Search (203 results, page 2 of 11)

  • × theme_ss:"Automatisches Klassifizieren"
  1. Orwig, R.E.; Chen, H.; Nunamaker, J.F.: ¬A graphical, self-organizing approach to classifying electronic meeting output (1997) 0.01 
    0.010788266 = product of:
  0.021576531 = sum of:
    0.021576531 = product of:
      0.032364797 = sum of:
        0.0105208345 = weight(_text_:a in 6928) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0105208345 = score(doc=6928,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.19940455 = fieldWeight in 6928, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6928)
        0.021843962 = weight(_text_:h in 6928) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021843962 = score(doc=6928,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113683715 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.19214681 = fieldWeight in 6928, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6928)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Describes research in the application of a Kohonen Self-Organizing Map (SOM) to the problem of classification of electronic brainstorming output and an evaluation of the results. Describes an electronic meeting system and describes the classification problem that exists in the group problem solving process. Surveys the literature concerning classification. Describes the application of the Kohonen SOM to the meeting output classification problem. Describes an experiment that evaluated the classification performed by the Kohonen SOM by comparing it with those of a human expert and a Hopfield neural network. Discusses conclusions and directions for future research
    Type
    a
  2. Chung, Y.-M.; Noh, Y.-H.: Developing a specialized directory system by automatically classifying Web documents (2003) 0.01 
    0.010699681 = product of:
  0.021399362 = sum of:
    0.021399362 = product of:
      0.032099042 = sum of:
        0.013375646 = weight(_text_:a in 1566) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013375646 = score(doc=1566,freq=22.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.25351265 = fieldWeight in 1566, product of:
              4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
                22.0 = termFreq=22.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1566)
        0.018723397 = weight(_text_:h in 1566) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018723397 = score(doc=1566,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113683715 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.16469726 = fieldWeight in 1566, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1566)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    This study developed a specialized directory system using an automatic classification technique. Economics was selected as the subject field for the classification experiments with Web documents. The classification scheme of the directory follows the DDC, and subject terms representing each class number or subject category were selected from the DDC table to construct a representative term dictionary. In collecting and classifying the Web documents, various strategies were tested in order to find the optimal thresholds. In the classification experiments, Web documents in economics were classified into a total of 757 hierarchical subject categories built from the DDC scheme. The first and second experiments using the representative term dictionary resulted in relatively high precision ratios of 77 and 60%, respectively. The third experiment employing a machine learning-based k-nearest neighbours (kNN) classifier in a closed experimental setting achieved a precision ratio of 96%. This implies that it is possible to enhance the classification performance by applying a hybrid method combining a dictionary-based technique and a kNN classifier
    Type
    a
  3. Ruiz, M.E.; Srinivasan, P.: Combining machine learning and hierarchical indexing structures for text categorization (2001) 0.01 
    0.010418028 = product of:
  0.020836055 = sum of:
    0.020836055 = product of:
      0.031254083 = sum of:
        0.009410121 = weight(_text_:a in 1595) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009410121 = score(doc=1595,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 1595, 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=1595)
        0.021843962 = weight(_text_:h in 1595) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021843962 = score(doc=1595,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113683715 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.19214681 = fieldWeight in 1595, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1595)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    This paper presents a method that exploits the hierarchical structure of an indexing vocabulary to guide the development and training of machine learning methods for automatic text categorization. We present the design of a hierarchical classifier based an the divide-and-conquer principle. The method is evaluated using backpropagation neural networks, such as the machine learning algorithm, that leam to assign MeSH categories to a subset of MEDLINE records. Comparisons with traditional Rocchio's algorithm adapted for text categorization, as well as flat neural network classifiers, are provided. The results indicate that the use of hierarchical structures improves Performance significantly.
