Search (192 results, page 1 of 10)

  • × theme_ss:"Automatisches Klassifizieren"
  1. Hotho, A.; Bloehdorn, S.: Data Mining 2004 : Text classification by boosting weak learners based on terms and concepts (2004) 0.38 
    0.37924933 = product of:
  0.5056658 = sum of:
    0.06558679 = product of:
      0.19676036 = sum of:
        0.19676036 = weight(_text_:3a in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.19676036 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.35009617 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 562, 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=562)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.19676036 = weight(_text_:2f in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.19676036 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.35009617 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 562, 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=562)
    0.014968331 = weight(_text_:of in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014968331 = score(doc=562,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.23179851 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
    0.19676036 = weight(_text_:2f in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.19676036 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.35009617 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 562, 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=562)
    0.014805362 = product of:
      0.029610723 = sum of:
        0.029610723 = weight(_text_:on in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029610723 = score(doc=562,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.32602316 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.016784549 = product of:
      0.033569098 = sum of:
        0.033569098 = weight(_text_:22 in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033569098 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 562, 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=562)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(6/8)
    Abstract
    Document representations for text classification are typically based on the classical Bag-Of-Words paradigm. This approach comes with deficiencies that motivate the integration of features on a higher semantic level than single words. In this paper we propose an enhancement of the classical document representation through concepts extracted from background knowledge. Boosting is used for actual classification. Experimental evaluations on two well known text corpora support our approach through consistent improvement of the results.
    Content
    Vgl.: http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CEAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fciteseerx.ist.psu.edu%2Fviewdoc%2Fdownload%3Fdoi%3D10.1.1.91.4940%26rep%3Drep1%26type%3Dpdf&ei=dOXrUMeIDYHDtQahsIGACg&usg=AFQjCNHFWVh6gNPvnOrOS9R3rkrXCNVD-A&sig2=5I2F5evRfMnsttSgFF9g7Q&bvm=bv.1357316858,d.Yms.
    Date
    8. 1.2013 10:22:32
    Source
    Proceedings of the 4th IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM 2004), 1-4 November 2004, Brighton, UK
  2. Losee, R.M.; Haas, S.W.: Sublanguage terms : dictionaries, usage, and automatic classification (1995) 0.06 
    0.058700606 = product of:
  0.11740121 = sum of:
    0.033397563 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033397563 = score(doc=2650,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 2650, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2650)
    0.048399284 = weight(_text_:use in 2650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.048399284 = score(doc=2650,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.3827611 = fieldWeight in 2650, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2650)
    0.026776161 = weight(_text_:of in 2650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026776161 = score(doc=2650,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.41465375 = fieldWeight in 2650, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2650)
    0.008828212 = product of:
      0.017656423 = sum of:
        0.017656423 = weight(_text_:on in 2650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017656423 = score(doc=2650,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.19440265 = fieldWeight in 2650, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2650)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)
    Abstract
    The use of terms from natural and social science titles and abstracts is studied from the perspective of sublanguages and their specialized dictionaries. Explores different notions of sublanguage distinctiveness. Object methods for separating hard and soft sciences are suggested based on measures of sublanguage use, dictionary characteristics, and sublanguage distinctiveness. Abstracts were automatically classified with a high degree of accuracy by using a formula that condsiders the degree of uniqueness of terms in each sublanguage. This may prove useful for text filtering of information retrieval systems
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 46(1995) no.7, S.519-529
  3. Dolin, R.; Agrawal, D.; El Abbadi, A.; Pearlman, J.: Using automated classification for summarizing and selecting heterogeneous information sources (1998) 0.05 
    0.053835314 = product of:
  0.10767063 = sum of:
    0.035423465 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 316) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.035423465 = score(doc=316,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.2835858 = fieldWeight in 316, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=316)
    0.044457585 = weight(_text_:use in 316) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044457585 = score(doc=316,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.35158852 = fieldWeight in 316, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=316)
    0.021168415 = weight(_text_:of in 316) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021168415 = score(doc=316,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.32781258 = fieldWeight in 316, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=316)
    0.006621159 = product of:
      0.013242318 = sum of:
        0.013242318 = weight(_text_:on in 316) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013242318 = score(doc=316,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.14580199 = fieldWeight in 316, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=316)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)
    Abstract
    Information retrieval over the Internet increasingly requires the filtering of thousands of heterogeneous information sources. Important sources of information include not only traditional databases with structured data and queries, but also increasing numbers of non-traditional, semi- or unstructured collections such as Web sites, FTP archives, etc. As the number and variability of sources increases, new ways of automatically summarizing, discovering, and selecting collections relevant to a user's query are needed. One such method involves the use of classification schemes, such as the Library of Congress Classification (LCC) [10], within which a collection may be represented based on its content, irrespective of the structure of the actual data or documents. For such a system to be useful in a large-scale distributed environment, it must be easy to use for both collection managers and users. As a result, it must be possible to classify documents automatically within a classification scheme. Furthermore, there must be a straightforward and intuitive interface with which the user may use the scheme to assist in information retrieval (IR).
