-
Byrne, C.C.; McCracken, S.A.: ¬An adaptive thesaurus employing semantic distance, relational inheritance and nominal compound interpretation for linguistic support of information retrieval (1999)
0.04
0.03847464 = product of:
0.10259905 = sum of:
0.050096344 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4483) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050096344 = score(doc=4483,freq=2.0), product of:
0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.40105087 = fieldWeight in 4483, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4483)
0.018933605 = weight(_text_:of in 4483) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018933605 = score(doc=4483,freq=4.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.2932045 = fieldWeight in 4483, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4483)
0.033569098 = product of:
0.067138195 = sum of:
0.067138195 = weight(_text_:22 in 4483) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.067138195 = score(doc=4483,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 4483, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4483)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.375 = coord(3/8)
- Date
- 15. 3.2000 10:22:37
- Source
- Journal of information science. 25(1999) no.2, S.113-131
-
Amirhosseini, M.; Avidan, G.: ¬A dialectic perspective on the evolution of thesauri and ontologies (2021)
0.04
0.038067754 = product of:
0.07613551 = sum of:
0.020873476 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 592) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020873476 = score(doc=592,freq=2.0), product of:
0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 592, 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=592)
0.021389665 = weight(_text_:use in 592) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021389665 = score(doc=592,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.1691581 = fieldWeight in 592, 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=592)
0.02431554 = weight(_text_:of in 592) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02431554 = score(doc=592,freq=38.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.37654874 = fieldWeight in 592, product of:
6.164414 = tf(freq=38.0), with freq of:
38.0 = termFreq=38.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=592)
0.00955682 = product of:
0.01911364 = sum of:
0.01911364 = weight(_text_:on in 592) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01911364 = score(doc=592,freq=6.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.21044704 = fieldWeight in 592, 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=592)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(4/8)
- Abstract
- The purpose of this article is to identify the most important factors and features in the evolution of thesauri and ontologies through a dialectic model. This model relies on a dialectic process or idea which could be discovered via a dialectic method. This method has focused on identifying the logical relationship between a beginning proposition, or an idea called a thesis, a negation of that idea called the antithesis, and the result of the conflict between the two ideas, called a synthesis. During the creation of knowledge organization systems (KOSs), the identification of logical relations between different ideas has been made possible through the consideration and use of the most influential methods and tools such as dictionaries, Roget's Thesaurus, thesaurus, micro-, macro- and metathesauri, ontology, lower, middle and upper level ontologies. The analysis process has adapted a historical methodology, more specifically a dialectic method and documentary method as the reasoning process. This supports our arguments and synthesizes a method for the analysis of research results. Confirmed by the research results, the principle of unity has shown to be the most important factor in the development and evolution of the structure of knowledge organization systems and their types. There are various types of unity when considering the analysis of logical relations. These include the principle of unity of alphabetical order, unity of science, semantic unity, structural unity and conceptual unity. The results have clearly demonstrated a movement from plurality to unity in the assembling of the complex structure of knowledge organization systems to increase information and knowledge storage and retrieval performance.
-
Maniez, J.: ¬Des classifications aux thesaurus : du bon usage des facettes (1999)
0.04
0.03685964 = product of:
0.09829237 = sum of:
0.051335193 = weight(_text_:use in 6404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.051335193 = score(doc=6404,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.40597942 = fieldWeight in 6404, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6404)
0.013388081 = weight(_text_:of in 6404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013388081 = score(doc=6404,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.20732689 = fieldWeight in 6404, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6404)
0.033569098 = product of:
0.067138195 = sum of:
0.067138195 = weight(_text_:22 in 6404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.067138195 = score(doc=6404,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6404, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6404)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.375 = coord(3/8)
- Date
- 1. 8.1996 22:01:00
- Footnote
- Übers. d. Titels: From classification to thesauri: making good use of facets
-
Maniez, J.: ¬Du bon usage des facettes : des classifications aux thésaurus (1999)
0.04
0.03685964 = product of:
0.09829237 = sum of:
0.051335193 = weight(_text_:use in 3773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.051335193 = score(doc=3773,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.40597942 = fieldWeight in 3773, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3773)
0.013388081 = weight(_text_:of in 3773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013388081 = score(doc=3773,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.20732689 = fieldWeight in 3773, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3773)
0.033569098 = product of:
0.067138195 = sum of:
0.067138195 = weight(_text_:22 in 3773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.067138195 = score(doc=3773,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3773, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3773)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.375 = coord(3/8)
- Date
- 1. 8.1996 22:01:00
- Footnote
- Übers. d. Titels: The good use of facets: from classifications to thesauri
-
White, M.: ¬The value of taxonomies, thesauri and metadata in enterprise search (2016)
0.04
0.03668788 = product of:
0.07337576 = sum of:
0.020873476 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2964) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020873476 = score(doc=2964,freq=2.0), product of:
0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 2964, 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=2964)
0.030249555 = weight(_text_:use in 2964) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030249555 = score(doc=2964,freq=4.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.23922569 = fieldWeight in 2964, 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=2964)
0.0167351 = weight(_text_:of in 2964) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0167351 = score(doc=2964,freq=18.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.25915858 = fieldWeight in 2964, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2964)
0.0055176322 = product of:
0.0110352645 = sum of:
