Search (75 results, page 1 of 4)

  • × type_ss:"a"
  • × theme_ss:"Wissensrepräsentation"
  1. Schmitz-Esser, W.: Language of general communication and concept compatibility (1996) 0.07
    0.066491924 = product of:
      0.13298385 = sum of:
        0.13298385 = sum of:
          0.07141977 = weight(_text_:i in 6089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.07141977 = score(doc=6089,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
                0.045439374 = queryNorm
              0.41672117 = fieldWeight in 6089, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
                0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=6089)
          0.06156408 = weight(_text_:22 in 6089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.06156408 = score(doc=6089,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.045439374 = queryNorm
              0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 6089, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=6089)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Pages
    S.11-22
    Series
    Propozycje i Materialy; 6
  2. Gendt, M. van; Isaac, I.; Meij, L. van der; Schlobach, S.: Semantic Web techniques for multiple views on heterogeneous collections : a case study (2006) 0.04
    0.039895155 = product of:
      0.07979031 = sum of:
        0.07979031 = sum of:
          0.042851865 = weight(_text_:i in 2418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.042851865 = score(doc=2418,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
                0.045439374 = queryNorm
              0.25003272 = fieldWeight in 2418, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2418)
          0.036938448 = weight(_text_:22 in 2418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.036938448 = score(doc=2418,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.045439374 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2418, 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=2418)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 10th European conference, proceedings / ECDL 2006, Alicante, Spain, September 17 - 22, 2006
  3. Renear, A.H.; Wickett, K.M.; Urban, R.J.; Dubin, D.; Shreeves, S.L.: Collection/item metadata relationships (2008) 0.04
    0.039895155 = product of:
      0.07979031 = sum of:
        0.07979031 = sum of:
          0.042851865 = weight(_text_:i in 2623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.042851865 = score(doc=2623,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
                0.045439374 = queryNorm
              0.25003272 = fieldWeight in 2623, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2623)
          0.036938448 = weight(_text_:22 in 2623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.036938448 = score(doc=2623,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.045439374 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2623, 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=2623)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Contemporary retrieval systems, which search across collections, usually ignore collection-level metadata. Alternative approaches, exploiting collection-level information, will require an understanding of the various kinds of relationships that can obtain between collection-level and item-level metadata. This paper outlines the problem and describes a project that is developing a logic-based framework for classifying collection/item metadata relationships. This framework will support (i) metadata specification developers defining metadata elements, (ii) metadata creators describing objects, and (iii) system designers implementing systems that take advantage of collection-level metadata. We present three examples of collection/item metadata relationship categories, attribute/value-propagation, value-propagation, and value-constraint and show that even in these simple cases a precise formulation requires modal notions in addition to first-order logic. These formulations are related to recent work in information retrieval and ontology evaluation.
    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
  4. Zeng, Q.; Yu, M.; Yu, W.; Xiong, J.; Shi, Y.; Jiang, M.: Faceted hierarchy : a new graph type to organize scientific concepts and a construction method (2019) 0.03
    0.027063664 = product of:
      0.054127328 = sum of:
        0.054127328 = product of:
          0.21650931 = sum of:
            0.21650931 = weight(_text_:3a in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.21650931 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.38523552 = queryWeight, product of:
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045439374 = queryNorm
                0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 400, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=400)
          0.25 = coord(1/4)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Content
    Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Faclanthology.org%2FD19-5317.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0ZZFyq5wWTtNTvNkrvjlGA.
  5. Barsalou, L.W.: Frames, concepts, and conceptual fields (1992) 0.03
    0.025250703 = product of:
      0.050501406 = sum of:
        0.050501406 = product of:
          0.10100281 = sum of:
            0.10100281 = weight(_text_:i in 3217) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.10100281 = score(doc=3217,freq=16.0), product of:
                0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045439374 = queryNorm
                0.58933276 = fieldWeight in 3217, product of:
                  4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                    16.0 = termFreq=16.0
                  3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3217)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    In this chapter I propose that frames provide the fundamental representation of knowledge in human cognition. In the first section, I raise problems with the feature list representations often found in theories of knowledge, and I sketch the solutions that frames provide to them. In the second section, I examine the three fundamental concepts of frames: attribute-value sets, structural invariants, and constraints. Because frames also represents the attributes, values, structural invariants, and constraints within a frame, the mechanism that constructs frames builds them recursively. The frame theory I propose borrows heavily from previous frame theories, although its collection of representational components is somewhat unique. Furthermore, frame theorists generally assume that frames are rigid configurations of independent attributes, whereas I propose that frames are dynamic relational structures whose form is flexible and context dependent. In the third section, I illustrate how frames support a wide variety of representational tasks central to conceptual processing in natural and artificial intelligence. Frames can represent exemplars and propositions, prototypes and membership, subordinates and taxonomies. Frames can also represent conceptual combinations, event sequences, rules, and plans. In the fourth section, I show how frames define the extent of conceptual fields and how they provide a powerful productive mechanism for generating specific concepts within a field.
