Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Moens, M.-F."
  • × theme_ss:"Automatisches Abstracting"
  1. Moens, M.-F.: Summarizing court decisions (2007) 0.01 
    0.012212552 = product of:
  0.03053138 = sum of:
    0.018650195 = weight(_text_:on in 954) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018650195 = score(doc=954,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.17010231 = fieldWeight in 954, 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=954)
    0.011881187 = weight(_text_:information in 954) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011881187 = score(doc=954,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 954, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=954)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    In the field of law there is an absolute need for summarizing the texts of court decisions in order to make the content of the cases easily accessible for legal professionals. During the SALOMON and MOSAIC projects we investigated the summarization and retrieval of legal cases. This article presents some of the main findings while integrating the research results of experiments on legal document summarization by other research groups. In addition, we propose novel avenues of research for automatic text summarization, which we currently exploit when summarizing court decisions in the ACILA project. Techniques for automated concept learning and argument recognition are here the most challenging.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 43(2007) no.6, S.1748-1764
  2. Moens, M.-F.; Uyttendaele, C.; Dumotier, J.: Abstracting of legal cases : the potential of clustering based on the selection of representative objects (1999) 0.01 
    0.010467903 = product of:
  0.026169756 = sum of:
    0.015985882 = weight(_text_:on in 2944) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015985882 = score(doc=2944,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.14580199 = fieldWeight in 2944, 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=2944)
    0.0101838745 = weight(_text_:information in 2944) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0101838745 = score(doc=2944,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2944, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2944)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 50(1999) no.2, S.151-161
  3. Uyttendaele, C.; Moens, M.-F.; Dumortier, J.: SALOMON: automatic abstracting of legal cases for effective access to court decisions (1998) 0.01 
    0.005275072 = product of:
  0.02637536 = sum of:
    0.02637536 = weight(_text_:on in 495) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02637536 = score(doc=495,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.24056101 = fieldWeight in 495, 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=495)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    The SALOMON project summarises Belgian criminal cases in order to improve access to the large number of existing and future cases. A double methodology was used when developing SALOMON: the cases are processed by employing additional knowledge to interpret structural patterns and features on the one hand and by way of occurrence statistics of index terms on the other. SALOMON performs an initial categorisation and structuring of the cases and subsequently extracts the most relevant text units of the alleged offences and of the opinion of the court. The SALOMON techniques do not themselves solve any legal questions, but they do guide the use effectively towards relevant texts
  4. Moens, M.-F.; Uyttendaele, C.: Automatic text structuring and categorization as a first step in summarizing legal cases (1997) 0.00 
    0.002036775 = product of:
  0.0101838745 = sum of:
    0.0101838745 = weight(_text_:information in 2256) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0101838745 = score(doc=2256,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2256, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2256)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Information processing and management. 33(1997) no.6, S.727-737

Authors

Years