Search (319 results, page 1 of 16)

0.039088413 = product of:
  0.078176826 = sum of:
    0.078176826 = sum of:
      0.038227327 = weight(_text_:j in 759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.038227327 = score(doc=759,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.109994456 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.34753868 = fieldWeight in 759, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=759)
      0.007118898 = weight(_text_:a in 759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.007118898 = score(doc=759,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 759, 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=759)
      0.0328306 = weight(_text_:22 in 759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0328306 = score(doc=759,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1212218 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 759, 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=759)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

XML will have a profound impact on the way data is exchanged on the Internet. An important feature of this language is the separation of content from presentation, which makes it easier to select and/or reformat the data. However, due to the likelihood of numerous industry and domain specific DTDs, those who wish to integrate information will still be faced with the problem of semantic interoperability. In this paper we discuss why this problem is not solved by XML, and then discuss why the Resource Description Framework is only a partial solution. We then present the SHOE language, which we feel has many of the features necessary to enable a semantic web, and describe an existing set of tools that make it easy to use the language.

Date

11. 5.2013 19:22:18

Type

a

0.02906596 = product of:
  0.05813192 = sum of:
    0.05813192 = sum of:
      0.02316926 = weight(_text_:j in 662) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02316926 = score(doc=662,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.109994456 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.21064025 = fieldWeight in 662, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=662)
      0.006822146 = weight(_text_:a in 662) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.006822146 = score(doc=662,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 662, product of:
            3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
              10.0 = termFreq=10.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=662)
      0.028140513 = weight(_text_:22 in 662) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.028140513 = score(doc=662,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1212218 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 662, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=662)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The concept of Linked Data has made its entrance in the cultural heritage sector due to its potential use for the integration of heterogeneous collections and deriving additional value out of existing metadata. However, practitioners and researchers alike need a better understanding of what outcome they can reasonably expect of the reconciliation process between their local metadata and established controlled vocabularies which are already a part of the Linked Data cloud. This paper offers an in-depth analysis of how a locally developed vocabulary can be successfully reconciled with the Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) and the Arts and Architecture Thesaurus (AAT) through the help of a general-purpose tool for interactive data transformation (OpenRefine). Issues negatively affecting the reconciliation process are identified and solutions are proposed in order to derive maximum value from existing metadata and controlled vocabularies in an automated manner.

Date

22. 3.2013 19:29:20

Type

a

0.024735201 = product of:
  0.049470402 = sum of:
    0.049470402 = sum of:
      0.021844188 = weight(_text_:j in 2661) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.021844188 = score(doc=2661,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.109994456 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.19859353 = fieldWeight in 2661, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2661)
      0.008865873 = weight(_text_:a in 2661) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.008865873 = score(doc=2661,freq=38.0), product of:
          0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.22212058 = fieldWeight in 2661, product of:
            6.164414 = tf(freq=38.0), with freq of:
              38.0 = termFreq=38.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2661)
      0.018760342 = weight(_text_:22 in 2661) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.018760342 = score(doc=2661,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1212218 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2661, 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=2661)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The basic goal of education within a discipline is to transform a novice into an expert. This entails moving the novice toward the "semantic space" that the expert inhabits-the space of concepts, meanings, vocabularies, and other intellectual constructs that comprise the discipline. Metadata is significant to this goal in digitally mediated education environments. Encoding the experts' semantic space not only enables the sharing of semantics among discipline scientists, but also creates an environment that bridges the semantic gap between the common vocabulary of the novice and the granular descriptive language of the seasoned scientist (Greenberg, et al, 2005). Developments underlying the Semantic Web, where vocabularies are formalized in the Web Ontology Language (OWL), and Web 2.0 approaches of user-generated folksonomies provide an infrastructure for linking vocabulary systems and promoting group learning via metadata literacy. Group learning is a pedagogical approach to teaching that harnesses the phenomenon of "collective intelligence" to increase learning by means of collaboration. Learning a new semantic system can be daunting for a novice, and yet it is integral to advance one's knowledge in a discipline and retain interest. These ideas are key to the "BOT 2.0: Botany through Web 2.0, the Memex and Social Learning" project (Bot 2.0).72 Bot 2.0 is a collaboration involving the North Carolina Botanical Garden, the UNC SILS Metadata Research center, and the Renaissance Computing Institute (RENCI). Bot 2.0 presents a curriculum utilizing a memex as a way for students to link and share digital information, working asynchronously in an environment beyond the traditional classroom. Our conception of a memex is not a centralized black box but rather a flexible, distributed framework that uses the most salient and easiest-to-use collaborative platforms (e.g., Facebook, Flickr, wiki and blog technology) for personal information management. By meeting students "where they live" digitally, we hope to attract students to the study of botanical science. A key aspect is to teach students scientific terminology and about the value of metadata, an inherent function in several of the technologies and in the instructional approach we are utilizing. This poster will report on a study examining the value of both folksonomies and taxonomies for post-secondary college students learning plant identification. Our data is drawn from a curriculum involving a virtual independent learning portion and a "BotCamp" weekend at UNC, where students work with digital plan specimens that they have captured. Results provide some insight into the importance of collaboration and shared vocabulary for gaining confidence and for student progression from novice to expert in botany.