  4. Huang, Y.-L.: ¬A theoretic and empirical research of cluster indexing for Mandarine Chinese full text document (1998) 0.05 
    0.051363036 = product of:
  0.10272607 = sum of:
    0.029222867 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 513) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029222867 = score(doc=513,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 513, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=513)
    0.042349376 = weight(_text_:use in 513) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042349376 = score(doc=513,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.33491597 = fieldWeight in 513, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=513)
    0.02342914 = weight(_text_:of in 513) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02342914 = score(doc=513,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.36282203 = fieldWeight in 513, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=513)
    0.007724685 = product of:
      0.01544937 = sum of:
        0.01544937 = weight(_text_:on in 513) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01544937 = score(doc=513,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.17010231 = fieldWeight in 513, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=513)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)
    Abstract
    Since most popular commercialized systems for full text retrieval are designed with full text scaning and Boolean logic query mode, these systems use an oversimplified relationship between the indexing form and the content of document. Reports the use of Singular Value Decomposition (SVD) to develop a Cluster Indexing Model (CIM) based on a Vector Space Model (VSM) in orer to explore the index theory of cluster indexing for chinese full text documents. From a series of experiments, it was found that the indexing performance of CIM is better than traditional VSM, and has almost equivalent effectiveness of the authority control of index terms
    Source
    Bulletin of library and information science. 1998, no.24, S.44-68
  5. Cui, H.; Heidorn, P.B.; Zhang, H.: ¬An approach to automatic classification of text for information retrieval (2002) 0.05 
    0.04823032 = product of:
  0.09646064 = sum of:
    0.041327372 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 174) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041327372 = score(doc=174,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.33085006 = fieldWeight in 174, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=174)
    0.029945528 = weight(_text_:use in 174) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029945528 = score(doc=174,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.23682132 = fieldWeight in 174, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=174)
    0.017463053 = weight(_text_:of in 174) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017463053 = score(doc=174,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.2704316 = fieldWeight in 174, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=174)
    0.007724685 = product of:
      0.01544937 = sum of:
        0.01544937 = weight(_text_:on in 174) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01544937 = score(doc=174,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.17010231 = fieldWeight in 174, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=174)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)
    Abstract
    In this paper, we explore an approach to make better use of semi-structured documents in information retrieval in the domain of biology. Using machine learning techniques, we make those inherent structures explicit by XML markups. This marking up has great potentials in improving task performance in specimen identification and the usability of online flora and fauna.
    Source
    Proceedings of the Second ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries : JCDL 2002 ; July 14 - 18, 2002, Portland, Oregon, USA. Ed. by Gary Marchionini
  6. Adamson, G.W.; Boreham, J.: ¬The use of an association measure based on character structure to identify semantically related pairs of words and document titles (1974) 0.05 
    0.047997322 = product of:
  0.095994644 = sum of:
    0.029222867 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 398) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029222867 = score(doc=398,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 398, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=398)
    0.029945528 = weight(_text_:use in 398) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029945528 = score(doc=398,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.23682132 = fieldWeight in 398, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=398)
    0.025901893 = weight(_text_:of in 398) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025901893 = score(doc=398,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.40111488 = fieldWeight in 398, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=398)
    0.010924355 = product of:
      0.02184871 = sum of:
        0.02184871 = weight(_text_:on in 398) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02184871 = score(doc=398,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.24056101 = fieldWeight in 398, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=398)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)
    Abstract
    An automatic classification technique has been developed, based on the character structure of words. Dice's similarity coefficient is computed from the number of matching diagrams in pairs of character strings, and used to cluster sets of character strings. A sample of words from a chemical data base was chosen to contain certain stems derived from the names of chemical elements. They were successfully clusterd into groups of semantically related words. Each cluster is characterised by the root word from which all its members are derived. A second example of titles from Mathematical Reviews was clustered into well-defined classes, which compare favourably with the subject groupings of Mathematical Reviews
    Source
    Information storage and retrieval. 10(1974), S.253-260