    Source
    Advances in classification research, vol.10: proceedings of the 10th ASIS SIG/CR Classification Research Workshop. Ed.: Albrechtsen, H. u. J.E. Mai
    Type
    a
  4. Reiner, U.: Automatische DDC-Klassifizierung von bibliografischen Titeldatensätzen (2009) 0.01 
    0.010332656 = product of:
  0.020665312 = sum of:
    0.020665312 = product of:
      0.061995935 = sum of:
        0.061995935 = weight(_text_:22 in 611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.061995935 = score(doc=611,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16023713 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 611, 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=611)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    22. 8.2009 12:54:24
  5. Panyr, J.: Vektorraum-Modell und Clusteranalyse in Information-Retrieval-Systemen (1987) 0.01 
    0.010113914 = product of:
  0.020227827 = sum of:
    0.020227827 = product of:
      0.03034174 = sum of:
        0.0053772116 = weight(_text_:a in 2322) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0053772116 = score(doc=2322,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 2322, 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=2322)
        0.02496453 = weight(_text_:h in 2322) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02496453 = score(doc=2322,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113683715 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.21959636 = fieldWeight in 2322, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2322)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Nachrichten für Dokumentation. 38(1987) H.1, S.13-20
    Type
    a
  6. Fangmeyer, H.; Gloden, R.: Bewertung und Vergleich von Klassifikationsergebnissen bei automatischen Verfahren (1978) 0.01 
    0.010113914 = product of:
  0.020227827 = sum of:
    0.020227827 = product of:
      0.03034174 = sum of:
        0.0053772116 = weight(_text_:a in 81) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0053772116 = score(doc=81,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 81, 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=81)
        0.02496453 = weight(_text_:h in 81) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02496453 = score(doc=81,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113683715 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.21959636 = fieldWeight in 81, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=81)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Type
    a
  7. Koch, T.: Nutzung von Klassifikationssystemen zur verbesserten Beschreibung, Organisation und Suche von Internetressourcen (1998) 0.01 
    0.010113914 = product of:
  0.020227827 = sum of:
    0.020227827 = product of:
      0.03034174 = sum of:
        0.0053772116 = weight(_text_:a in 1030) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0053772116 = score(doc=1030,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 1030, 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=1030)
        0.02496453 = weight(_text_:h in 1030) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02496453 = score(doc=1030,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113683715 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.21959636 = fieldWeight in 1030, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1030)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    BuB. 50(1998) H.5, S.326-335
    Type
    a
  8. Illing, S.: Automatisiertes klinisches Codieren (2021) 0.01 
    0.010113914 = product of:
  0.020227827 = sum of:
    0.020227827 = product of:
      0.03034174 = sum of:
        0.0053772116 = weight(_text_:a in 419) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0053772116 = score(doc=419,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 419, 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=419)
        0.02496453 = weight(_text_:h in 419) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02496453 = score(doc=419,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113683715 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.21959636 = fieldWeight in 419, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=419)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 72(2021) H.5/6, S.285-290
    Type
    a
  9. Khoo, C.S.G.; Ng, K.; Ou, S.: ¬An exploratory study of human clustering of Web pages (2003) 0.01 
    0.009818392 = product of:
  0.019636784 = sum of:
    0.019636784 = product of:
      0.029455176 = sum of:
        0.0046568024 = weight(_text_:a in 2741) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0046568024 = score(doc=2741,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.088261776 = fieldWeight in 2741, 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=2741)
        0.024798373 = weight(_text_:22 in 2741) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024798373 = score(doc=2741,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16023713 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2741, 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=2741)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    This study seeks to find out how human beings cluster Web pages naturally. Twenty Web pages retrieved by the Northem Light search engine for each of 10 queries were sorted by 3 subjects into categories that were natural or meaningful to them. lt was found that different subjects clustered the same set of Web pages quite differently and created different categories. The average inter-subject similarity of the clusters created was a low 0.27. Subjects created an average of 5.4 clusters for each sorting. The categories constructed can be divided into 10 types. About 1/3 of the categories created were topical. Another 20% of the categories relate to the degree of relevance or usefulness. The rest of the categories were subject-independent categories such as format, purpose, authoritativeness and direction to other sources. The authors plan to develop automatic methods for categorizing Web pages using the common categories created by the subjects. lt is hoped that the techniques developed can be used by Web search engines to automatically organize Web pages retrieved into categories that are natural to users. 1. Introduction The World Wide Web is an increasingly important source of information for people globally because of its ease of access, the ease of publishing, its ability to transcend geographic and national boundaries, its flexibility and heterogeneity and its dynamic nature. However, Web users also find it increasingly difficult to locate relevant and useful information in this vast information storehouse. Web search engines, despite their scope and power, appear to be quite ineffective. They retrieve too many pages, and though they attempt to rank retrieved pages in order of probable relevance, often the relevant documents do not appear in the top-ranked 10 or 20 documents displayed. Several studies have found that users do not know how to use the advanced features of Web search engines, and do not know how to formulate and re-formulate queries. Users also typically exert minimal effort in performing, evaluating and refining their searches, and are unwilling to scan more than 10 or 20 items retrieved (Jansen, Spink, Bateman & Saracevic, 1998). This suggests that the conventional ranked-list display of search results does not satisfy user requirements, and that better ways of presenting and summarizing search results have to be developed. One promising approach is to group retrieved pages into clusters or categories to allow users to navigate immediately to the "promising" clusters where the most useful Web pages are likely to be located. This approach has been adopted by a number of search engines (notably Northem Light) and search agents.
