Search (7 results, page 1 of 1)

0.09310571 = product of:
  0.18621142 = sum of:
    0.17619146 = weight(_text_:2f in 563) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17619146 = score(doc=563,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.31349787 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 563, 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=563)
    0.010019952 = product of:
      0.030059857 = sum of:
        0.030059857 = weight(_text_:22 in 563) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030059857 = score(doc=563,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 563, 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=563)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Content

A Thesis presented to The University of Guelph In partial fulfilment of requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Computer Science. Vgl. Unter: http://www.inf.ufrgs.br%2F~ceramisch%2Fdownload_files%2Fpublications%2F2009%2Fp01.pdf.

Date

10. 1.2013 19:22:47

0.022980269 = product of:
  0.045960538 = sum of:
    0.040115565 = weight(_text_:evolution in 3807) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.040115565 = score(doc=3807,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.20482016 = fieldWeight in 3807, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3807)
    0.0058449726 = product of:
      0.017534917 = sum of:
        0.017534917 = weight(_text_:22 in 3807) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017534917 = score(doc=3807,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 3807, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3807)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Research limitations/implications In total, 42 definitions were identified spanning a period of 11 years. This represented the first use of KM through the estimated apex of terms used. From 2006 onwards definitions were used in repetition, and all definitions that were considered to repeat were therefore subsequently excluded as not being unique instances. All definitions listed are by no means complete and exhaustive. The definitions are viewed outside the scope and context in which they were originally formulated and then used to review the key concepts in the definitions themselves. Social implications When the authors refer to the aforementioned discussion of KM content as well as the presentation of the method followed in this paper, the authors may have a few implications for future research in KM. First the research validates ideas presented by the OECD in 2005 pertaining to KM. It also validates that through the evolution of KM, the authors ended with a description of KM that may be seen as a standardised description. If the authors as academics and practitioners, for example, refer to KM as the same construct and/or idea, it has the potential to speculatively, distinguish between what KM may or may not be. Originality/value By simplifying the term used to define KM, by focusing on the most common definitions, the paper assist in refocusing KM by reconsidering the dimensions that is the most common in how it has been defined over time. This would hopefully assist in reigniting discussions about KM and how it may be used to the benefit of an organisation.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

0.014326988 = product of:
  0.05730795 = sum of:
    0.05730795 = weight(_text_:evolution in 3042) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05730795 = score(doc=3042,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.2926002 = fieldWeight in 3042, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3042)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Based on State of the Union addresses from 1790 to 2014 (225 speeches delivered by 42 presidents), this paper describes and evaluates different text representation strategies. To determine the most important words of a given text, the term frequencies (tf) or the tf?idf weighting scheme can be applied. Recently, latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) has been proposed to define the topics included in a corpus. As another strategy, this study proposes to apply a vocabulary specificity measure (Z?score) to determine the most significantly overused word-types or short sequences of them. Our experiments show that the simple term frequency measure is not able to discriminate between specific terms associated with a document or a set of texts. Using the tf idf or LDA approach, the selection requires some arbitrary decisions. Based on the term-specific measure (Z?score), the term selection has a clear theoretical basis. Moreover, the most significant sentences for each presidency can be determined. As another facet, we can visualize the dynamic evolution of usage of some terms associated with their specificity measures. Finally, this technique can be employed to define the most important lexical leaders introducing terms overused by the k following presidencies.

0.0033399842 = product of:
  0.013359937 = sum of:
    0.013359937 = product of:
      0.04007981 = sum of:
        0.04007981 = weight(_text_:22 in 1490) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04007981 = score(doc=1490,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1490, 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=1490)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

22. 3.2015 9:30:24

0.002504988 = product of:
  0.010019952 = sum of:
    0.010019952 = product of:
      0.030059857 = sum of:
        0.030059857 = weight(_text_:22 in 1848) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030059857 = score(doc=1848,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1848, 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=1848)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The goal of entity linking is to associate references to an entity that is found in unstructured natural language content to an authoritative inventory of known entities. This article describes the construction of 6 test collections for cross-language person-entity linking that together span 22 languages. Fully automated components were used together with 2 crowdsourced validation stages to affordably generate ground-truth annotations with an accuracy comparable to that of a completely manual process. The resulting test collections each contain between 642 (Arabic) and 2,361 (Romanian) person references in non-English texts for which the correct resolution in English Wikipedia is known, plus a similar number of references for which no correct resolution into English Wikipedia is believed to exist. Fully automated cross-language person-name linking experiments with 20 non-English languages yielded a resolution accuracy of between 0.84 (Serbian) and 0.98 (Romanian), which compares favorably with previously reported cross-language entity linking results for Spanish.

0.0020874902 = product of:
  0.008349961 = sum of:
    0.008349961 = product of:
      0.025049882 = sum of:
        0.025049882 = weight(_text_:22 in 1365) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025049882 = score(doc=1365,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1365, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1365)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

2. 9.2014 21:22:48

0.0016699921 = product of:
  0.0066799684 = sum of:
    0.0066799684 = product of:
      0.020039905 = sum of:
        0.020039905 = weight(_text_:22 in 4217) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020039905 = score(doc=4217,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 4217, 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=4217)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

22. 1.2018 11:32:44