-
Ruge, G.: ¬A spreading activation network for automatic generation of thesaurus relationships (1991)
0.04
0.035309397 = product of:
0.07061879 = sum of:
0.025779642 = weight(_text_:for in 4506) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025779642 = score(doc=4506,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.047278564 = queryNorm
0.29041752 = fieldWeight in 4506, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4506)
0.04483915 = product of:
0.0896783 = sum of:
0.0896783 = weight(_text_:22 in 4506) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0896783 = score(doc=4506,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16556148 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047278564 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4506, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4506)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Date
- 8.10.2000 11:52:22
-
Mikacic, M.: Statistical system for subject designation (SSSD) for libraries in Croatia (1996)
0.03
0.034587763 = product of:
0.06917553 = sum of:
0.03294002 = weight(_text_:for in 2943) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03294002 = score(doc=2943,freq=10.0), product of:
0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.047278564 = queryNorm
0.37108192 = fieldWeight in 2943, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2943)
0.036235508 = product of:
0.072471015 = sum of:
0.072471015 = weight(_text_:22 in 2943) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.072471015 = score(doc=2943,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16556148 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047278564 = queryNorm
0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 2943, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2943)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Describes the developments of the Statistical System for Subject Designation (SSSD): a syntactical system for subject designation for libraries in Croatia, based on the construction of subject headings in agreement with the theory of the sentence nature of subject headings. The discussion is preceded by a brief summary of theories underlying basic principles and fundamental rules of the alphabetical subject catalogue
- Date
- 31. 7.2006 14:22:21
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) no.1, S.77-93
-
Degez, D.: Compatibilité des langages d'indexation mariage, cohabitation ou fusion? : Quelques examples concrèts (1998)
0.02
0.0223727 = product of:
0.0447454 = sum of:
0.022325827 = weight(_text_:for in 2245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022325827 = score(doc=2245,freq=6.0), product of:
0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.047278564 = queryNorm
0.25150898 = fieldWeight in 2245, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2245)
0.022419576 = product of:
0.04483915 = sum of:
0.04483915 = weight(_text_:22 in 2245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04483915 = score(doc=2245,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16556148 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047278564 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2245, 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=2245)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- To illustrate the theoretical analysis presented by J. Maniez published in Documentaliste 34(1997) nos.4/5 presents some concrete examples drawn for experience of the difficulties increasingly faced in trying to make different indexing languages compatible. Various types of problems may be considered: comparing semantic terms and relationships that compose indexing languages, setting standards for writing and vocabulary, and opposing pre and post coordinated descriptors. Proposes several solutions and discusses the need for further applied research in this area
- Date
- 1. 8.1996 22:01:00
-
Dextre Clarke, S.G.: Thesaural relationships (2001)
0.02
0.0223727 = product of:
0.0447454 = sum of:
0.022325827 = weight(_text_:for in 1149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022325827 = score(doc=1149,freq=6.0), product of:
0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.047278564 = queryNorm
0.25150898 = fieldWeight in 1149, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1149)
0.022419576 = product of:
0.04483915 = sum of:
0.04483915 = weight(_text_:22 in 1149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04483915 = score(doc=1149,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16556148 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047278564 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1149, 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=1149)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- A thesaurus in the controlled vocabulary environment is a tool designed to support effective infonnation retrieval (IR) by guiding indexers and searchers consistently to choose the same terms for expressing a given concept or combination of concepts. Terms in the thesaurus are linked by relationships of three well-known types: equivalence, hierarchical, and associative. The functions and properties of these three basic types and some subcategories are described, as well as some additional relationship types conunonly found in thesauri. Progressive automation of IR processes and the capability for simultaneous searching of vast networked resources are creating some pressures for change in the categorization and consistency of relationships.