0.0110352645 = weight(_text_:on in 2964) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0110352645 = score(doc=2964,freq=2.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 2964, 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=2964)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(4/8)
- Abstract
- Although the technical, mathematical and linguistic principles of search date back to the early 1960s and enterprise search applications have been commercially available since the 1980s; it is only since the launch of Microsoft SharePoint 2010 and the integration of the Apache Lucene and Solr projects in 2010 that there has been a wider adoption of enterprise search applications. Surveys carried out over the last five years indicate that although enterprises accept that search applications are essential in locating information, there has not been any significant investment in search teams to support these applications. Where taxonomies, thesauri and metadata have been used to improve the search user interface and enhance the search experience, the indications are that levels of search satisfaction are significantly higher. The challenges faced by search managers in developing and maintaining these tools include a lack of published research on the use of these tools and difficulty in recruiting search team members with the requisite skills and experience. There would seem to be an important and immediate opportunity to bring together the research, knowledge organization and enterprise search communities to explore how good practice in the use of taxonomies, thesauri and metadata in enterprise search can be established, enhanced and promoted.
- Content
- Beitrag in einem Special issue: The Great Debate: "This House Believes that the Traditional Thesaurus has no Place in Modern Information Retrieval." [19 February 2015, 14:00-17:30 preceded by ISKO UK AGM and followed by networking, wine and nibbles; vgl.: http://www.iskouk.org/content/great-debate].
-
Doerr, M.: Semantic problems of thesaurus mapping (2001)
0.04
0.03604816 = product of:
0.07209632 = sum of:
0.020873476 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020873476 = score(doc=5902,freq=2.0), product of:
0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 5902, 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=5902)
0.021389665 = weight(_text_:use in 5902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021389665 = score(doc=5902,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.1691581 = fieldWeight in 5902, 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=5902)
0.02431554 = weight(_text_:of in 5902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02431554 = score(doc=5902,freq=38.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.37654874 = fieldWeight in 5902, product of:
6.164414 = tf(freq=38.0), with freq of:
38.0 = termFreq=38.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5902)
0.0055176322 = product of:
0.0110352645 = sum of:
0.0110352645 = weight(_text_:on in 5902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0110352645 = score(doc=5902,freq=2.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 5902, 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=5902)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(4/8)
- Abstract
- With networked information access to heterogeneous data sources, the problem of terminology provision and interoperability of controlled vocabulary schemes such as thesauri becomes increasingly urgent. Solutions are needed to improve the performance of full-text retrieval systems and to guide the design of controlled terminology schemes for use in structured data, including metadata. Thesauri are created in different languages, with different scope and points of view and at different levels of abstraction and detail, to accomodate access to a specific group of collections. In any wider search accessing distributed collections, the user would like to start with familiar terminology and let the system find out the correspondences to other terminologies in order to retrieve equivalent results from all addressed collections. This paper investigates possible semantic differences that may hinder the unambiguous mapping and transition from one thesaurus to another. It focusses on the differences of meaning of terms and their relations as intended by their creators for indexing and querying a specific collection, in contrast to methods investigating the statistical relevance of terms for objects in a collection. It develops a notion of optimal mapping, paying particular attention to the intellectual quality of mappings between terms from different vocabularies and to problems of polysemy. Proposals are made to limit the vagueness introduced by the transition from one vocabulary to another. The paper shows ways in which thesaurus creators can improve their methodology to meet the challenges of networked access of distributed collections created under varying conditions. For system implementers, the discussion will lead to a better understanding of the complexity of the problem
- Source
- Journal of digital information. 1(2001) no.8,
-
Martín-Moncunill, D.; García-Barriocanal, E.; Sicilia, M.-A.; Sánchez-Alonso, S.: Evaluating the practical applicability of thesaurus-based keyphrase extraction in the agricultural domain : insights from the VOA3R project (2015)
0.04
0.035469376 = product of:
0.07093875 = sum of:
0.020873476 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020873476 = score(doc=2106,freq=2.0), product of:
0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 2106, 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=2106)
0.021389665 = weight(_text_:use in 2106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021389665 = score(doc=2106,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.1691581 = fieldWeight in 2106, 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=2106)
0.017640345 = weight(_text_:of in 2106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017640345 = score(doc=2106,freq=20.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.27317715 = fieldWeight in 2106, 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=2106)
0.0110352645 = product of:
0.022070529 = sum of:
0.022070529 = weight(_text_:on in 2106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022070529 = score(doc=2106,freq=8.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.24300331 = fieldWeight in 2106, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2106)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(4/8)
- Abstract
- The use of Knowledge Organization Systems (KOSs) in aggregated metadata collections facilitates the implementation of search mechanisms operating on the same term or keyphrase space, thus preparing the ground for improved browsing, more accurate retrieval and better user profiling. Automatic thesaurus-based keyphrase extraction appears to be an inexpensive tool to obtain this information, but the studies on its effectiveness are scattered and do not consider the practical applicability of these techniques compared to the quality obtained by involving human experts. This paper presents an evaluation of keyphrase extraction using the KEA software and the AGROVOC vocabulary on a sample of a large collection of metadata in the field of agriculture from the AGRIS database. This effort includes a double evaluation, the classical automatic evaluation based on precision and recall measures, plus a blind evaluation aimed to contrast the quality of the keyphrases extracted against expert-provided samples and against the keyphrases originally recorded in the metadata. Results show not only that KEA outperforms humans in matching the original keyphrases, but also that the quality of the keyphrases extracted was similar to those provided by humans.