Source

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

Type

a

0.022804346 = product of:
  0.045608692 = sum of:
    0.045608692 = product of:
      0.068413034 = sum of:
        0.030892346 = weight(_text_:j in 4685) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030892346 = score(doc=4685,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109994456 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.28085366 = fieldWeight in 4685, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4685)
        0.037520684 = weight(_text_:22 in 4685) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037520684 = score(doc=4685,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1212218 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4685, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4685)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

14. 8.2011 13:33:22

Editor

Carroll, J.J. u. J. de Roo

0.020908467 = product of:
  0.041816935 = sum of:
    0.041816935 = sum of:
      0.015446173 = weight(_text_:j in 1634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.015446173 = score(doc=1634,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.109994456 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.14042683 = fieldWeight in 1634, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1634)
      0.007610422 = weight(_text_:a in 1634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.007610422 = score(doc=1634,freq=28.0), product of:
          0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.19066721 = fieldWeight in 1634, product of:
            5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
              28.0 = termFreq=28.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1634)
      0.018760342 = weight(_text_:22 in 1634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.018760342 = score(doc=1634,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1212218 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1634, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1634)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

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

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

Type

a

0.02088198 = product of:
  0.04176396 = sum of:
    0.04176396 = sum of:
      0.013515402 = weight(_text_:j in 1155) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.013515402 = score(doc=1155,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.109994456 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.12287348 = fieldWeight in 1155, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1155)
      0.0050338213 = weight(_text_:a in 1155) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0050338213 = score(doc=1155,freq=16.0), product of:
          0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 1155, product of:
            4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
              16.0 = termFreq=16.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1155)
      0.02321474 = weight(_text_:22 in 1155) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02321474 = score(doc=1155,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.1212218 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.19150631 = fieldWeight in 1155, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1155)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Metadata and semantics are integral to any information system and significant to the sphere of Web data. Research focusing on metadata and semantics is crucial for advancing our understanding and knowledge of metadata; and, more profoundly for being able to effectively discover, use, archive, and repurpose information. In response to this need, researchers are actively examining methods for generating, reusing, and interchanging metadata. Integrated with these developments is research on the application of computational methods, linked data, and data analytics. A growing body of work also targets conceptual and theoretical designs providing foundational frameworks for metadata and semantic applications. There is no doubt that metadata weaves its way into nearly every aspect of our information ecosystem, and there is great motivation for advancing the current state of metadata and semantics. To this end, it is vital that scholars and practitioners convene and share their work.
The MTSR 2013 program and the contents of these proceedings show a rich diversity of research and practices, drawing on problems from metadata and semantically focused tools and technologies, linked data, cross-language semantics, ontologies, metadata models, and semantic system and metadata standards. The general session of the conference included 18 papers covering a broad spectrum of topics, proving the interdisciplinary field of metadata, and was divided into three main themes: platforms for research data sets, system architecture and data management; metadata and ontology validation, evaluation, mapping and interoperability; and content management. Metadata as a research topic is maturing, and the conference also supported the following five tracks: Metadata and Semantics for Open Repositories, Research Information Systems and Data Infrastructures; Metadata and Semantics for Cultural Collections and Applications; Metadata and Semantics for Agriculture, Food and Environment; Big Data and Digital Libraries in Health, Science and Technology; and European and National Projects, and Project Networking. Each track had a rich selection of papers, giving broader diversity to MTSR, and enabling deeper exploration of significant topics.