    Date
    12. 9.2004 9:56:22
    Type
    a
  10. Reiner, U.: Automatische DDC-Klassifizierung bibliografischer Titeldatensätze der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie (2009) 0.01 
    0.009818392 = product of:
  0.019636784 = sum of:
    0.019636784 = product of:
      0.029455176 = sum of:
        0.0046568024 = weight(_text_:a in 3284) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0046568024 = score(doc=3284,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.088261776 = fieldWeight in 3284, 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=3284)
        0.024798373 = weight(_text_:22 in 3284) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024798373 = score(doc=3284,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16023713 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 3284, 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=3284)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Das Klassifizieren von Objekten (z. B. Fauna, Flora, Texte) ist ein Verfahren, das auf menschlicher Intelligenz basiert. In der Informatik - insbesondere im Gebiet der Künstlichen Intelligenz (KI) - wird u. a. untersucht, inweit Verfahren, die menschliche Intelligenz benötigen, automatisiert werden können. Hierbei hat sich herausgestellt, dass die Lösung von Alltagsproblemen eine größere Herausforderung darstellt, als die Lösung von Spezialproblemen, wie z. B. das Erstellen eines Schachcomputers. So ist "Rybka" der seit Juni 2007 amtierende Computerschach-Weltmeistern. Inwieweit Alltagsprobleme mit Methoden der Künstlichen Intelligenz gelöst werden können, ist eine - für den allgemeinen Fall - noch offene Frage. Beim Lösen von Alltagsproblemen spielt die Verarbeitung der natürlichen Sprache, wie z. B. das Verstehen, eine wesentliche Rolle. Den "gesunden Menschenverstand" als Maschine (in der Cyc-Wissensbasis in Form von Fakten und Regeln) zu realisieren, ist Lenat's Ziel seit 1984. Bezüglich des KI-Paradeprojektes "Cyc" gibt es CycOptimisten und Cyc-Pessimisten. Das Verstehen der natürlichen Sprache (z. B. Werktitel, Zusammenfassung, Vorwort, Inhalt) ist auch beim intellektuellen Klassifizieren von bibliografischen Titeldatensätzen oder Netzpublikationen notwendig, um diese Textobjekte korrekt klassifizieren zu können. Seit dem Jahr 2007 werden von der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek nahezu alle Veröffentlichungen mit der Dewey Dezimalklassifikation (DDC) intellektuell klassifiziert.
    Die Menge der zu klassifizierenden Veröffentlichungen steigt spätestens seit der Existenz des World Wide Web schneller an, als sie intellektuell sachlich erschlossen werden kann. Daher werden Verfahren gesucht, um die Klassifizierung von Textobjekten zu automatisieren oder die intellektuelle Klassifizierung zumindest zu unterstützen. Seit 1968 gibt es Verfahren zur automatischen Dokumentenklassifizierung (Information Retrieval, kurz: IR) und seit 1992 zur automatischen Textklassifizierung (ATC: Automated Text Categorization). Seit immer mehr digitale Objekte im World Wide Web zur Verfügung stehen, haben Arbeiten zur automatischen Textklassifizierung seit ca. 1998 verstärkt zugenommen. Dazu gehören seit 1996 auch Arbeiten zur automatischen DDC-Klassifizierung bzw. RVK-Klassifizierung von bibliografischen Titeldatensätzen und Volltextdokumenten. Bei den Entwicklungen handelt es sich unseres Wissens bislang um experimentelle und keine im ständigen Betrieb befindlichen Systeme. Auch das VZG-Projekt Colibri/DDC ist seit 2006 u. a. mit der automatischen DDC-Klassifizierung befasst. Die diesbezüglichen Untersuchungen und Entwicklungen dienen zur Beantwortung der Forschungsfrage: "Ist es möglich, eine inhaltlich stimmige DDC-Titelklassifikation aller GVK-PLUS-Titeldatensätze automatisch zu erzielen?"