- Date
- 22. 9.2007 15:45:57
-
Jia, J.: From data to knowledge : the relationships between vocabularies, linked data and knowledge graphs (2021)
0.02
0.017214008 = product of:
0.034428015 = sum of:
0.01841403 = weight(_text_:for in 106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01841403 = score(doc=106,freq=8.0), product of:
0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.047278564 = queryNorm
0.20744109 = fieldWeight in 106, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=106)
0.016013984 = product of:
0.032027967 = sum of:
0.032027967 = weight(_text_:22 in 106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032027967 = score(doc=106,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16556148 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047278564 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 106, 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=106)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Purpose The purpose of this paper is to identify the concepts, component parts and relationships between vocabularies, linked data and knowledge graphs (KGs) from the perspectives of data and knowledge transitions. Design/methodology/approach This paper uses conceptual analysis methods. This study focuses on distinguishing concepts and analyzing composition and intercorrelations to explore data and knowledge transitions. Findings Vocabularies are the cornerstone for accurately building understanding of the meaning of data. Vocabularies provide for a data-sharing model and play an important role in supporting the semantic expression of linked data and defining the schema layer; they are also used for entity recognition, alignment and linkage for KGs. KGs, which consist of a schema layer and a data layer, are presented as cubes that organically combine vocabularies, linked data and big data. Originality/value This paper first describes the composition of vocabularies, linked data and KGs. More importantly, this paper innovatively analyzes and summarizes the interrelatedness of these factors, which comes from frequent interactions between data and knowledge. The three factors empower each other and can ultimately empower the Semantic Web.
- Date
- 22. 1.2021 14:24:32
-
Mooers, C.N.: ¬The indexing language of an information retrieval system (1985)
0.02
0.015795194 = product of:
0.031590387 = sum of:
0.020380598 = weight(_text_:for in 3644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020380598 = score(doc=3644,freq=20.0), product of:
0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.047278564 = queryNorm
0.22959523 = fieldWeight in 3644, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3644)
0.011209788 = product of:
0.022419576 = sum of:
0.022419576 = weight(_text_:22 in 3644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022419576 = score(doc=3644,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16556148 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047278564 = 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(2/4)
- 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.
-
Maniez, J.: Fusion de banques de donnees documentaires at compatibilite des languages d'indexation (1997)
0.02
0.015132599 = product of:
0.030265197 = sum of:
0.0110484185 = weight(_text_:for in 2246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0110484185 = score(doc=2246,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.047278564 = queryNorm
0.12446466 = fieldWeight in 2246, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2246)
0.019216778 = product of:
0.038433556 = sum of:
0.038433556 = weight(_text_:22 in 2246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.038433556 = score(doc=2246,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16556148 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047278564 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2246, 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=2246)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Discusses the apparently unattainable goal of compatibility of information languages. While controlled languages can improve retrieval performance within a single system, they make cooperation across different systems more difficult. The Internet and downloading accentuate this adverse outcome and the acceleration of data exchange aggravates the problem of compatibility. Defines this familiar concept and demonstrates that coherence is just as necessary as it was for indexing languages, the proliferation of which has created confusion in grouped data banks. Describes 2 types of potential solutions, similar to those applied to automatic translation of natural languages: - harmonizing the information languages themselves, both difficult and expensive, or, the more flexible solution involving automatic harmonization of indexing formulae based on pre established concordance tables. However, structural incompatibilities between post coordinated languages and classifications may lead any harmonization tools up a blind alley, while the paths of a universal concordance model are rare and narrow
- Date
- 1. 8.1996 22:01:00
-
Schmitz-Esser, W.: Language of general communication and concept compatibility (1996)
0.01
0.008006992 = product of:
0.032027967 = sum of:
0.032027967 = product of:
0.064055935 = sum of:
0.064055935 = weight(_text_:22 in 6089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.064055935 = score(doc=6089,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16556148 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047278564 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 6089, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=6089)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Pages
- S.11-22
-
Milstead, J.L.: Standards for relationships between subject indexing terms (2001)
0.01
0.007307842 = product of:
0.029231368 = sum of:
0.029231368 = weight(_text_:for in 1148) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029231368 = score(doc=1148,freq=14.0), product of:
0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.047278564 = queryNorm
0.32930255 = fieldWeight in 1148, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1148)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Relationships between the terms in thesauri and Indexes are the subject of national and international standards. The standards for thesauri enumerate and provide criteria for three basic types of relationship: equivalence, hierarchical, and associative. Standards and guidelines for indexes draw an the thesaurus standards to provide less detailed guidance for showing relationships between the terms used in an Index. The international standard for multilingual thesauri adds recommendations for assuring equal treatment of the languages of a thesaurus. The present standards were developed when lookup and search were essentially manual, and the value of the kinds of relationships has never been determined. It is not clear whether users understand or can use the distinctions between kinds of relationships. On the other hand, sophisticated text analysis systems may be able both to assist with development of more powerful term relationship schemes and to use the relationships to improve retrieval.