  6. Mainz, I.; Weller, K.; Paulsen, I.; Mainz, D.; Kohl, J.; Haeseler, A. von: Ontoverse : collaborative ontology engineering for the life sciences (2008) 0.02
    0.020200564 = product of:
      0.040401127 = sum of:
        0.040401127 = product of:
          0.080802254 = sum of:
            0.080802254 = weight(_text_:i in 1594) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.080802254 = score(doc=1594,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045439374 = queryNorm
                0.4714662 = fieldWeight in 1594, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1594)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
  7. Weller, K.; Peters, I.: Reconsidering relationships for knowledge representation (2007) 0.02
    0.020200564 = product of:
      0.040401127 = sum of:
        0.040401127 = product of:
          0.080802254 = sum of:
            0.080802254 = weight(_text_:i in 216) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.080802254 = score(doc=216,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045439374 = queryNorm
                0.4714662 = fieldWeight in 216, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=216)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Proceedings of I-Know '07, Graz, September 5-7
  8. Park, O.n.: Opening ontology design : a study of the implications of knowledge organization for ontology design (2008) 0.02
    0.018555403 = product of:
      0.037110806 = sum of:
        0.037110806 = product of:
          0.07422161 = sum of:
            0.07422161 = weight(_text_:i in 2489) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07422161 = score(doc=2489,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045439374 = queryNorm
                0.43306938 = fieldWeight in 2489, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2489)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    It is proposed that sufficient research into ontology design has not been achieved and that this deficiency has led to the insufficiency of ontology in reinforcing its communications frameworks, knowledge sharing and re-use applications. In order to diagnose the problems of ontology research, I first survey the notion of ontology in the context of ontology design, based on a Means-Ends tool provided by a Cognitive Work Analysis. The potential contributions of knowledge organization in library and information sciences that can be used to improve the limitations of ontology research are demonstrated. I propose a context-centered view as an approach for ontology design, and present faceted classification as an appropriate method for structuring ontology. In addition, I also provides a case study of wine ontology in order to demonstrate how knowledge organization approaches in library and information science can improve ontology design.
  9. Lukasiewicz, T.: Uncertainty reasoning for the Semantic Web (2017) 0.02
    0.017675493 = product of:
      0.035350986 = sum of:
        0.035350986 = product of:
          0.07070197 = sum of:
            0.07070197 = weight(_text_:i in 3939) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07070197 = score(doc=3939,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045439374 = queryNorm
                0.41253293 = fieldWeight in 3939, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3939)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The Semantic Web has attracted much attention, both from academia and industry. An important role in research towards the Semantic Web is played by formalisms and technologies for handling uncertainty and/or vagueness. In this paper, I first provide some motivating examples for handling uncertainty and/or vagueness in the Semantic Web. I then give an overview of some own formalisms for handling uncertainty and/or vagueness in the Semantic Web.
  10. Nielsen, M.: Neuronale Netze : Alpha Go - Computer lernen Intuition (2018) 0.02
    0.01539102 = product of:
      0.03078204 = sum of:
        0.03078204 = product of:
          0.06156408 = sum of:
            0.06156408 = weight(_text_:22 in 4523) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06156408 = score(doc=4523,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045439374 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4523, 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=4523)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Spektrum der Wissenschaft. 2018, H.1, S.22-27
  11. Menzel, C.: Knowledge representation, the World Wide Web, and the evolution of logic (2011) 0.02
    0.015150423 = product of:
      0.030300846 = sum of:
        0.030300846 = product of:
          0.060601693 = sum of:
            0.060601693 = weight(_text_:i in 761) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.060601693 = score(doc=761,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045439374 = queryNorm
                0.35359967 = fieldWeight in 761, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=761)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    In this paper, I have traced a series of evolutionary adaptations of FOL motivated entirely by its use by knowledge engineers to represent and share information on the Web culminating in the development of Common Logic. While the primary goal in this paper has been to document this evolution, it is arguable, I think that CL's syntactic and semantic egalitarianism better realizes the goal "topic neutrality" that a logic should ideally exemplify - understood, at least in part, as the idea that logic should as far as possible not itself embody any metaphysical presuppositions. Instead of retaining the traditional metaphysical divisions of FOL that reflect its Fregean origins, CL begins as it were with a single, metaphysically homogeneous domain in which, potentially, anything can play the traditional roles of object, property, relation, and function. Note that the effect of this is not to destroy traditional metaphysical divisions. Rather, it simply to refrain from building those divisions explicitly into one's logic; instead, such divisions are left to the user to introduce and enforce axiomatically in an explicit metaphysical theory.