    Date
    22. 1.2010 14:41:24
    Type
    a
  11. Prabowo, R.; Jackson, M.; Burden, P.; Knoell, H.-D.: Ontology-based automatic classification for the Web pages : design, implementation and evaluation (2002) 0.01 
    0.009247085 = product of:
  0.01849417 = sum of:
    0.01849417 = product of:
      0.027741255 = sum of:
        0.009017859 = weight(_text_:a in 3383) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009017859 = score(doc=3383,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 3383, 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=3383)
        0.018723397 = weight(_text_:h in 3383) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018723397 = score(doc=3383,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113683715 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.16469726 = fieldWeight in 3383, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3383)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    In recent years, we have witnessed the continual growth in the use of ontologies in order to provide a mechanism to enable machine reasoning. This paper describes an automatic classifier, which focuses on the use of ontologies for classifying Web pages with respect to the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) and Library of Congress Classification (LCC) schemes. Firstly, we explain how these ontologies can be built in a modular fashion, and mapped into DDC and LCC. Secondly, we propose the formal definition of a DDC-LCC and an ontology-classification-scheme mapping. Thirdly, we explain the way the classifier uses these ontologies to assist classification. Finally, an experiment in which the accuracy of the classifier was evaluated is presented. The experiment shows that our approach results an improved classification in terms of accuracy. This improvement, however, comes at a cost in a low overage ratio due to the incompleteness of the ontologies used
  12. Teich, E.; Degaetano-Ortlieb, S.; Fankhauser, P.; Kermes, H.; Lapshinova-Koltunski, E.: ¬The linguistic construal of disciplinarity : a data-mining approach using register features (2016) 0.01 
    0.008929739 = product of:
  0.017859478 = sum of:
    0.017859478 = product of:
      0.026789214 = sum of:
        0.008065818 = weight(_text_:a in 3015) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008065818 = score(doc=3015,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 3015, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3015)
        0.018723397 = weight(_text_:h in 3015) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018723397 = score(doc=3015,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113683715 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.16469726 = fieldWeight in 3015, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3015)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    We analyze the linguistic evolution of selected scientific disciplines over a 30-year time span (1970s to 2000s). Our focus is on four highly specialized disciplines at the boundaries of computer science that emerged during that time: computational linguistics, bioinformatics, digital construction, and microelectronics. Our analysis is driven by the question whether these disciplines develop a distinctive language use-both individually and collectively-over the given time period. The data set is the English Scientific Text Corpus (scitex), which includes texts from the 1970s/1980s and early 2000s. Our theoretical basis is register theory. In terms of methods, we combine corpus-based methods of feature extraction (various aggregated features [part-of-speech based], n-grams, lexico-grammatical patterns) and automatic text classification. The results of our research are directly relevant to the study of linguistic variation and languages for specific purposes (LSP) and have implications for various natural language processing (NLP) tasks, for example, authorship attribution, text mining, or training NLP tools.
    Type
    a
  13. Oberhauser, O.: Automatisches Klassifizieren und Bibliothekskataloge (2005) 0.01 
    0.008849675 = product of:
  0.01769935 = sum of:
    0.01769935 = product of:
      0.026549023 = sum of:
        0.0047050603 = weight(_text_:a in 4099) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0047050603 = score(doc=4099,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 4099, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4099)
        0.021843962 = weight(_text_:h in 4099) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021843962 = score(doc=4099,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113683715 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.19214681 = fieldWeight in 4099, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4099)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Bibliothek Technik Recht. Festschrift für Peter Kubalek zum 60. Geburtstag. Hrsg.: H. Hrusa
    Type
    a
  14. Kanaan, G.; Al-Shalabi, R.; Ghwanmeh, S.; Al-Ma'adeed, H.: ¬A comparison of text-classification techniques applied to Arabic text (2009) 0.01 
    0.008569533 = product of:
  0.017139066 = sum of:
    0.017139066 = product of:
      0.025708599 = sum of:
        0.006985203 = weight(_text_:a in 3096) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006985203 = score(doc=3096,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 3096, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3096)
        0.018723397 = weight(_text_:h in 3096) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018723397 = score(doc=3096,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113683715 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.16469726 = fieldWeight in 3096, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3096)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Many algorithms have been implemented for the problem of text classification. Most of the work in this area was carried out for English text. Very little research has been carried out on Arabic text. The nature of Arabic text is different than that of English text, and preprocessing of Arabic text is more challenging. This paper presents an implementation of three automatic text-classification techniques for Arabic text. A corpus of 1445 Arabic text documents belonging to nine categories has been automatically classified using the kNN, Rocchio, and naïve Bayes algorithms. The research results reveal that Naïve Bayes was the best performer, followed by kNN and Rocchio.