-
Schmitz-Esser, W.: Formalizing terminology-based knowledge for an ontology independently of a particular language (2008)
0.01
0.0067657465 = product of:
0.027062986 = sum of:
0.027062986 = weight(_text_:for in 1680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027062986 = score(doc=1680,freq=12.0), product of:
0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.047278564 = queryNorm
0.3048749 = fieldWeight in 1680, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1680)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Last word ontological thought and practice is exemplified on an axiomatic framework [a model for an Integrative Cross-Language Ontology (ICLO), cf. Poli, R., Schmitz-Esser, W., forthcoming 2007] that is highly general, based on natural language, multilingual, can be implemented as topic maps and may be openly enhanced by software available for particular languages. Basics of ontological modelling, conditions for construction and maintenance, and the most salient points in application are addressed, such as cross-language text mining and knowledge generation. The rationale is to open the eyes for the tremendous potential of terminology-based ontologies for principled Knowledge Organization and the interchange and reuse of formalized knowledge.
-
Kobrin, R.Y.: On the principles of terminological work in the creation of thesauri for information retrieval systems (1979)
0.01
0.0064449105 = product of:
0.025779642 = sum of:
0.025779642 = weight(_text_:for in 2954) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025779642 = score(doc=2954,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.047278564 = queryNorm
0.29041752 = fieldWeight in 2954, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2954)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
-
Salton, G.: Experiments in automatic thesaurus construction for information retrieval (1972)
0.01
0.0064449105 = product of:
0.025779642 = sum of:
0.025779642 = weight(_text_:for in 5314) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025779642 = score(doc=5314,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.047278564 = queryNorm
0.29041752 = fieldWeight in 5314, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5314)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
-
Farradane, J.: Concept organization for information retrieval (1967)
0.01
0.0064449105 = product of:
0.025779642 = sum of:
0.025779642 = weight(_text_:for in 35) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025779642 = score(doc=35,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.047278564 = queryNorm
0.29041752 = fieldWeight in 35, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=35)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
-
Melton, J.S.: ¬A use for the techniques of structural linguistics in documentation research (1965)
0.01
0.0063788076 = product of:
0.02551523 = sum of:
0.02551523 = weight(_text_:for in 834) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02551523 = score(doc=834,freq=6.0), product of:
0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.047278564 = queryNorm
0.28743884 = fieldWeight in 834, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=834)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Index language (the system of symbols for representing subject content after analysis) is considered as a separate component and a variable in an information retrieval system. It is suggested that for purposes of testing, comparing and evaluating index language, the techniques of structural linguistics may provide a descriptive methodology by which all such languages (hierarchical and faceted classification, analytico-synthetic indexing, traditional subject indexing, indexes and classifications based on automatic text analysis, etc.) could be described in term of a linguistic model, and compared on a common basis
-
Hoerman, H.L.; Furniss, K.A.: Turning practice into principles : a comparison of the IFLA Principles underlying Subject Heading Languages (SHLs) and the principles underlying the Library of Congress Subject Headings system (2000)
0.01
0.0061762533 = product of:
0.024705013 = sum of:
0.024705013 = weight(_text_:for in 5611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024705013 = score(doc=5611,freq=10.0), product of:
0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.047278564 = queryNorm
0.27831143 = fieldWeight in 5611, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5611)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- The IFLA Section on Classification and Indexing's Working Group on Principles Underlying Subject Headings Languages has identified a set of eleven principles for subject heading languages and excerpted the texts that match each principle from the instructions for each of eleven national subject indexing systems, including excerpts from the LC's Subject Cataloging Manual: Subject Headings. This study compares the IFLA principles with other texts that express the principles underlying LCSH, especially Library of Congress Subject Headings: Principles of Structure and Policies for Application, prepared by Lois Mai Chan for the Library of Congress in 1990, Chan's later book on LCSH, and earlier documents by Haykin and Cutter. The principles are further elaborated for clarity and discussed