-
Tudhope, D.; Alani, H.; Jones, C.: Augmenting thesaurus relationships : possibilities for retrieval (2001)
0.04
0.035110302 = product of:
0.09362747 = sum of:
0.046674512 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1520) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.046674512 = score(doc=1520,freq=10.0), product of:
0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.37365708 = fieldWeight in 1520, 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=1520)
0.021389665 = weight(_text_:use in 1520) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021389665 = score(doc=1520,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.1691581 = fieldWeight in 1520, 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=1520)
0.025563288 = weight(_text_:of in 1520) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025563288 = score(doc=1520,freq=42.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.39587128 = fieldWeight in 1520, product of:
6.4807405 = tf(freq=42.0), with freq of:
42.0 = termFreq=42.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1520)
0.375 = coord(3/8)
- Abstract
- This paper discusses issues concerning the augmentation of thesaurus relationships, in light of new application possibilities for retrieval. We first discuss a case study that explored the retrieval potential of an augmented set of thesaurus relationships by specialising standard relationships into richer subtypes, in particular hierarchical geographical containment and the associative relationship. We then locate this work in a broader context by reviewing various attempts to build taxonomies of thesaurus relationships, and conclude by discussing the feasibility of hierarchically augmenting the core set of thesaurus relationships, particularly the associative relationship. We discuss the possibility of enriching the specification and semantics of Related Term (RT relationships), while maintaining compatibility with traditional thesauri via a limited hierarchical extension of the associative (and hierarchical) relationships. This would be facilitated by distinguishing the type of term from the (sub)type of relationship and explicitly specifying semantic categories for terms following a faceted approach. We first illustrate how hierarchical spatial relationships can be used to provide more flexible retrieval for queries incorporating place names in applications employing online gazetteers and geographical thesauri. We then employ a set of experimental scenarios to investigate key issues affecting use of the associative (RT) thesaurus relationships in semantic distance measures. Previous work has noted the potential of RTs in thesaurus search aids but also the problem of uncontrolled expansion of query term sets. Results presented in this paper suggest the potential for taking account of the hierarchical context of an RT link and specialisations of the RT relationship
- Source
- Journal of digital information. 1(2001) no.8
- Theme
- Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
-
Assem, M. van; Malaisé, V.; Miles, A.; Schreiber, G.: ¬A method to convert thesauri to SKOS (2006)
0.03
0.03446567 = product of:
0.06893134 = sum of:
0.025048172 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4642) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025048172 = score(doc=4642,freq=2.0), product of:
0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 4642, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4642)
0.025667597 = weight(_text_:use in 4642) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025667597 = score(doc=4642,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.20298971 = fieldWeight in 4642, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4642)
0.011594418 = weight(_text_:of in 4642) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011594418 = score(doc=4642,freq=6.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.17955035 = fieldWeight in 4642, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4642)
0.006621159 = product of:
0.013242318 = sum of:
0.013242318 = weight(_text_:on in 4642) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013242318 = score(doc=4642,freq=2.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.14580199 = fieldWeight in 4642, 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=4642)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(4/8)
- Abstract
- Thesauri can be useful resources for indexing and retrieval on the Semantic Web, but often they are not published in RDF/OWL. To convert thesauri to RDF for use in Semantic Web applications and to ensure the quality and utility of the conversion a structured method is required. Moreover, if different thesauri are to be interoperable without complicated mappings, a standard schema for thesauri is required. This paper presents a method for conversion of thesauri to the SKOS RDF/OWL schema, which is a proposal for such a standard under development by W3Cs Semantic Web Best Practices Working Group. We apply the method to three thesauri: IPSV, GTAA and MeSH. With these case studies we evaluate our method and the applicability of SKOS for representing thesauri.