  7. Mengle, S.; Goharian, N.: Passage detection using text classification (2009) 0.04 
    0.043146178 = product of:
  0.086292356 = sum of:
    0.046674512 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2765) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.046674512 = score(doc=2765,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.37365708 = fieldWeight in 2765, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2765)
    0.02011309 = weight(_text_:of in 2765) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02011309 = score(doc=2765,freq=26.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.31146988 = fieldWeight in 2765, product of:
          5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
            26.0 = termFreq=26.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2765)
    0.0055176322 = product of:
      0.0110352645 = sum of:
        0.0110352645 = weight(_text_:on in 2765) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0110352645 = score(doc=2765,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 2765, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2765)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.013987125 = product of:
      0.02797425 = sum of:
        0.02797425 = weight(_text_:22 in 2765) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02797425 = score(doc=2765,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2765, 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=2765)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)
    Abstract
    Passages can be hidden within a text to circumvent their disallowed transfer. Such release of compartmentalized information is of concern to all corporate and governmental organizations. Passage retrieval is well studied; we posit, however, that passage detection is not. Passage retrieval is the determination of the degree of relevance of blocks of text, namely passages, comprising a document. Rather than determining the relevance of a document in its entirety, passage retrieval determines the relevance of the individual passages. As such, modified traditional information-retrieval techniques compare terms found in user queries with the individual passages to determine a similarity score for passages of interest. In passage detection, passages are classified into predetermined categories. More often than not, passage detection techniques are deployed to detect hidden paragraphs in documents. That is, to hide information, documents are injected with hidden text into passages. Rather than matching query terms against passages to determine their relevance, using text-mining techniques, the passages are classified. Those documents with hidden passages are defined as infected. Thus, simply stated, passage retrieval is the search for passages relevant to a user query, while passage detection is the classification of passages. That is, in passage detection, passages are labeled with one or more categories from a set of predetermined categories. We present a keyword-based dynamic passage approach (KDP) and demonstrate that KDP outperforms statistically significantly (99% confidence) the other document-splitting approaches by 12% to 18% in the passage detection and passage category-prediction tasks. Furthermore, we evaluate the effects of the feature selection, passage length, ambiguous passages, and finally training-data category distribution on passage-detection accuracy.
    Date
    22. 3.2009 19:14:43
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.4, S.814-825
  8. AlQenaei, Z.M.; Monarchi, D.E.: ¬The use of learning techniques to analyze the results of a manual classification system (2016) 0.04 
    0.04307954 = product of:
  0.08615908 = sum of:
    0.029519552 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2836) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029519552 = score(doc=2836,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 2836, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2836)
    0.030249555 = weight(_text_:use in 2836) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030249555 = score(doc=2836,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.23922569 = fieldWeight in 2836, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2836)
    0.02087234 = weight(_text_:of in 2836) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02087234 = score(doc=2836,freq=28.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.32322758 = fieldWeight in 2836, product of:
          5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
            28.0 = termFreq=28.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2836)
    0.0055176322 = product of:
      0.0110352645 = sum of:
        0.0110352645 = weight(_text_:on in 2836) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0110352645 = score(doc=2836,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 2836, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2836)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)
    Abstract
    Classification is the process of assigning objects to pre-defined classes based on observations or characteristics of those objects, and there are many approaches to performing this task. The overall objective of this study is to demonstrate the use of two learning techniques to analyze the results of a manual classification system. Our sample consisted of 1,026 documents, from the ACM Computing Classification System, classified by their authors as belonging to one of the groups of the classification system: "H.3 Information Storage and Retrieval." A singular value decomposition of the documents' weighted term-frequency matrix was used to represent each document in a 50-dimensional vector space. The analysis of the representation using both supervised (decision tree) and unsupervised (clustering) techniques suggests that two pairs of the ACM classes are closely related to each other in the vector space. Class 1 (Content Analysis and Indexing) is closely related to Class 3 (Information Search and Retrieval), and Class 4 (Systems and Software) is closely related to Class 5 (Online Information Services). Further analysis was performed to test the diffusion of the words in the two classes using both cosine and Euclidean distance.