-
Khoo, C.; Chan, S.; Niu, Y.: ¬The many facets of the cause-effect relation (2002)
0.01
0.0061762533 = product of:
0.024705013 = sum of:
0.024705013 = weight(_text_:for in 1192) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024705013 = score(doc=1192,freq=10.0), product of:
0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.047278564 = queryNorm
0.27831143 = fieldWeight in 1192, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1192)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- This chapter presents a broad survey of the cause-effect relation, with particular emphasis an how the relation is expressed in text. Philosophers have been grappling with the concept of causation for centuries. Researchers in social psychology have found that the human mind has a very complex mechanism for identifying and attributing the cause for an event. Inferring cause-effect relations between events and statements has also been found to be an important part of reading and text comprehension, especially for narrative text. Though many of the cause-effect relations in text are implied and have to be inferred by the reader, there is also a wide variety of linguistic expressions for explicitly indicating cause and effect. In addition, it has been found that certain words have "causal valence"-they bias the reader to attribute cause in certain ways. Cause-effect relations can also be divided into several different types.
-
Boteram, F.: Semantische Relationen in Dokumentationssprachen : vom Thesaurus zum semantischen Netz (2010)
0.01
0.005604894 = product of:
0.022419576 = sum of:
0.022419576 = product of:
0.04483915 = sum of:
0.04483915 = weight(_text_:22 in 4792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04483915 = score(doc=4792,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16556148 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047278564 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4792, 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=4792)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Wissensspeicher in digitalen Räumen: Nachhaltigkeit - Verfügbarkeit - semantische Interoperabilität. Proceedings der 11. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation, Konstanz, 20. bis 22. Februar 2008. Hrsg.: J. Sieglerschmidt u. H.P.Ohly
-
Gopinath, M.A.; Prasad, K.N.: Compatibility of the principles for design of thesaurus and classification scheme (1976)
0.01
0.0055242092 = product of:
0.022096837 = sum of:
0.022096837 = weight(_text_:for in 2943) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022096837 = score(doc=2943,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.047278564 = queryNorm
0.24892932 = fieldWeight in 2943, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2943)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
-
Fugmann, R.: Unusual possibilities in indexing and classification (1990)
0.01
0.0052082743 = product of:
0.020833097 = sum of:
0.020833097 = weight(_text_:for in 4781) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020833097 = score(doc=4781,freq=4.0), product of:
0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.047278564 = queryNorm
0.23469281 = fieldWeight in 4781, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4781)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Contemporary research in information science has concentrated on the development of methods for the algorithmic processing of natural language texts. Often, the equivalence of this approach to the intellectual technique of content analysis and indexing is claimed. It is, however, disregarded that contemporary intellectual techniques are far from exploiting their full capabilities. This is largely due to the omission of vocabulary categorisation. It is demonstrated how categorisation can drastically improve the quality of indexing and classification, and, hence, of retrieval
- Source
- Tools for knowledge organization and the human interface. Proceedings of the 1st International ISKO Conference, Darmstadt, 14.-17.8.1990. Pt.1
-
Fugmann, R.: ¬The analytico-synthetic foundation for large indexing & information retrieval systems : dedicated to Prof. Dr. Werner Schultheis, the vigorous initiator of modern chem. documentation in Germany on the occasion of his 85th birthday (1983)
0.01
0.0052082743 = product of:
0.020833097 = sum of:
0.020833097 = weight(_text_:for in 215) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020833097 = score(doc=215,freq=4.0), product of:
0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.047278564 = queryNorm
0.23469281 = fieldWeight in 215, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=215)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Series
- Sarada Ranganathan Lectures; 14)(Sarada Ranganathan Endowment for Library Science series ; 16