-
¬The Great Debate, 19 February 2015, ISKO UK (2015)
0.03
0.033400677 = product of:
0.066801354 = sum of:
0.020873476 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2105) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020873476 = score(doc=2105,freq=2.0), product of:
0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 2105, 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=2105)
0.021389665 = weight(_text_:use in 2105) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021389665 = score(doc=2105,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.1691581 = fieldWeight in 2105, 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=2105)
0.0167351 = weight(_text_:of in 2105) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0167351 = score(doc=2105,freq=18.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.25915858 = fieldWeight in 2105, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2105)
0.007803111 = product of:
0.015606222 = sum of:
0.015606222 = weight(_text_:on in 2105) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015606222 = score(doc=2105,freq=4.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 2105, 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=2105)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(4/8)
- Abstract
- Once upon a time, the thesaurus was venerated. It marked a breakthrough in the retrieval of very specific needles of information hidden in large haystacks. Some of the veneration rubbed off on to the trained information professionals, who alone mastered the occult art of using it to concoct effective search strategies. All this was in the time before we had a computer on every desk, when a collection of 10,000 articles was considered large, and long before the Google era. But now, who has the patience to consult a complicated thesaurus? Only a dedicated few. Has the thesaurus passed its sell-by date? And even its use-by date? These questions, and more, were tossed around at the Great Debate by a community of enthusiasts. While some limitations of the old-fashioned (?) thesaurus were noted, it still received a happy vote of confidence at the end. - Judi Vernau (2015) First speaker for the proposition - Vanda Broughton (2015) First speaker for the opposition - Helen Lippell (2015) Second speaker for the proposition - Leonard Will (2015) Second speaker for the opposition - Cross-examination of expert witnesses - Martin White (2015) Questions and discussion from the floor
-
Mooers, C.N.: ¬The indexing language of an information retrieval system (1985)
0.03
0.0333192 = product of:
0.0666384 = sum of:
0.025307747 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025307747 = score(doc=3644,freq=6.0), product of:
0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.20260347 = fieldWeight in 3644, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3644)
0.014972764 = weight(_text_:use in 3644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014972764 = score(doc=3644,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.11841066 = fieldWeight in 3644, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3644)
0.016566904 = weight(_text_:of in 3644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016566904 = score(doc=3644,freq=36.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.25655392 = fieldWeight in 3644, product of:
6.0 = tf(freq=36.0), with freq of:
36.0 = termFreq=36.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3644)
0.009790987 = product of:
0.019581974 = sum of:
0.019581974 = weight(_text_:22 in 3644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019581974 = score(doc=3644,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 3644, 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=3644)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(4/8)
- Abstract
- Calvin Mooers' work toward the resolution of the problem of ambiguity in indexing went unrecognized for years. At the time he introduced the "descriptor" - a term with a very distinct meaning-indexers were, for the most part, taking index terms directly from the document, without either rationalizing them with context or normalizing them with some kind of classification. It is ironic that Mooers' term came to be attached to the popular but unsophisticated indexing methods which he was trying to root out. Simply expressed, what Mooers did was to take the dictionary definitions of terms and redefine them so clearly that they could not be used in any context except that provided by the new definition. He did, at great pains, construct such meanings for over four hundred words; disambiguation and specificity were sought after and found for these words. He proposed that all indexers adopt this method so that when the index supplied a term, it also supplied the exact meaning for that term as used in the indexed document. The same term used differently in another document would be defined differently and possibly renamed to avoid ambiguity. The disambiguation was achieved by using unabridged dictionaries and other sources of defining terminology. In practice, this tends to produce circularity in definition, that is, word A refers to word B which refers to word C which refers to word A. It was necessary, therefore, to break this chain by creating a new, definitive meaning for each word. Eventually, means such as those used by Austin (q.v.) for PRECIS achieved the same purpose, but by much more complex means than just creating a unique definition of each term. Mooers, however, was probably the first to realize how confusing undefined terminology could be. Early automatic indexers dealt with distinct disciplines and, as long as they did not stray beyond disciplinary boundaries, a quick and dirty keyword approach was satisfactory. The trouble came when attempts were made to make a combined index for two or more distinct disciplines. A number of processes have since been developed, mostly involving tagging of some kind or use of strings. Mooers' solution has rarely been considered seriously and probably would be extremely difficult to apply now because of so much interdisciplinarity. But for a specific, weIl defined field, it is still weIl worth considering. Mooers received training in mathematics and physics from the University of Minnesota and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He was the founder of Zator Company, which developed and marketed a coded card information retrieval system, and of Rockford Research, Inc., which engages in research in information science. He is the inventor of the TRAC computer language.