    Type
    a
  15. Wu, M.; Liu, Y.-H.; Brownlee, R.; Zhang, X.: Evaluating utility and automatic classification of subject metadata from Research Data Australia (2021) 0.01 
    0.008569533 = product of:
  0.017139066 = sum of:
    0.017139066 = product of:
      0.025708599 = sum of:
        0.006985203 = weight(_text_:a in 453) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006985203 = score(doc=453,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 453, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=453)
        0.018723397 = weight(_text_:h in 453) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018723397 = score(doc=453,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113683715 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.16469726 = fieldWeight in 453, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=453)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    In this paper, we present a case study of how well subject metadata (comprising headings from an international classification scheme) has been deployed in a national data catalogue, and how often data seekers use subject metadata when searching for data. Through an analysis of user search behaviour as recorded in search logs, we find evidence that users utilise the subject metadata for data discovery. Since approximately half of the records ingested by the catalogue did not include subject metadata at the time of harvest, we experimented with automatic subject classification approaches in order to enrich these records and to provide additional support for user search and data discovery. Our results show that automatic methods work well for well represented categories of subject metadata, and these categories tend to have features that can distinguish themselves from the other categories. Our findings raise implications for data catalogue providers; they should invest more effort to enhance the quality of data records by providing an adequate description of these records for under-represented subject categories.
    Type
    a
  16. Pong, J.Y.-H.; Kwok, R.C.-W.; Lau, R.Y.-K.; Hao, J.-X.; Wong, P.C.-C.: ¬A comparative study of two automatic document classification methods in a library setting (2008) 0.01 
    0.008369497 = product of:
  0.016738994 = sum of:
    0.016738994 = product of:
      0.02510849 = sum of:
        0.0095056575 = weight(_text_:a in 2532) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0095056575 = score(doc=2532,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.18016359 = fieldWeight in 2532, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2532)
        0.015602832 = weight(_text_:h in 2532) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015602832 = score(doc=2532,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113683715 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.13724773 = fieldWeight in 2532, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2532)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    In current library practice, trained human experts usually carry out document cataloguing and indexing based on a manual approach. With the explosive growth in the number of electronic documents available on the Internet and digital libraries, it is increasingly difficult for library practitioners to categorize both electronic documents and traditional library materials using just a manual approach. To improve the effectiveness and efficiency of document categorization at the library setting, more in-depth studies of using automatic document classification methods to categorize library items are required. Machine learning research has advanced rapidly in recent years. However, applying machine learning techniques to improve library practice is still a relatively unexplored area. This paper illustrates the design and development of a machine learning based automatic document classification system to alleviate the manual categorization problem encountered within the library setting. Two supervised machine learning algorithms have been tested. Our empirical tests show that supervised machine learning algorithms in general, and the k-nearest neighbours (KNN) algorithm in particular, can be used to develop an effective document classification system to enhance current library practice. Moreover, some concrete recommendations regarding how to practically apply the KNN algorithm to develop automatic document classification in a library setting are made. To our best knowledge, this is the first in-depth study of applying the KNN algorithm to automatic document classification based on the widely used LCC classification scheme adopted by many large libraries.