All the papers underwent a thorough and rigorous peer-review process. The review and selection this year was highly competitive and only papers containing significant research results, innovative methods, or novel and best practices were accepted for publication. Only 29 of 89 submissions were accepted as full papers, representing 32.5% of the total number of submissions. Additional contributions covering noteworthy and important results in special tracks or project reports were accepted, totaling 42 accepted contributions. This year's conference included two outstanding keynote speakers. Dr. Stefan Gradmann, a professor arts department of KU Leuven (Belgium) and director of university library, addressed semantic research drawing from his work with Europeana. The title of his presentation was, "Towards a Semantic Research Library: Digital Humanities Research, Europeana and the Linked Data Paradigm". Dr. Michail Salampasis, associate professor from our conference host institution, the Department of Informatics of the Alexander TEI of Thessaloniki, presented new potential, intersecting search and linked data. The title of his talk was, "Rethinking the Search Experience: What Could Professional Search Systems Do Better?"

Date

17.12.2013 12:51:22

Editor

Greenberg, J.

0.019979727 = product of:
  0.039959453 = sum of:
    0.039959453 = sum of:
      0.015446173 = weight(_text_:j in 2656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.015446173 = score(doc=2656,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.109994456 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.14042683 = fieldWeight in 2656, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2656)
      0.0057529383 = weight(_text_:a in 2656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0057529383 = score(doc=2656,freq=16.0), product of:
          0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 2656, product of:
            4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
              16.0 = termFreq=16.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2656)
      0.018760342 = weight(_text_:22 in 2656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.018760342 = score(doc=2656,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1212218 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2656, 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=2656)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This poster explores the customization of DSpace to allow the use of the AGRIS Application Profile metadata standard and the AGROVOC thesaurus. The objective is the adaptation of DSpace, through the least invasive code changes either in the form of plug-ins or add-ons, to the specific needs of the Agricultural Sciences and Technology community. Metadata standards such as AGRIS AP, and Knowledge Organization Systems such as the AGROVOC thesaurus, provide mechanisms for sharing information in a standardized manner by recommending the use of common semantics and interoperable syntax (Subirats et al., 2007). AGRIS AP was created to enhance the description, exchange and subsequent retrieval of agricultural Document-like Information Objects (DLIOs). It is a metadata schema which draws from Metadata standards such as Dublin Core (DC), the Australian Government Locator Service Metadata (AGLS) and the Agricultural Metadata Element Set (AgMES) namespaces. It allows sharing of information across dispersed bibliographic systems (FAO, 2005). AGROVOC68 is a multilingual structured thesaurus covering agricultural and related domains. Its main role is to standardize the indexing process in order to make searching simpler and more efficient. AGROVOC is developed by FAO (Lauser et al., 2006). The customization of the DSpace is taking place in several phases. First, the AGRIS AP metadata schema was mapped onto the metadata DSpace model, with several enhancements implemented to support AGRIS AP elements. Next, AGROVOC will be integrated as a controlled vocabulary accessed through a local SKOS or OWL file. Eventually the system will be configurable to access AGROVOC through local files or remotely via webservices. Finally, spell checking and tooltips will be incorporated in the user interface to support metadata editing. Adapting DSpace to support AGRIS AP and annotation using the semantically-rich AGROVOC thesaurus transform DSpace into a powerful, domain-specific system for annotation and exchange of bibliographic metadata in the agricultural domain.

