire life cycles of bursting hashtags. Around the problem of "how to build a system to predict bursting hashtags," we explore different types of features and present machine learning solutions. On real data sets from Twitter, experiments are conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed solutions and the contributions of features.

Type

a