- Footnote
- Original in: Information retrieval today: papers presented at an Institute conducted by the Library School and the Center for Continuation Study, University of Minnesota, Sept. 19-22, 1962. Ed. by Wesley Simonton. Minneapolis, Minn.: The Center, 1963. S.21-36.
- Source
- Theory of subject analysis: a sourcebook. Ed.: L.M. Chan, et al
-
Schmitz-Esser, W.: Thesaurus and beyond : an advanced formula for linguistic engineering and information retrieval (1999)
0.03
0.033082325 = product of:
0.06616465 = sum of:
0.025048172 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4116) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025048172 = score(doc=4116,freq=2.0), product of:
0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 4116, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4116)
0.017710768 = weight(_text_:of in 4116) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017710768 = score(doc=4116,freq=14.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.2742677 = fieldWeight in 4116, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4116)
0.006621159 = product of:
0.013242318 = sum of:
0.013242318 = weight(_text_:on in 4116) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013242318 = score(doc=4116,freq=2.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.14580199 = fieldWeight in 4116, 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=4116)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.016784549 = product of:
0.033569098 = sum of:
0.033569098 = weight(_text_:22 in 4116) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033569098 = score(doc=4116,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4116, 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=4116)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(4/8)
- Abstract
- This paper describes a proposal for a new approach to thesaurus design and construction that could have significant implicantions for change in the way multilingual thesauri are handled and integrated with each other. The formula presented here has its origin in the work of the German Thesaurus Committee and has had input from a number of scientists and practitioners int he field. The emphasis is on the various types of relationships found among concepts, notiions and universals in languages. These relationships are analysed and refined beyond the approach taken in existing thesauri. This proposal is very much at the discussion stage and the author invites the assistance of interested readers through criticisms, discussion and dialogue. Applications of the proposed thesaurus are included and the major goal of this proposal is to provide the basis for improved desing and integration of multilingual thesauri
- Source
- Knowledge organization. 26(1999) no.1, S.10-22
-
ALA / Subcommittee on Subject Relationships/Reference Structures: Final Report to the ALCTS/CCS Subject Analysis Committee (1997)
0.03
0.03276944 = product of:
0.06553888 = sum of:
0.020663686 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1800) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020663686 = score(doc=1800,freq=4.0), product of:
0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.16542503 = fieldWeight in 1800, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1800)
0.014972764 = weight(_text_:use in 1800) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014972764 = score(doc=1800,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.11841066 = fieldWeight in 1800, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1800)
0.018315405 = weight(_text_:of in 1800) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018315405 = score(doc=1800,freq=44.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.28363106 = fieldWeight in 1800, product of:
6.6332498 = tf(freq=44.0), with freq of:
44.0 = termFreq=44.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1800)
0.011587027 = product of:
0.023174055 = sum of:
0.023174055 = weight(_text_:on in 1800) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023174055 = score(doc=1800,freq=18.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.25515348 = fieldWeight in 1800, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1800)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(4/8)
- Abstract
- The SAC Subcommittee on Subject Relationships/Reference Structures was authorized at the 1995 Midwinter Meeting and appointed shortly before Annual Conference. Its creation was one result of a discussion of how (and why) to promote the display and use of broader-term subject heading references, and its charge reads as follows: To investigate: (1) the kinds of relationships that exist between subjects, the display of which are likely to be useful to catalog users; (2) how these relationships are or could be recorded in authorities and classification formats; (3) options for how these relationships should be presented to users of online and print catalogs, indexes, lists, etc. By the summer 1996 Annual Conference, make some recommendations to SAC about how to disseminate the information and/or implement changes. At that time assess the need for additional time to investigate these issues. The Subcommittee's work on each of the imperatives in the charge was summarized in a report issued at the 1996 Annual Conference (Appendix A). Highlights of this work included the development of a taxonomy of 165 subject relationships; a demonstration that, using existing MARC coding, catalog systems could be programmed to generate references they do not currently support; and an examination of reference displays in several CD-ROM database products. Since that time, work has continued on identifying term relationships and display options; on tracking research, discussion, and implementation of subject relationships in information systems; and on compiling a list of further research needs.