  9. Golub, K.; Soergel, D.; Buchanan, G.; Tudhope, D.; Lykke, M.; Hiom, D.: ¬A framework for evaluating automatic indexing or classification in the context of retrieval (2016) 0.04 
    0.039419614 = product of:
  0.07883923 = sum of:
    0.036153924 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3311) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.036153924 = score(doc=3311,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.28943354 = fieldWeight in 3311, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3311)
    0.021389665 = weight(_text_:use in 3311) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021389665 = score(doc=3311,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.1691581 = fieldWeight in 3311, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3311)
    0.015778005 = weight(_text_:of in 3311) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015778005 = score(doc=3311,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.24433708 = fieldWeight in 3311, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3311)
    0.0055176322 = product of:
      0.0110352645 = sum of:
        0.0110352645 = weight(_text_:on in 3311) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0110352645 = score(doc=3311,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 3311, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3311)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)
    Abstract
    Tools for automatic subject assignment help deal with scale and sustainability in creating and enriching metadata, establishing more connections across and between resources and enhancing consistency. Although some software vendors and experimental researchers claim the tools can replace manual subject indexing, hard scientific evidence of their performance in operating information environments is scarce. A major reason for this is that research is usually conducted in laboratory conditions, excluding the complexities of real-life systems and situations. The article reviews and discusses issues with existing evaluation approaches such as problems of aboutness and relevance assessments, implying the need to use more than a single "gold standard" method when evaluating indexing and retrieval, and proposes a comprehensive evaluation framework. The framework is informed by a systematic review of the literature on evaluation approaches: evaluating indexing quality directly through assessment by an evaluator or through comparison with a gold standard, evaluating the quality of computer-assisted indexing directly in the context of an indexing workflow, and evaluating indexing quality indirectly through analyzing retrieval performance.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.1, S.3-16
  10. Dolin, R.; Agrawal, D.; El Abbadi, A.; Pearlman, J.: Using automated classification for summarizing and selecting heterogeneous information sources (1998) 0.04 
    0.038422056 = product of:
  0.07684411 = sum of:
    0.017711733 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1253) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017711733 = score(doc=1253,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.1417929 = fieldWeight in 1253, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1253)
    0.031436257 = weight(_text_:use in 1253) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031436257 = score(doc=1253,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.24861062 = fieldWeight in 1253, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1253)
    0.018332386 = weight(_text_:of in 1253) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018332386 = score(doc=1253,freq=60.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.28389403 = fieldWeight in 1253, product of:
          7.745967 = tf(freq=60.0), with freq of:
            60.0 = termFreq=60.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1253)
    0.009363732 = product of:
      0.018727465 = sum of:
        0.018727465 = weight(_text_:on in 1253) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018727465 = score(doc=1253,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.20619515 = fieldWeight in 1253, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1253)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)
    Abstract
    Information retrieval over the Internet increasingly requires the filtering of thousands of heterogeneous information sources. Important sources of information include not only traditional databases with structured data and queries, but also increasing numbers of non-traditional, semi- or unstructured collections such as Web sites, FTP archives, etc. As the number and variability of sources increases, new ways of automatically summarizing, discovering, and selecting collections relevant to a user's query are needed. One such method involves the use of classification schemes, such as the Library of Congress Classification (LCC), within which a collection may be represented based on its content, irrespective of the structure of the actual data or documents. For such a system to be useful in a large-scale distributed environment, it must be easy to use for both collection managers and users. As a result, it must be possible to classify documents automatically within a classification scheme. Furthermore, there must be a straightforward and intuitive interface with which the user may use the scheme to assist in information retrieval (IR). Our work with the Alexandria Digital Library (ADL) Project focuses on geo-referenced information, whether text, maps, aerial photographs, or satellite images. As a result, we have emphasized techniques which work with both text and non-text, such as combined textual and graphical queries, multi-dimensional indexing, and IR methods which are not solely dependent on words or phrases. Part of this work involves locating relevant online sources of information. In particular, we have designed and are currently testing aspects of an architecture, Pharos, which we believe will scale up to 1.000.000 heterogeneous sources. Pharos accommodates heterogeneity in content and format, both among multiple sources as well as within a single source. That is, we consider sources to include Web sites, FTP archives, newsgroups, and full digital libraries; all of these systems can include a wide variety of content and multimedia data formats. Pharos is based on the use of hierarchical classification schemes. These include not only well-known 'subject' (or 'concept') based schemes such as the Dewey Decimal System and the LCC, but also, for example, geographic classifications, which might be constructed as layers of smaller and smaller hierarchical longitude/latitude boxes. Pharos is designed to work with sophisticated queries which utilize subjects, geographical locations, temporal specifications, and other types of information domains. The Pharos architecture requires that hierarchically structured collection metadata be extracted so that it can be partitioned in such a way as to greatly enhance scalability. Automated classification is important to Pharos because it allows information sources to extract the requisite collection metadata automatically that must be distributed.