Source

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

Type

a

0.019953802 = product of:
  0.039907604 = sum of:
    0.039907604 = product of:
      0.059861403 = sum of:
        0.027030803 = weight(_text_:j in 4330) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027030803 = score(doc=4330,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109994456 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.24574696 = fieldWeight in 4330, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4330)
        0.0328306 = weight(_text_:22 in 4330) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0328306 = score(doc=4330,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1212218 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4330, 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=4330)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

12. 2.2011 17:35:22

0.018585186 = sum of:
  0.015708717 = product of:
    0.10996101 = sum of:
      0.10996101 = weight(_text_:3a in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.10996101 = score(doc=701,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2934808 = queryWeight, product of:
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.3746787 = fieldWeight in 701, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=701)
    0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
  0.0028764694 = product of:
    0.008629408 = sum of:
      0.008629408 = weight(_text_:a in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.008629408 = score(doc=701,freq=36.0), product of:
          0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.034616705 = queryNorm
          0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 701, product of:
            6.0 = tf(freq=36.0), with freq of:
              36.0 = termFreq=36.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=701)
    0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

By the explosion of possibilities for a ubiquitous content production, the information overload problem reaches the level of complexity which cannot be managed by traditional modelling approaches anymore. Due to their pure syntactical nature traditional information retrieval approaches did not succeed in treating content itself (i.e. its meaning, and not its representation). This leads to a very low usefulness of the results of a retrieval process for a user's task at hand. In the last ten years ontologies have been emerged from an interesting conceptualisation paradigm to a very promising (semantic) modelling technology, especially in the context of the Semantic Web. From the information retrieval point of view, ontologies enable a machine-understandable form of content description, such that the retrieval process can be driven by the meaning of the content. However, the very ambiguous nature of the retrieval process in which a user, due to the unfamiliarity with the underlying repository and/or query syntax, just approximates his information need in a query, implies a necessity to include the user in the retrieval process more actively in order to close the gap between the meaning of the content and the meaning of a user's query (i.e. his information need). This thesis lays foundation for such an ontology-based interactive retrieval process, in which the retrieval system interacts with a user in order to conceptually interpret the meaning of his query, whereas the underlying domain ontology drives the conceptualisation process. In that way the retrieval process evolves from a query evaluation process into a highly interactive cooperation between a user and the retrieval system, in which the system tries to anticipate the user's information need and to deliver the relevant content proactively. Moreover, the notion of content relevance for a user's query evolves from a content dependent artefact to the multidimensional context-dependent structure, strongly influenced by the user's preferences. This cooperation process is realized as the so-called Librarian Agent Query Refinement Process. In order to clarify the impact of an ontology on the retrieval process (regarding its complexity and quality), a set of methods and tools for different levels of content and query formalisation is developed, ranging from pure ontology-based inferencing to keyword-based querying in which semantics automatically emerges from the results. Our evaluation studies have shown that the possibilities to conceptualize a user's information need in the right manner and to interpret the retrieval results accordingly are key issues for realizing much more meaningful information retrieval systems.