- Content
- Enthält: Appendix A: Subcommittee on Subject Relationships/Reference Structures - REPORT TO THE ALCTS/CCS SUBJECT ANALYSIS COMMITTEE - July 1996 Appendix B (part 1): Taxonomy of Subject Relationships. Compiled by Dee Michel with the assistance of Pat Kuhr - June 1996 draft (alphabetical display) (Separat in: http://web2.ala.org/ala/alctscontent/CCS/committees/subjectanalysis/subjectrelations/msrscu2.pdf) Appendix B (part 2): Taxonomy of Subject Relationships. Compiled by Dee Michel with the assistance of Pat Kuhr - June 1996 draft (hierarchical display) Appendix C: Checklist of Candidate Subject Relationships for Information Retrieval. Compiled by Dee Michel, Pat Kuhr, and Jane Greenberg; edited by Greg Wool - June 1997 Appendix D: Review of Reference Displays in Selected CD-ROM Abstracts and Indexes by Harriette Hemmasi and Steven Riel Appendix E: Analysis of Relationships in Six LC Subject Authority Records by Harriette Hemmasi and Gary Strawn Appendix F: Report of a Preliminary Survey of Subject Referencing in OPACs by Gregory Wool Appendix G: LC Subject Referencing in OPACs--Why Bother? by Gregory Wool Appendix H: Research Needs on Subject Relationships and Reference Structures in Information Access compiled by Jane Greenberg and Steven Riel with contributions from Dee Michel and others edited by Gregory Wool Appendix I: Bibliography on Subject Relationships compiled mostly by Dee Michel with additional contributions from Jane Greenberg, Steven Riel, and Gregory Wool
- Theme
- Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
-
¬The thesaurus: review, renaissance and revision (2004)
0.03
0.032665867 = product of:
0.065331735 = sum of:
0.033135615 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3243) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033135615 = score(doc=3243,freq=14.0), product of:
0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.2652702 = fieldWeight in 3243, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3243)
0.012833798 = weight(_text_:use in 3243) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012833798 = score(doc=3243,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.101494856 = fieldWeight in 3243, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3243)
0.016051745 = weight(_text_:of in 3243) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016051745 = score(doc=3243,freq=46.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.2485762 = fieldWeight in 3243, product of:
6.78233 = tf(freq=46.0), with freq of:
46.0 = termFreq=46.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3243)
0.0033105796 = product of:
0.006621159 = sum of:
0.006621159 = weight(_text_:on in 3243) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.006621159 = score(doc=3243,freq=2.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.072900996 = fieldWeight in 3243, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3243)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(4/8)
- Content
- Enthält u.a. folgende Aussage von J. Aitchison u. S. Dextre Clarke: "We face a paradox. Ostensibly, the need and the opportunity to apply thesauri to information retrieval are greater than ever before. On the other hand, users resist most efforts to persuade them to apply one. The drive for interoperability of systems means we must design our vocabularies for easy integration into downstream applications such as content management systems, indexing/metatagging interfaces, search engines, and portals. Summarizing the search for vocabularies that work more intuitively, we see that there are trends working in opposite directions. In the hugely popular taxonomies an the one hand, relationships between terms are more loosely defined than in thesauri. In the ontologies that will support computer-to-computer communications in AI applications such as the Semantic Web, we see the need for much more precisely defined term relationships."
Enthält die Beiträge: Spiteri, L.F.: Word association testing and thesaurus construction: a pilot study. Aitchison, J., S.G. Dextre-Clarke: The Thesaurus: a historical viewpoint, with a look to the future. Thomas, A.R.: Teach yourself thesaurus: exercises, reading, resources. Shearer, J.R.: A practical exercise in building a thesaurus. Nielsen, M.L.: Thesaurus construction: key issues and selected readings. Riesland, M.A.: Tools of the trade: vocabulary management software. Will, L.: Thesaurus consultancy. Owens, L.A., P.A. Cochrane: Thesaurus evaluation. Greenberg, J.: User comprehension and application of information retrieval thesauri. Johnson, E.H.: Distributed thesaurus Web services. Thomas, A.R., S.K. Roe: An interview with Dr. Amy J. Warner. Landry, P.: Multilingual subject access: the linking approach of MACS.
- Footnote
- Rez. in: KO 32(2005) no.2, S.95-97 (A. Gilchrist):"It might be thought unfortunate that the word thesaurus is assonant with prehistoric beasts but as this book clearly demonstrates, the thesaurus is undergoing a notable revival, and we can remind ourselves that the word comes from the Greek thesaurus, meaning a treasury. This is a useful and timely source book, bringing together ten chapters, following an Editorial introduction and culminating in an interview with a member of the team responsible for revising the NISO Standard Guidelines for the construction, format and management of monolingual thesauri; formal proof of the thesaural renaissance. Though predominantly an American publication, it is good to see four English authors as well as one from Canada and one from Denmark; and with a good balance of academics and practitioners. This has helped to widen the net in the citing of useful references. While the techniques of thesaurus construction are still basically sound, the Editors, in their introduction, point out that the thesaurus, in its sense of an information retrieval tool is almost exactly 50 years old, and that the information environment of today is radically different. They claim three purposes for the compilation: "to acquaint or remind the Library and Information Science community of the history of the development of the thesaurus and standards for thesaurus construction. to provide bibliographies and tutorials from which any reader can become more grounded in her or his understanding of thesaurus construction, use and evaluation. to address topics related to thesauri but that are unique to the current digital environment, or network of networks." This last purpose, understandably, tends to be the slightly more tentative part of the book, but as Rosenfeld and Morville said in their book Information architecture for the World Wide Web "thesauri [will] become a key tool for dealing with the growing size and importance of web sites and intranets". The evidence supporting their belief has been growing steadily in the seven years since the first edition was published.