    We are currently experimenting with newsgroups as collections. We have built an initial prototype which automatically classifies and summarizes newsgroups within the LCC. (The prototype can be tested below, and more details may be found at http://pharos.alexandria.ucsb.edu/). The prototype uses electronic library catalog records as a `training set' and Latent Semantic Indexing (LSI) for IR. We use the training set to build a rich set of classification terminology, and associate these terms with the relevant categories in the LCC. This association between terms and classification categories allows us to relate users' queries to nodes in the LCC so that users can select appropriate query categories. Newsgroups are similarly associated with classification categories. Pharos then matches the categories selected by users to relevant newsgroups. In principle, this approach allows users to exclude newsgroups that might have been selected based on an unintended meaning of a query term, and to include newsgroups with relevant content even though the exact query terms may not have been used. This work is extensible to other types of classification, including geographical, temporal, and image feature. Before discussing the methodology of the collection summarization and selection, we first present an online demonstration below. The demonstration is not intended to be a complete end-user interface. Rather, it is intended merely to offer a view of the process to suggest the "look and feel" of the prototype. The demo works as follows. First supply it with a few keywords of interest. The system will then use those terms to try to return to you the most relevant subject categories within the LCC. Assuming that the system recognizes any of your terms (it has over 400,000 terms indexed), it will give you a list of 15 LCC categories sorted by relevancy ranking. From there, you have two choices. The first choice, by clicking on the "News" links, is to get a list of newsgroups which the system has identified as relevant to the LCC category you select. The other choice, by clicking on the LCC ID links, is to enter the LCC hierarchy starting at the category of your choice and navigate the tree until you locate the best category for your query. From there, again, you can get a list of newsgroups by clicking on the "News" links. After having shown this demonstration to many people, we would like to suggest that you first give it easier examples before trying to break it. For example, "prostate cancer" (discussed below), "remote sensing", "investment banking", and "gershwin" all work reasonably well.
  11. Yoon, Y.; Lee, C.; Lee, G.G.: ¬An effective procedure for constructing a hierarchical text classification system (2006) 0.04 
    0.03735762 = product of:
  0.07471524 = sum of:
    0.029945528 = weight(_text_:use in 5273) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029945528 = score(doc=5273,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.23682132 = fieldWeight in 5273, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5273)
    0.017463053 = weight(_text_:of in 5273) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017463053 = score(doc=5273,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.2704316 = fieldWeight in 5273, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5273)
    0.007724685 = product of:
      0.01544937 = sum of:
        0.01544937 = weight(_text_:on in 5273) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01544937 = score(doc=5273,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.17010231 = fieldWeight in 5273, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5273)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.019581974 = product of:
      0.039163947 = sum of:
        0.039163947 = weight(_text_:22 in 5273) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039163947 = score(doc=5273,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5273, 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=5273)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)
    Abstract
    In text categorization tasks, classification on some class hierarchies has better results than in cases without the hierarchy. Currently, because a large number of documents are divided into several subgroups in a hierarchy, we can appropriately use a hierarchical classification method. However, we have no systematic method to build a hierarchical classification system that performs well with large collections of practical data. In this article, we introduce a new evaluation scheme for internal node classifiers, which can be used effectively to develop a hierarchical classification system. We also show that our method for constructing the hierarchical classification system is very effective, especially for the task of constructing classifiers applied to hierarchy tree with a lot of levels.
    Date
    22. 7.2006 16:24:52
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.3, S.431-442
  12. Golub, K.; Lykke, M.: Automated classification of web pages in hierarchical browsing (2009) 0.04 
    0.035572 = product of:
  0.071144 = sum of:
    0.020873476 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3614) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020873476 = score(doc=3614,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 3614, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3614)
    0.021389665 = weight(_text_:use in 3614) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021389665 = score(doc=3614,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.1691581 = fieldWeight in 3614, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3614)
    0.019324033 = weight(_text_:of in 3614) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019324033 = score(doc=3614,freq=24.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.2992506 = fieldWeight in 3614, product of:
          4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
            24.0 = termFreq=24.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3614)
    0.00955682 = product of:
      0.01911364 = sum of:
        0.01911364 = weight(_text_:on in 3614) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01911364 = score(doc=3614,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.21044704 = fieldWeight in 3614, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3614)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this study is twofold: to investigate whether it is meaningful to use the Engineering Index (Ei) classification scheme for browsing, and then, if proven useful, to investigate the performance of an automated classification algorithm based on the Ei classification scheme. Design/methodology/approach - A user study was conducted in which users solved four controlled searching tasks. The users browsed the Ei classification scheme in order to examine the suitability of the classification systems for browsing. The classification algorithm was evaluated by the users who judged the correctness of the automatically assigned classes. Findings - The study showed that the Ei classification scheme is suited for browsing. Automatically assigned classes were on average partly correct, with some classes working better than others. Success of browsing showed to be correlated and dependent on classification correctness. Research limitations/implications - Further research should address problems of disparate evaluations of one and the same web page. Additional reasons behind browsing failures in the Ei classification scheme also need further investigation. Practical implications - Improvements for browsing were identified: describing class captions and/or listing their subclasses from start; allowing for searching for words from class captions with synonym search (easily provided for Ei since the classes are mapped to thesauri terms); when searching for class captions, returning the hierarchical tree expanded around the class in which caption the search term is found. The need for improvements of classification schemes was also indicated. Originality/value - A user-based evaluation of automated subject classification in the context of browsing has not been conducted before; hence the study also presents new findings concerning methodology.