    Type
    a
  17. Kasprzik, A.: Automatisierte und semiautomatisierte Klassifizierung : eine Analyse aktueller Projekte (2014) 0.01 
    0.008142265 = product of:
  0.01628453 = sum of:
    0.01628453 = product of:
      0.024426792 = sum of:
        0.0057033943 = weight(_text_:a in 2470) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0057033943 = score(doc=2470,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.10809815 = fieldWeight in 2470, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2470)
        0.018723397 = weight(_text_:h in 2470) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018723397 = score(doc=2470,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113683715 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.16469726 = fieldWeight in 2470, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2470)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Perspektive Bibliothek. 3(2014) H.1, S.85-110
    Type
    a
  18. Suominen, A.; Toivanen, H.: Map of science with topic modeling : comparison of unsupervised learning and human-assigned subject classification (2016) 0.01 
    0.007944992 = product of:
  0.015889984 = sum of:
    0.015889984 = product of:
      0.023834974 = sum of:
        0.008232141 = weight(_text_:a in 3121) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008232141 = score(doc=3121,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.15602624 = fieldWeight in 3121, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3121)
        0.015602832 = weight(_text_:h in 3121) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015602832 = score(doc=3121,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113683715 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.13724773 = fieldWeight in 3121, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3121)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The delineation of coordinates is fundamental for the cartography of science, and accurate and credible classification of scientific knowledge presents a persistent challenge in this regard. We present a map of Finnish science based on unsupervised-learning classification, and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of this approach vis-à-vis those generated by human reasoning. We conclude that from theoretical and practical perspectives there exist several challenges for human reasoning-based classification frameworks of scientific knowledge, as they typically try to fit new-to-the-world knowledge into historical models of scientific knowledge, and cannot easily be deployed for new large-scale data sets. Automated classification schemes, in contrast, generate classification models only from the available text corpus, thereby identifying credibly novel bodies of knowledge. They also lend themselves to versatile large-scale data analysis, and enable a range of Big Data possibilities. However, we also argue that it is neither possible nor fruitful to declare one or another method a superior approach in terms of realism to classify scientific knowledge, and we believe that the merits of each approach are dependent on the practical objectives of analysis.
    Type
    a
  19. Qu, B.; Cong, G.; Li, C.; Sun, A.; Chen, H.: ¬An evaluation of classification models for question topic categorization (2012) 0.01 
    0.0077059045 = product of:
  0.015411809 = sum of:
    0.015411809 = product of:
      0.023117714 = sum of:
        0.007514882 = weight(_text_:a in 237) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007514882 = score(doc=237,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.14243183 = fieldWeight in 237, 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=237)
        0.015602832 = weight(_text_:h in 237) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015602832 = score(doc=237,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113683715 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.13724773 = fieldWeight in 237, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=237)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    We study the problem of question topic classification using a very large real-world Community Question Answering (CQA) dataset from Yahoo! Answers. The dataset comprises 3.9 million questions and these questions are organized into more than 1,000 categories in a hierarchy. To the best knowledge, this is the first systematic evaluation of the performance of different classification methods on question topic classification as well as short texts. Specifically, we empirically evaluate the following in classifying questions into CQA categories: (a) the usefulness of n-gram features and bag-of-word features; (b) the performance of three standard classification algorithms (naive Bayes, maximum entropy, and support vector machines); (c) the performance of the state-of-the-art hierarchical classification algorithms; (d) the effect of training data size on performance; and (e) the effectiveness of the different components of CQA data, including subject, content, asker, and the best answer. The experimental results show what aspects are important for question topic classification in terms of both effectiveness and efficiency. We believe that the experimental findings from this study will be useful in real-world classification problems.
    Type
    a
  20. Fang, H.: Classifying research articles in multidisciplinary sciences journals into subject categories (2015) 0.01 
    0.0077059045 = product of:
  0.015411809 = sum of:
    0.015411809 = product of:
      0.023117714 = sum of:
        0.007514882 = weight(_text_:a in 2194) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007514882 = score(doc=2194,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.14243183 = fieldWeight in 2194, 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=2194)
        0.015602832 = weight(_text_:h in 2194) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015602832 = score(doc=2194,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113683715 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.13724773 = fieldWeight in 2194, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2194)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    In the Thomson Reuters Web of Science database, the subject categories of a journal are applied to all articles in the journal. However, many articles in multidisciplinary Sciences journals may only be represented by a small number of subject categories. To provide more accurate information on the research areas of articles in such journals, we can classify articles in these journals into subject categories as defined by Web of Science based on their references. For an article in a multidisciplinary sciences journal, the method counts the subject categories in all of the article's references indexed by Web of Science, and uses the most numerous subject categories of the references to determine the most appropriate classification of the article. We used articles in an issue of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) to validate the correctness of the method by comparing the obtained results with the categories of the articles as defined by PNAS and their content. This study shows that the method provides more precise search results for the subject category of interest in bibliometric investigations through recognition of articles in multidisciplinary sciences journals whose work relates to a particular subject category.
    Type
    a

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 167
  • d 33
  • a 1
  • chi 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 178
  • el 28
  • r 3
  • m 2
  • s 1
  • x 1
  • More… Less…

Themes