The didactic parts of the book are a collection of exercises, readings and resources constituting a "Teach yourself " chapter written by Alan Thomas, ending with the warning that "New challenges include how to devise multi-functional and usersensitive vocabularies, corporate taxonomies and ontologies, and how to apply the transformative technology to them." This is absolutely right, and there is a need for some good writing that would tackle these issues. Another chapter, by James Shearer, skilfully manages to compress a practical exercise in building a thesaurus into some twenty A5 size pages. The third chapter in this set, by Marianne Lykke Nielsen, contains extensive reviews of key issues and selected readings under eight headings from the concept of the thesaurus, through the various construction stages and ending with automatic construction techniques. . . . This is a useful and approachable book. It is a pity that the index is such a poor advertisement for vocabulary control and usefulness."
- LCSH
- Information retrieval
- RSWK
- Informations- und Dokumentationswissenschaft / Information Retrieval / Inhaltserschließung / Thesaurus (BVB)
- Subject
- Informations- und Dokumentationswissenschaft / Information Retrieval / Inhaltserschließung / Thesaurus (BVB)
Information retrieval
-
Jarvelin, K.: ¬A deductive data model for thesaurus navigation and query expansion (1996)
0.03
0.031705774 = product of:
0.08454873 = sum of:
0.066795126 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5625) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.066795126 = score(doc=5625,freq=8.0), product of:
0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.5347345 = fieldWeight in 5625, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5625)
0.008925388 = weight(_text_:of in 5625) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008925388 = score(doc=5625,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.13821793 = fieldWeight in 5625, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5625)
0.008828212 = product of:
0.017656423 = sum of:
0.017656423 = weight(_text_:on in 5625) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017656423 = score(doc=5625,freq=2.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.19440265 = fieldWeight in 5625, 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=5625)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.375 = coord(3/8)
- Abstract
- Describes a deductive data model based on 3 abstraction levels for representing vocabularies for information retrieval: conceptual level; expression level; and occurrence level. The proposed data model can be used for the representation and navigation of indexing and retrieval thesauri and as a vocabulary source for concept based query expansion in heterogeneous retrieval environments
- Theme
- Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
-
Chen, H.; Yim, T.; Fye, D.: Automatic thesaurus generation for an electronic community system (1995)
0.03
0.030722464 = product of:
0.061444927 = sum of:
0.020873476 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2918) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020873476 = score(doc=2918,freq=2.0), product of:
0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 2918, 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=2918)
0.021389665 = weight(_text_:use in 2918) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021389665 = score(doc=2918,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.1691581 = fieldWeight in 2918, 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=2918)
0.013664153 = weight(_text_:of in 2918) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013664153 = score(doc=2918,freq=12.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.21160212 = fieldWeight in 2918, 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=2918)
0.0055176322 = product of:
0.0110352645 = sum of:
0.0110352645 = weight(_text_:on in 2918) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0110352645 = score(doc=2918,freq=2.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 2918, 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=2918)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(4/8)
- Abstract
- Reports an algorithmic approach to the automatic generation of thesauri for electronic community systems. The techniques used included terms filtering, automatic indexing, and cluster analysis. The testbed for the research was the Worm Community System, which contains a comprehensive library of specialized community data and literature, currently in use by molecular biologists who study the nematode worm. The resulting worm thesaurus included 2709 researchers' names, 798 gene names, 20 experimental methods, and 4302 subject descriptors. On average, each term had about 90 weighted neighbouring terms indicating relevant concepts. The thesaurus was developed as an online search aide. Tests the worm thesaurus in an experiment with 6 worm researchers of varying degrees of expertise and background. The experiment showed that the thesaurus was an excellent 'memory jogging' device and that it supported learning and serendipitous browsing. Despite some occurrences of obvious noise, the system was useful in suggesting relevant concepts for the researchers' queries and it helped improve concept recall. With a simple browsing interface, an automatic thesaurus can become a useful tool for online search and can assist researchers in exploring and traversing a dynamic and complex electronic community system
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 46(1995) no.3, S.175-193
- Theme
- Verbale Doksprachen im Online-Retrieval
-
Shiri, A.A.; Revie, C.; Chowdhury, G.: Thesaurus-assisted search term selection and query expansion : a review of user-centred studies (2002)
0.03
0.030439943 = product of:
0.08117318 = sum of:
0.035423465 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1330) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035423465 = score(doc=1330,freq=4.0), product of:
0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.2835858 = fieldWeight in 1330, 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=1330)
0.025667597 = weight(_text_:use in 1330) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025667597 = score(doc=1330,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.20298971 = fieldWeight in 1330, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1330)
0.02008212 = weight(_text_:of in 1330) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02008212 = score(doc=1330,freq=18.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.3109903 = fieldWeight in 1330, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1330)
0.375 = coord(3/8)
- Abstract
- This paper provides a review of the literature related to the application of domain-specific thesauri in the search and retrieval process. Focusing an studies that adopt a user-centred approach, the review presents a survey of the methodologies and results from empirical studies undertaken an the use of thesauri as sources of term selection for query formulation and expansion during the search process. It summarises the ways in which domain-specific thesauri from different disciplines have been used by various types of users and how these tools aid users in the selection of search terms. The review consists of two main sections: first, studies an thesaurus-aided search term selection; and second, studies dealing with query expansion using thesauri. Both sections are illustrated with case studies that have adopted a user-centred approach.