Content

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

0.018322643 = product of:
  0.036645286 = sum of:
    0.036645286 = product of:
      0.05496793 = sum of:
        0.04633852 = weight(_text_:j in 224) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04633852 = score(doc=224,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109994456 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.4212805 = fieldWeight in 224, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=224)
        0.008629408 = weight(_text_:a in 224) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008629408 = score(doc=224,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 224, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=224)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a

0.017480146 = product of:
  0.034960292 = sum of:
    0.034960292 = product of:
      0.052440435 = sum of:
        0.04633852 = weight(_text_:j in 3358) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04633852 = score(doc=3358,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109994456 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.4212805 = fieldWeight in 3358, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3358)
        0.006101913 = weight(_text_:a in 3358) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006101913 = score(doc=3358,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 3358, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3358)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a

0.017328596 = product of:
  0.03465719 = sum of:
    0.03465719 = product of:
      0.051985785 = sum of:
        0.0050849267 = weight(_text_:a in 2090) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0050849267 = score(doc=2090,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 2090, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2090)
        0.046900857 = weight(_text_:22 in 2090) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046900857 = score(doc=2090,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1212218 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2090, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2090)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Metadata and semantics research: 10th International Conference, MTSR 2016, Göttingen, Germany, November 22-25, 2016, Proceedings. Eds.: E. Garoufallou

Type

a

0.015918773 = product of:
  0.031837545 = sum of:
    0.031837545 = product of:
      0.047756318 = sum of:
        0.043688376 = weight(_text_:j in 4407) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043688376 = score(doc=4407,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.109994456 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.39718705 = fieldWeight in 4407, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4407)
        0.0040679416 = weight(_text_:a in 4407) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0040679416 = score(doc=4407,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 4407, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4407)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Towards the semantic Web: ontology-driven knowledge management. Eds.: J. Davies, u.a

Type

a

0.015807595 = product of:
  0.03161519 = sum of:
    0.03161519 = product of:
      0.047422785 = sum of:
        0.03861543 = weight(_text_:j in 376) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03861543 = score(doc=376,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109994456 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.35106707 = fieldWeight in 376, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=376)
        0.008807353 = weight(_text_:a in 376) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008807353 = score(doc=376,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.22065444 = fieldWeight in 376, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=376)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a

0.01564872 = product of:
  0.03129744 = sum of:
    0.03129744 = product of:
      0.04694616 = sum of:
        0.038227327 = weight(_text_:j in 2547) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038227327 = score(doc=2547,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.109994456 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.34753868 = fieldWeight in 2547, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2547)
        0.008718833 = weight(_text_:a in 2547) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008718833 = score(doc=2547,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.21843673 = fieldWeight in 2547, 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=2547)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Without semantically enriched content, the Web cannot reach its full potential. The authors discuss tools and techniques for generating and processing such content, thus setting a foundation upon which to build the Semantic Web. In particular, they put a Semantic Web language through its paces and try to answer questions about how people can use it, such as, How do authors generate semantic descriptions? How do agents discover these descriptions? How can agents integrate information from different sites? How can users query the Semantic Web? The authors present a system that addresses these questions and describe tools that help users interact with the Semantic Web. They motivate the design of their system with a specific application: semantic markup for computer science.

Type

a

0.015115409 = product of:
  0.030230818 = sum of:
    0.030230818 = product of:
      0.045346227 = sum of:
        0.038227327 = weight(_text_:j in 2262) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038227327 = score(doc=2262,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.109994456 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.34753868 = fieldWeight in 2262, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2262)
        0.007118898 = weight(_text_:a in 2262) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007118898 = score(doc=2262,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 2262, 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=2262)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Over the past few years, we have seen a growing interest in the potential of both peer-to-peer (P2P) computing and the use of more formal approaches to knowledge management, involving the development of ontologies. This penultimate chapter discusses possibilities that both approaches may offer for more effective and efficient knowledge management. In particular, we investigate how the two paradigms may be combined. In this chapter, we describe our vision in terms of a set of future steps that need to be taken to bring the results described in earlier chapters to their full potential.