    Source
    Journal of documentation. 65(2009) no.6, S.901-925
    Theme
    Klassifikationssysteme im Online-Retrieval
  13. Godby, C. J.; Stuler, J.: ¬The Library of Congress Classification as a knowledge base for automatic subject categorization (2001) 0.03 
    0.032842048 = product of:
  0.087578796 = sum of:
    0.033397563 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1567) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033397563 = score(doc=1567,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 1567, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1567)
    0.03422346 = weight(_text_:use in 1567) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03422346 = score(doc=1567,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.27065295 = fieldWeight in 1567, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1567)
    0.019957775 = weight(_text_:of in 1567) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019957775 = score(doc=1567,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.3090647 = fieldWeight in 1567, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1567)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)
    Abstract
    This paper describes a set of experiments in adapting a subset of the Library of Congress Classification for use as a database for automatic classification. A high degree of concept integrity was obtained when subject headings were mapped from OCLC's WorldCat database and filtered using the log-likelihood statistic
    Footnote
    Paper, IFLA Preconference "Subject Retrieval in a Networked Environment", Dublin, OH, August 2001.
  14. Yilmaz, T.; Ozcan, R.; Altingovde, I.S.; Ulusoy, Ö.: Improving educational web search for question-like queries through subject classification (2019) 0.03 
    0.032742057 = product of:
  0.065484114 = sum of:
    0.020873476 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5041) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020873476 = score(doc=5041,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 5041, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5041)
    0.021389665 = weight(_text_:use in 5041) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021389665 = score(doc=5041,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.1691581 = fieldWeight in 5041, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5041)
    0.013664153 = weight(_text_:of in 5041) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013664153 = score(doc=5041,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.21160212 = fieldWeight in 5041, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5041)
    0.00955682 = product of:
      0.01911364 = sum of:
        0.01911364 = weight(_text_:on in 5041) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01911364 = score(doc=5041,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.21044704 = fieldWeight in 5041, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5041)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)
    Abstract
    Students use general web search engines as their primary source of research while trying to find answers to school-related questions. Although search engines are highly relevant for the general population, they may return results that are out of educational context. Another rising trend; social community question answering websites are the second choice for students who try to get answers from other peers online. We attempt discovering possible improvements in educational search by leveraging both of these information sources. For this purpose, we first implement a classifier for educational questions. This classifier is built by an ensemble method that employs several regular learning algorithms and retrieval based approaches that utilize external resources. We also build a query expander to facilitate classification. We further improve the classification using search engine results and obtain 83.5% accuracy. Although our work is entirely based on the Turkish language, the features could easily be mapped to other languages as well. In order to find out whether search engine ranking can be improved in the education domain using the classification model, we collect and label a set of query results retrieved from a general web search engine. We propose five ad-hoc methods to improve search ranking based on the idea that the query-document category relation is an indicator of relevance. We evaluate these methods for overall performance, varying query length and based on factoid and non-factoid queries. We show that some of the methods significantly improve the rankings in the education domain.
  15. Guerrero-Bote, V.P.; Moya Anegón, F. de; Herrero Solana, V.: Document organization using Kohonen's algorithm (2002) 0.03 
    0.031860404 = product of:
  0.08496107 = sum of:
    0.047231287 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2564) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.047231287 = score(doc=2564,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.37811437 = fieldWeight in 2564, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2564)
    0.025244808 = weight(_text_:of in 2564) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025244808 = score(doc=2564,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.39093933 = fieldWeight in 2564, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2564)
    0.012484977 = product of:
      0.024969954 = sum of:
        0.024969954 = weight(_text_:on in 2564) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024969954 = score(doc=2564,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.27492687 = fieldWeight in 2564, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2564)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)
    Abstract
    The classification of documents from a bibliographic database is a task that is linked to processes of information retrieval based on partial matching. A method is described of vectorizing reference documents from LISA which permits their topological organization using Kohonen's algorithm. As an example a map is generated of 202 documents from LISA, and an analysis is made of the possibilities of this type of neural network with respect to the development of information retrieval systems based on graphical browsing.