- Theme
- Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
-
Jing, Y.; Croft, W.B.: ¬An association thesaurus for information retrieval (199?)
0.03
0.028955635 = product of:
0.07721502 = sum of:
0.058445733 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.058445733 = score(doc=4494,freq=8.0), product of:
0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.46789268 = fieldWeight in 4494, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4494)
0.011044604 = weight(_text_:of in 4494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011044604 = score(doc=4494,freq=4.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.17103596 = fieldWeight in 4494, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4494)
0.007724685 = product of:
0.01544937 = sum of:
0.01544937 = weight(_text_:on in 4494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01544937 = score(doc=4494,freq=2.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.17010231 = fieldWeight in 4494, 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=4494)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.375 = coord(3/8)
- Abstract
- Although commonly used in both commercial and experimental information retrieval systems, thesauri have not demonstrated consistent benefits for retrieval performance, and it is difficult to construct a thesaurus automatically for large text databases. In this paper, an approach, called PhraseFinder, is proposed to construct collection-dependent association thesauri automatically using large full-text document collections. The association thesaurus can be accessed through natural language queries in INQUERY, an information retrieval system based on the probabilistic inference network. Experiments are conducted in INQUERY to evaluate different types of association thesauri, and thesauri constructed for a variety of collections
-
Shapiro, C.D.; Yan, P.-F.: Generous tools : thesauri in digital libraries (1996)
0.03
0.028934728 = product of:
0.07715928 = sum of:
0.050615493 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3132) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050615493 = score(doc=3132,freq=6.0), product of:
0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.40520695 = fieldWeight in 3132, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3132)
0.015619429 = weight(_text_:of in 3132) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015619429 = score(doc=3132,freq=8.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.24188137 = fieldWeight in 3132, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3132)
0.010924355 = product of:
0.02184871 = sum of:
0.02184871 = weight(_text_:on in 3132) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02184871 = score(doc=3132,freq=4.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.24056101 = fieldWeight in 3132, 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=3132)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.375 = coord(3/8)
- Abstract
- The Electronic Libraries and Information Highways MITRE Sponsored Research project aims to help searchers working in digital libraries increase their chance of matching the language of authors. Focuses on whether query formulation can be improved through the addition of semantic knowledge that is interactively gathered from a thesaurus that exists in a distributed, interoperating, cooperative environment. A prototype, ELVIS, was built that improves information retrieval through query expansion and is based on publicly available Z39.50 standard thesauri integrated with networked information discovery and retrieval tools
- Source
- Proceedings of the 17th National Online Meeting 1996, New York, 14-16 May 1996. Ed.: M.E. Williams
- Theme
- Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
-
Milstead, J.L.; Berger, M.C.: ¬The Engineering Information thesaurus development project (1993)
0.03
0.028628808 = product of:
0.076343484 = sum of:
0.048399284 = weight(_text_:use in 5292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048399284 = score(doc=5292,freq=4.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.3827611 = fieldWeight in 5292, 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=5292)
0.0154592255 = weight(_text_:of in 5292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0154592255 = score(doc=5292,freq=6.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.23940048 = fieldWeight in 5292, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5292)
0.012484977 = product of:
0.024969954 = sum of:
0.024969954 = weight(_text_:on in 5292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024969954 = score(doc=5292,freq=4.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.27492687 = fieldWeight in 5292, 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=5292)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.375 = coord(3/8)
- Abstract
- Reports on the development of a thesaurus by Engineering Information, Inc. for use in indexing its databases. The concept in the former, highly precoordinate, indexing vocabulary were converted into postcoodinate descriptors, and a full set of thesaural relationships developed. Issues to be resolved in developing the vocabulary included the degree of postcoordination that was appropriate, the need to make the thesaurus usable with retrospective indexing that could not be converted and the demands on in-house staff during the development and conversion process
- Source
- Information services and use. 13(1993) no.1, S.71-80