Source

Towards the semantic Web: ontology-driven knowledge management. Eds.: J. Davies, u.a

Type

a

0.013862876 = product of:
  0.027725752 = sum of:
    0.027725752 = product of:
      0.041588627 = sum of:
        0.0040679416 = weight(_text_:a in 3376) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0040679416 = score(doc=3376,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 3376, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3376)
        0.037520684 = weight(_text_:22 in 3376) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037520684 = score(doc=3376,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1212218 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3376, 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=3376)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

31. 7.2010 16:58:22

Type

a

0.013849812 = product of:
  0.027699623 = sum of:
    0.027699623 = product of:
      0.041549433 = sum of:
        0.008718833 = weight(_text_:a in 1026) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008718833 = score(doc=1026,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.21843673 = fieldWeight in 1026, 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=1026)
        0.0328306 = weight(_text_:22 in 1026) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0328306 = score(doc=1026,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1212218 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1026, 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=1026)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

We have created software applications that allow users to both author and use Semantic Web metadata. To create and use a layer of semantic content on top of the existing Web, we have (1) implemented a user interface that expedites the task of attributing metadata to resources on the Web, and (2) augmented a Web browser to leverage this semantic metadata to provide relevant information and tasks to the user. This project provides a framework for annotating and reorganizing existing files, pages, and sites on the Web that is similar to Vannevar Bushrsquos original concepts of trail blazing and associative indexing.

Source

Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 7th European Conference, proceedings / ECDL 2003, Trondheim, Norway, August 17-22, 2003

Type

a

0.013389558 = product of:
  0.026779115 = sum of:
    0.026779115 = product of:
      0.040168673 = sum of:
        0.033441946 = weight(_text_:j in 265) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033441946 = score(doc=265,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.109994456 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.304033 = fieldWeight in 265, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=265)
        0.0067267264 = weight(_text_:a in 265) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0067267264 = score(doc=265,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.1685276 = fieldWeight in 265, 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=265)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Within the cultural heritage field, proprietary metadata and vocabularies are being transformed into public Linked Data. These efforts have mostly been at the level of large-scale aggregators such as Europeana where the original data is abstracted to a common format and schema. Although this approach ensures a level of consistency and interoperability, the richness of the original data is lost in the process. In this paper, we present a transparent and interactive methodology for ingesting, converting and linking cultural heritage metadata into Linked Data. The methodology is designed to maintain the richness and detail of the original metadata. We introduce the XMLRDF conversion tool and describe how it is integrated in the ClioPatria semantic web toolkit. The methodology and the tools have been validated by converting the Amsterdam Museum metadata to a Linked Data version. In this way, the Amsterdam Museum became the first 'small' cultural heritage institution with a node in the Linked Data cloud.

Type

a

0.013196143 = product of:
  0.026392287 = sum of:
    0.026392287 = product of:
      0.03958843 = sum of:
        0.032766283 = weight(_text_:j in 4337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032766283 = score(doc=4337,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.109994456 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.2978903 = fieldWeight in 4337, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4337)
        0.006822146 = weight(_text_:a in 4337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006822146 = score(doc=4337,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.039914686 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034616705 = queryNorm
            0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 4337, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4337)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Many Semantic Web initiatives improve the capabilities of machines to exchange the meaning of information with other machines. These efforts lead to an increased quality of the application's results, but their user interfaces take little or no advantage of the semantic richness. For example, an ontology-based search engine will use its ontology when evaluating the user's query (e.g. for query formulation, disambiguation or evaluation), but fails to use it to significantly enrich the presentation of the results to a human user. For example, one could imagine replacing the endless list of hits with a structured presentation based on the semantic properties of the hits. Another problem is that the modelling of a domain is done from a single perspective (most often that of the information provider). Therefore, presentation based on the resulting ontology is unlikely to satisfy the needs of all the different types of users of the information. So even assuming an ontology for the domain is in place, mapping that ontology to the needs of individual users - based on their tasks, expertise and personal preferences - is not trivial.

Source

Towards the semantic Web: ontology-driven knowledge management. Eds.: J. Davies, u.a

Type

a