  16. Sebastiani, F.: ¬A tutorial an automated text categorisation (1999) 0.03 
    0.030937199 = product of:
  0.123748794 = sum of:
    0.018933605 = weight(_text_:of in 3390) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018933605 = score(doc=3390,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.2932045 = fieldWeight in 3390, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3390)
    0.10481519 = sum of:
      0.018727465 = weight(_text_:on in 3390) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.018727465 = score(doc=3390,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
            0.041294612 = queryNorm
          0.20619515 = fieldWeight in 3390, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3390)
      0.086087726 = weight(_text_:line in 3390) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.086087726 = score(doc=3390,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.23157367 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
            0.041294612 = queryNorm
          0.37175092 = fieldWeight in 3390, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3390)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    The automated categorisation (or classification) of texts into topical categories has a long history, dating back at least to 1960. Until the late '80s, the dominant approach to the problem involved knowledge-engineering automatic categorisers, i.e. manually building a set of rules encoding expert knowledge an how to classify documents. In the '90s, with the booming production and availability of on-line documents, automated text categorisation has witnessed an increased and renewed interest. A newer paradigm based an machine learning has superseded the previous approach. Within this paradigm, a general inductive process automatically builds a classifier by "learning", from a set of previously classified documents, the characteristics of one or more categories; the advantages are a very good effectiveness, a considerable savings in terms of expert manpower, and domain independence. In this tutorial we look at the main approaches that have been taken towards automatic text categorisation within the general machine learning paradigm. Issues of document indexing, classifier construction, and classifier evaluation, will be touched upon.
    Content
    Aus: Proceedings of THAI-99, European Symposium on Telematics, Hypermedia and Artificial Intelligence
  17. Liu, R.-L.: ¬A passage extractor for classification of disease aspect information (2013) 0.03 
    0.030152028 = product of:
  0.060304057 = sum of:
    0.020873476 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020873476 = score(doc=1107,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 1107, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1107)
    0.017640345 = weight(_text_:of in 1107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017640345 = score(doc=1107,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.27317715 = fieldWeight in 1107, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1107)
    0.007803111 = product of:
      0.015606222 = sum of:
        0.015606222 = weight(_text_:on in 1107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015606222 = score(doc=1107,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 1107, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1107)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.013987125 = product of:
      0.02797425 = sum of:
        0.02797425 = weight(_text_:22 in 1107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02797425 = score(doc=1107,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1107, 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=1107)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)
    Abstract
    Retrieval of disease information is often based on several key aspects such as etiology, diagnosis, treatment, prevention, and symptoms of diseases. Automatic identification of disease aspect information is thus essential. In this article, I model the aspect identification problem as a text classification (TC) problem in which a disease aspect corresponds to a category. The disease aspect classification problem poses two challenges to classifiers: (a) a medical text often contains information about multiple aspects of a disease and hence produces noise for the classifiers and (b) text classifiers often cannot extract the textual parts (i.e., passages) about the categories of interest. I thus develop a technique, PETC (Passage Extractor for Text Classification), that extracts passages (from medical texts) for the underlying text classifiers to classify. Case studies on thousands of Chinese and English medical texts show that PETC enhances a support vector machine (SVM) classifier in classifying disease aspect information. PETC also performs better than three state-of-the-art classifier enhancement techniques, including two passage extraction techniques for text classifiers and a technique that employs term proximity information to enhance text classifiers. The contribution is of significance to evidence-based medicine, health education, and healthcare decision support. PETC can be used in those application domains in which a text to be classified may have several parts about different categories.
    Date
    28.10.2013 19:22:57
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.11, S.2265-2277
  18. Godby, C.J.; Stuler, J.: ¬The Library of Congress Classification as a knowledge base for automatic subject categorization : subject access issues (2003) 0.03 
    0.02936183 = product of:
  0.07829821 = sum of:
    0.029222867 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029222867 = score(doc=3962,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 3962, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3962)
    0.029945528 = weight(_text_:use in 3962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029945528 = score(doc=3962,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.23682132 = fieldWeight in 3962, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3962)
    0.019129815 = weight(_text_:of in 3962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019129815 = score(doc=3962,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.29624295 = fieldWeight in 3962, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3962)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)
    Abstract
    This paper describes a set of experiments in adapting a subset of the Library of Congress Classification for use as a database for automatic classification. A high degree of concept integrity was obtained when subject headings were mapped from OCLC's WorldCat database and filtered using the log-likelihood statistic.