  12. Baumer, C.; Reichenberger, K.: Business Semantics - Praxis und Perspektiven (2006) 0.01
    0.014283955 = product of:
      0.02856791 = sum of:
        0.02856791 = product of:
          0.05713582 = sum of:
            0.05713582 = weight(_text_:i in 6020) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05713582 = score(doc=6020,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045439374 = queryNorm
                0.33337694 = fieldWeight in 6020, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6020)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Object
    I-Views
  13. Peters, I.; Weller. K.: Paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations in knowledge organization systems (2008) 0.01
    0.012498461 = product of:
      0.024996921 = sum of:
        0.024996921 = product of:
          0.049993843 = sum of:
            0.049993843 = weight(_text_:i in 1593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.049993843 = score(doc=1593,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045439374 = queryNorm
                0.29170483 = fieldWeight in 1593, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1593)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
  14. Paralic, J.; Kostial, I.: Ontology-based information retrieval (2003) 0.01
    0.012498461 = product of:
      0.024996921 = sum of:
        0.024996921 = product of:
          0.049993843 = sum of:
            0.049993843 = weight(_text_:i in 1153) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.049993843 = score(doc=1153,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045439374 = queryNorm
                0.29170483 = fieldWeight in 1153, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1153)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
  15. Atanassova, I.; Bertin, M.: Semantic facets for scientific information retrieval (2014) 0.01
    0.012498461 = product of:
      0.024996921 = sum of:
        0.024996921 = product of:
          0.049993843 = sum of:
            0.049993843 = weight(_text_:i in 4471) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.049993843 = score(doc=4471,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045439374 = queryNorm
                0.29170483 = fieldWeight in 4471, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4471)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
  16. Synak, M.; Dabrowski, M.; Kruk, S.R.: Semantic Web and ontologies (2009) 0.01
    0.0123128155 = product of:
      0.024625631 = sum of:
        0.024625631 = product of:
          0.049251262 = sum of:
            0.049251262 = weight(_text_:22 in 3376) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.049251262 = score(doc=3376,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045439374 = 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)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    31. 7.2010 16:58:22
  17. Giunchiglia, F.; Villafiorita, A.; Walsh, T.: Theories of abstraction (1997) 0.01
    0.0123128155 = product of:
      0.024625631 = sum of:
        0.024625631 = product of:
          0.049251262 = sum of:
            0.049251262 = weight(_text_:22 in 4476) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.049251262 = score(doc=4476,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045439374 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4476, 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=4476)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    1.10.2018 14:13:22
  18. Hauff-Hartig, S.: Wissensrepräsentation durch RDF: Drei angewandte Forschungsbeispiele : Bitte recht vielfältig: Wie Wissensgraphen, Disco und FaBiO Struktur in Mangas und die Humanities bringen (2021) 0.01
    0.0123128155 = product of:
      0.024625631 = sum of:
        0.024625631 = product of:
          0.049251262 = sum of:
            0.049251262 = weight(_text_:22 in 318) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.049251262 = score(doc=318,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045439374 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 318, 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=318)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 5.2021 12:43:05
  19. Priss, U.: Faceted information representation (2000) 0.01
    0.010773714 = product of:
      0.021547427 = sum of:
        0.021547427 = product of:
          0.043094855 = sum of:
            0.043094855 = weight(_text_:22 in 5095) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.043094855 = score(doc=5095,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045439374 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5095, 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=5095)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 1.2016 17:47:06
  20. Knorz, G.; Rein, B.: Semantische Suche in einer Hochschulontologie (2005) 0.01
    0.010773714 = product of:
      0.021547427 = sum of:
        0.021547427 = product of:
          0.043094855 = sum of:
            0.043094855 = weight(_text_:22 in 1852) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.043094855 = score(doc=1852,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045439374 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1852, 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=1852)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    11. 2.2011 18:22:58

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 62
  • d 12
  • sp 1
  • More… Less…