    Source
    Subject retrieval in a networked environment: Proceedings of the IFLA Satellite Meeting held in Dublin, OH, 14-16 August 2001 and sponsored by the IFLA Classification and Indexing Section, the IFLA Information Technology Section and OCLC. Ed.: I.C. McIlwaine
  19. Koch, T.; Ardö, A.; Brümmer, A.: ¬The building and maintenance of robot based internet search services : A review of current indexing and data collection methods. Prepared to meet the requirements of Work Package 3 of EU Telematics for Research, project DESIRE. Version D3.11v0.3 (Draft version 3) (1996) 0.03 
    0.027802408 = product of:
  0.07413975 = sum of:
    0.04418082 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1669) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04418082 = score(doc=1669,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.3536936 = fieldWeight in 1669, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1669)
    0.02231347 = weight(_text_:of in 1669) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02231347 = score(doc=1669,freq=50.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.34554482 = fieldWeight in 1669, product of:
          7.071068 = tf(freq=50.0), with freq of:
            50.0 = termFreq=50.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1669)
    0.007645456 = product of:
      0.015290912 = sum of:
        0.015290912 = weight(_text_:on in 1669) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015290912 = score(doc=1669,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.16835764 = fieldWeight in 1669, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1669)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)
    Abstract
    After a short outline of problems, possibilities and difficulties of systematic information retrieval on the Internet and a description of efforts for development in this area, a specification of the terminology for this report is required. Although the process of retrieval is generally seen as an iterative process of browsing and information retrieval and several important services on the net have taken this fact into consideration, the emphasis of this report lays on the general retrieval tools for the whole of Internet. In order to be able to evaluate the differences, possibilities and restrictions of the different services it is necessary to begin with organizing the existing varieties in a typological/ taxonomical survey. The possibilities and weaknesses will be briefly compared and described for the most important services in the categories robot-based WWW-catalogues of different types, list- or form-based catalogues and simultaneous or collected search services respectively. It will however for different reasons not be possible to rank them in order of "best" services. Still more important are the weaknesses and problems common for all attempts of indexing the Internet. The problems of the quality of the input, the technical performance and the general problem of indexing virtual hypertext are shown to be at least as difficult as the different aspects of harvesting, indexing and information retrieval. Some of the attempts made in the area of further development of retrieval services will be mentioned in relation to descriptions of the contents of documents and standardization efforts. Internet harvesting and indexing technology and retrieval software is thoroughly reviewed. Details about all services and software are listed in analytical forms in Annex 1-3.
  20. Gauch, S.; Chandramouli, A.; Ranganathan, S.: Training a hierarchical classifier using inter document relationships (2009) 0.03 
    0.027092684 = product of:
  0.072247155 = sum of:
    0.044457585 = weight(_text_:use in 2697) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044457585 = score(doc=2697,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.35158852 = fieldWeight in 2697, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2697)
    0.021168415 = weight(_text_:of in 2697) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021168415 = score(doc=2697,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.32781258 = fieldWeight in 2697, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2697)
    0.006621159 = product of:
      0.013242318 = sum of:
        0.013242318 = weight(_text_:on in 2697) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013242318 = score(doc=2697,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.14580199 = fieldWeight in 2697, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2697)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)
    Abstract
    Text classifiers automatically classify documents into appropriate concepts for different applications. Most classification approaches use flat classifiers that treat each concept as independent, even when the concept space is hierarchically structured. In contrast, hierarchical text classification exploits the structural relationships between the concepts. In this article, we explore the effectiveness of hierarchical classification for a large concept hierarchy. Since the quality of the classification is dependent on the quality and quantity of the training data, we evaluate the use of documents selected from subconcepts to address the sparseness of training data for the top-level classifiers and the use of document relationships to identify the most representative training documents. By selecting training documents using structural and similarity relationships, we achieve a statistically significant improvement of 39.8% (from 54.5-76.2%) in the accuracy of the hierarchical classifier over that of the flat classifier for a large, three-level concept hierarchy.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.1, S.47-58

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 167
  • d 23
  • a 1
  • chi 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 160
  • el 29
  • x 5
  • m 4
  • r 2
  • s 2
  • d 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects