Search (168 results, page 1 of 9)

  • × theme_ss:"Automatisches Klassifizieren"
  1. Godby, C.J.; Stuler, J.: ¬The Library of Congress Classification as a knowledge base for automatic subject categorization : subject access issues (2003) 0.11 
    0.10848325 = product of:
  0.1808054 = sum of:
    0.15182401 = weight(_text_:section in 3962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.15182401 = score(doc=3962,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.26305357 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.57716006 = fieldWeight in 3962, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3962)
    0.011881187 = weight(_text_:information in 3962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011881187 = score(doc=3962,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 3962, 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=3962)
    0.017100206 = product of:
      0.03420041 = sum of:
        0.03420041 = weight(_text_:technology in 3962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03420041 = score(doc=3962,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.23034787 = fieldWeight in 3962, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3962)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Source
    Subject retrieval in a networked environment: Proceedings of the IFLA Satellite Meeting held in Dublin, OH, 14-16 August 2001 and sponsored by the IFLA Classification and Indexing Section, the IFLA Information Technology Section and OCLC. Ed.: I.C. McIlwaine
  2. Hotho, A.; Bloehdorn, S.: Data Mining 2004 : Text classification by boosting weak learners based on terms and concepts (2004) 0.08 
    0.08110962 = product of:
  0.1351827 = sum of:
    0.07917517 = product of:
      0.2375255 = sum of:
        0.2375255 = weight(_text_:3a in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.2375255 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.42262965 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.03574552 = weight(_text_:on in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03574552 = score(doc=562,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.32602316 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
    0.020261997 = product of:
      0.040523995 = sum of:
        0.040523995 = weight(_text_:22 in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040523995 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    Document representations for text classification are typically based on the classical Bag-Of-Words paradigm. This approach comes with deficiencies that motivate the integration of features on a higher semantic level than single words. In this paper we propose an enhancement of the classical document representation through concepts extracted from background knowledge. Boosting is used for actual classification. Experimental evaluations on two well known text corpora support our approach through consistent improvement of the results.
    Content
    Vgl.: http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CEAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fciteseerx.ist.psu.edu%2Fviewdoc%2Fdownload%3Fdoi%3D10.1.1.91.4940%26rep%3Drep1%26type%3Dpdf&ei=dOXrUMeIDYHDtQahsIGACg&usg=AFQjCNHFWVh6gNPvnOrOS9R3rkrXCNVD-A&sig2=5I2F5evRfMnsttSgFF9g7Q&bvm=bv.1357316858,d.Yms.
    Date
    8. 1.2013 10:22:32
    Source
    Proceedings of the 4th IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM 2004), 1-4 November 2004, Brighton, UK
  3. Yoon, Y.; Lee, C.; Lee, G.G.: ¬An effective procedure for constructing a hierarchical text classification system (2006) 0.07 
    0.067205876 = product of:
  0.11200979 = sum of:
    0.018650195 = weight(_text_:on in 5273) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018650195 = score(doc=5273,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.17010231 = fieldWeight in 5273, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5273)
    0.011881187 = weight(_text_:information in 5273) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011881187 = score(doc=5273,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 5273, 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=5273)
    0.08147841 = sum of:
      0.03420041 = weight(_text_:technology in 5273) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03420041 = score(doc=5273,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.23034787 = fieldWeight in 5273, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5273)
      0.047278 = weight(_text_:22 in 5273) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.047278 = score(doc=5273,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5273, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5273)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    In text categorization tasks, classification on some class hierarchies has better results than in cases without the hierarchy. Currently, because a large number of documents are divided into several subgroups in a hierarchy, we can appropriately use a hierarchical classification method. However, we have no systematic method to build a hierarchical classification system that performs well with large collections of practical data. In this article, we introduce a new evaluation scheme for internal node classifiers, which can be used effectively to develop a hierarchical classification system. We also show that our method for constructing the hierarchical classification system is very effective, especially for the task of constructing classifiers applied to hierarchy tree with a lot of levels.
    Date
    22. 7.2006 16:24:52
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.3, S.431-442
  4. Zhu, W.Z.; Allen, R.B.: Document clustering using the LSI subspace signature model (2013) 0.06 
    0.061577972 = product of:
  0.10262995 = sum of:
    0.022607451 = weight(_text_:on in 690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022607451 = score(doc=690,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.20619515 = fieldWeight in 690, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=690)
    0.0101838745 = weight(_text_:information in 690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0101838745 = score(doc=690,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 690, 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=690)
    0.06983863 = sum of:
      0.029314637 = weight(_text_:technology in 690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.029314637 = score(doc=690,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 690, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=690)
      0.040523995 = weight(_text_:22 in 690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.040523995 = score(doc=690,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 690, 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=690)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    We describe the latent semantic indexing subspace signature model (LSISSM) for semantic content representation of unstructured text. Grounded on singular value decomposition, the model represents terms and documents by the distribution signatures of their statistical contribution across the top-ranking latent concept dimensions. LSISSM matches term signatures with document signatures according to their mapping coherence between latent semantic indexing (LSI) term subspace and LSI document subspace. LSISSM does feature reduction and finds a low-rank approximation of scalable and sparse term-document matrices. Experiments demonstrate that this approach significantly improves the performance of major clustering algorithms such as standard K-means and self-organizing maps compared with the vector space model and the traditional LSI model. The unique contribution ranking mechanism in LSISSM also improves the initialization of standard K-means compared with random seeding procedure, which sometimes causes low efficiency and effectiveness of clustering. A two-stage initialization strategy based on LSISSM significantly reduces the running time of standard K-means procedures.
    Date
    23. 3.2013 13:22:36
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.4, S.844-860
  5. Liu, R.-L.: ¬A passage extractor for classification of disease aspect information (2013) 0.06 
    0.059695046 = product of:
  0.09949174 = sum of:
    0.018839544 = weight(_text_:on in 1107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018839544 = score(doc=1107,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 1107, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1107)
    0.02245333 = weight(_text_:information in 1107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02245333 = score(doc=1107,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.256578 = fieldWeight in 1107, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1107)
    0.05819886 = sum of:
      0.024428863 = weight(_text_:technology in 1107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.024428863 = score(doc=1107,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 1107, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1107)
      0.03377 = weight(_text_:22 in 1107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03377 = score(doc=1107,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1107, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1107)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    Retrieval of disease information is often based on several key aspects such as etiology, diagnosis, treatment, prevention, and symptoms of diseases. Automatic identification of disease aspect information is thus essential. In this article, I model the aspect identification problem as a text classification (TC) problem in which a disease aspect corresponds to a category. The disease aspect classification problem poses two challenges to classifiers: (a) a medical text often contains information about multiple aspects of a disease and hence produces noise for the classifiers and (b) text classifiers often cannot extract the textual parts (i.e., passages) about the categories of interest. I thus develop a technique, PETC (Passage Extractor for Text Classification), that extracts passages (from medical texts) for the underlying text classifiers to classify. Case studies on thousands of Chinese and English medical texts show that PETC enhances a support vector machine (SVM) classifier in classifying disease aspect information. PETC also performs better than three state-of-the-art classifier enhancement techniques, including two passage extraction techniques for text classifiers and a technique that employs term proximity information to enhance text classifiers. The contribution is of significance to evidence-based medicine, health education, and healthcare decision support. PETC can be used in those application domains in which a text to be classified may have several parts about different categories.
    Date
    28.10.2013 19:22:57
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.11, S.2265-2277
  6. Egbert, J.; Biber, D.; Davies, M.: Developing a bottom-up, user-based method of web register classification (2015) 0.06 
    0.057605032 = product of:
  0.09600838 = sum of:
    0.015985882 = weight(_text_:on in 2158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015985882 = score(doc=2158,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.14580199 = fieldWeight in 2158, 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=2158)
    0.0101838745 = weight(_text_:information in 2158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0101838745 = score(doc=2158,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2158, 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=2158)
    0.06983863 = sum of:
      0.029314637 = weight(_text_:technology in 2158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.029314637 = score(doc=2158,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 2158, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2158)
      0.040523995 = weight(_text_:22 in 2158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.040523995 = score(doc=2158,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2158, 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=2158)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    This paper introduces a project to develop a reliable, cost-effective method for classifying Internet texts into register categories, and apply that approach to the analysis of a large corpus of web documents. To date, the project has proceeded in 2 key phases. First, we developed a bottom-up method for web register classification, asking end users of the web to utilize a decision-tree survey to code relevant situational characteristics of web documents, resulting in a bottom-up identification of register and subregister categories. We present details regarding the development and testing of this method through a series of 10 pilot studies. Then, in the second phase of our project we applied this procedure to a corpus of 53,000 web documents. An analysis of the results demonstrates the effectiveness of these methods for web register classification and provides a preliminary description of the types and distribution of registers on the web.
    Date
    4. 8.2015 19:22:04
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.9, S.1817-1831
  7. Mengle, S.; Goharian, N.: Passage detection using text classification (2009) 0.05 
    0.053096134 = product of:
  0.088493556 = sum of:
    0.013321568 = weight(_text_:on in 2765) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013321568 = score(doc=2765,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 2765, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2765)
    0.016973123 = weight(_text_:information in 2765) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016973123 = score(doc=2765,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 2765, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2765)
    0.05819886 = sum of:
      0.024428863 = weight(_text_:technology in 2765) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.024428863 = score(doc=2765,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 2765, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2765)
      0.03377 = weight(_text_:22 in 2765) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03377 = score(doc=2765,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2765, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2765)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    Passages can be hidden within a text to circumvent their disallowed transfer. Such release of compartmentalized information is of concern to all corporate and governmental organizations. Passage retrieval is well studied; we posit, however, that passage detection is not. Passage retrieval is the determination of the degree of relevance of blocks of text, namely passages, comprising a document. Rather than determining the relevance of a document in its entirety, passage retrieval determines the relevance of the individual passages. As such, modified traditional information-retrieval techniques compare terms found in user queries with the individual passages to determine a similarity score for passages of interest. In passage detection, passages are classified into predetermined categories. More often than not, passage detection techniques are deployed to detect hidden paragraphs in documents. That is, to hide information, documents are injected with hidden text into passages. Rather than matching query terms against passages to determine their relevance, using text-mining techniques, the passages are classified. Those documents with hidden passages are defined as infected. Thus, simply stated, passage retrieval is the search for passages relevant to a user query, while passage detection is the classification of passages. That is, in passage detection, passages are labeled with one or more categories from a set of predetermined categories. We present a keyword-based dynamic passage approach (KDP) and demonstrate that KDP outperforms statistically significantly (99% confidence) the other document-splitting approaches by 12% to 18% in the passage detection and passage category-prediction tasks. Furthermore, we evaluate the effects of the feature selection, passage length, ambiguous passages, and finally training-data category distribution on passage-detection accuracy.
    Date
    22. 3.2009 19:14:43
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.4, S.814-825
  8. Dubin, D.: Dimensions and discriminability (1998) 0.04 
    0.03772081 = product of:
  0.062868014 = sum of:
    0.018650195 = weight(_text_:on in 2338) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018650195 = score(doc=2338,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.17010231 = fieldWeight in 2338, 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=2338)
    0.02057882 = weight(_text_:information in 2338) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02057882 = score(doc=2338,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.23515764 = fieldWeight in 2338, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2338)
    0.023639 = product of:
      0.047278 = sum of:
        0.047278 = weight(_text_:22 in 2338) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047278 = score(doc=2338,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2338, 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=2338)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Date
    22. 9.1997 19:16:05
    Imprint
    Urbana-Champaign, IL : Illinois University at Urbana-Champaign, Graduate School of Library and Information Science
    Source
    Visualizing subject access for 21st century information resources: Papers presented at the 1997 Clinic on Library Applications of Data Processing, 2-4 Mar 1997, Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Ed.: P.A. Cochrane et al
  9. Yi, K.: Automatic text classification using library classification schemes : trends, issues and challenges (2007) 0.04 
    0.03713733 = product of:
  0.06189555 = sum of:
    0.02637536 = weight(_text_:on in 2560) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02637536 = score(doc=2560,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.24056101 = fieldWeight in 2560, 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=2560)
    0.011881187 = weight(_text_:information in 2560) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011881187 = score(doc=2560,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 2560, 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=2560)
    0.023639 = product of:
      0.047278 = sum of:
        0.047278 = weight(_text_:22 in 2560) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047278 = score(doc=2560,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2560, 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=2560)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    The proliferation of digital resources and their integration into a traditional library setting has created a pressing need for an automated tool that organizes textual information based on library classification schemes. Automated text classification is a research field of developing tools, methods, and models to automate text classification. This article describes the current popular approach for text classification and major text classification projects and applications that are based on library classification schemes. Related issues and challenges are discussed, and a number of considerations for the challenges are examined.
    Date
    22. 9.2008 18:31:54
  10. Wang, J.: ¬An extensive study on automated Dewey Decimal Classification (2009) 0.04 
    0.03565831 = product of:
  0.059430517 = sum of:
    0.029787935 = weight(_text_:on in 3172) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029787935 = score(doc=3172,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.271686 = fieldWeight in 3172, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3172)
    0.0084865615 = weight(_text_:information in 3172) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0084865615 = score(doc=3172,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 3172, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3172)
    0.021156019 = product of:
      0.042312037 = sum of:
        0.042312037 = weight(_text_:technology in 3172) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042312037 = score(doc=3172,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.2849816 = fieldWeight in 3172, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3172)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    In this paper, we present a theoretical analysis and extensive experiments on the automated assignment of Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) classes to bibliographic data with a supervised machine-learning approach. Library classification systems, such as the DDC, impose great obstacles on state-of-art text categorization (TC) technologies, including deep hierarchy, data sparseness, and skewed distribution. We first analyze statistically the document and category distributions over the DDC, and discuss the obstacles imposed by bibliographic corpora and library classification schemes on TC technology. To overcome these obstacles, we propose an innovative algorithm to reshape the DDC structure into a balanced virtual tree by balancing the category distribution and flattening the hierarchy. To improve the classification effectiveness to a level acceptable to real-world applications, we propose an interactive classification model that is able to predict a class of any depth within a limited number of user interactions. The experiments are conducted on a large bibliographic collection created by the Library of Congress within the science and technology domains over 10 years. With no more than three interactions, a classification accuracy of nearly 90% is achieved, thus providing a practical solution to the automatic bibliographic classification problem.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.11, S.2269-2286
  11. Liu, R.-L.: Context recognition for hierarchical text classification (2009) 0.03 
    0.03499105 = product of:
  0.08747762 = sum of:
    0.017638987 = weight(_text_:information in 2760) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017638987 = score(doc=2760,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 2760, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2760)
    0.06983863 = sum of:
      0.029314637 = weight(_text_:technology in 2760) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.029314637 = score(doc=2760,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 2760, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2760)
      0.040523995 = weight(_text_:22 in 2760) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.040523995 = score(doc=2760,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2760, 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=2760)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Information is often organized as a text hierarchy. A hierarchical text-classification system is thus essential for the management, sharing, and dissemination of information. It aims to automatically classify each incoming document into zero, one, or several categories in the text hierarchy. In this paper, we present a technique called CRHTC (context recognition for hierarchical text classification) that performs hierarchical text classification by recognizing the context of discussion (COD) of each category. A category's COD is governed by its ancestor categories, whose contents indicate contextual backgrounds of the category. A document may be classified into a category only if its content matches the category's COD. CRHTC does not require any trials to manually set parameters, and hence is more portable and easier to implement than other methods. It is empirically evaluated under various conditions. The results show that CRHTC achieves both better and more stable performance than several hierarchical and nonhierarchical text-classification methodologies.
    Date
    22. 3.2009 19:11:54
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.4, S.803-813
  12. Liu, R.-L.: Context-based term frequency assessment for text classification (2010) 0.03 
    0.034048714 = product of:
  0.056747854 = sum of:
    0.027688364 = weight(_text_:on in 3331) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027688364 = score(doc=3331,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.25253648 = fieldWeight in 3331, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3331)
    0.0144021725 = weight(_text_:information in 3331) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0144021725 = score(doc=3331,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 3331, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3331)
    0.014657319 = product of:
      0.029314637 = sum of:
        0.029314637 = weight(_text_:technology in 3331) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029314637 = score(doc=3331,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 3331, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3331)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    Automatic text classification (TC) is essential for the management of information. To properly classify a document d, it is essential to identify the semantics of each term t in d, while the semantics heavily depend on context (neighboring terms) of t in d. Therefore, we present a technique CTFA (Context-based Term Frequency Assessment) that improves text classifiers by considering term contexts in test documents. The results of the term context recognition are used to assess term frequencies of terms, and hence CTFA may easily work with various kinds of text classifiers that base their TC decisions on term frequencies, without needing to modify the classifiers. Moreover, CTFA is efficient, and neither huge memory nor domain-specific knowledge is required. Empirical results show that CTFA successfully enhances performance of several kinds of text classifiers on different experimental data.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.2, S.300-309
  13. Schaalje, G.B.; Blades, N.J.; Funai, T.: ¬An open-set size-adjusted Bayesian classifier for authorship attribution (2013) 0.03 
    0.031517737 = product of:
  0.05252956 = sum of:
    0.027688364 = weight(_text_:on in 1041) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027688364 = score(doc=1041,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.25253648 = fieldWeight in 1041, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1041)
    0.0101838745 = weight(_text_:information in 1041) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0101838745 = score(doc=1041,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 1041, 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=1041)
    0.014657319 = product of:
      0.029314637 = sum of:
        0.029314637 = weight(_text_:technology in 1041) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029314637 = score(doc=1041,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 1041, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1041)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    Recent studies of authorship attribution have used machine-learning methods including regularized multinomial logistic regression, neural nets, support vector machines, and the nearest shrunken centroid classifier to identify likely authors of disputed texts. These methods are all limited by an inability to perform open-set classification and account for text and corpus size. We propose a customized Bayesian logit-normal-beta-binomial classification model for supervised authorship attribution. The model is based on the beta-binomial distribution with an explicit inverse relationship between extra-binomial variation and text size. The model internally estimates the relationship of extra-binomial variation to text size, and uses Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) to produce distributions of posterior authorship probabilities instead of point estimates. We illustrate the method by training the machine-learning methods as well as the open-set Bayesian classifier on undisputed papers of The Federalist, and testing the method on documents historically attributed to Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison. The Bayesian classifier was the best classifier of these texts.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.9, S.1815-1825
  14. Liu, X.; Yu, S.; Janssens, F.; Glänzel, W.; Moreau, Y.; Moor, B.de: Weighted hybrid clustering by combining text mining and bibliometrics on a large-scale journal database (2010) 0.03 
    0.031000165 = product of:
  0.05166694 = sum of:
    0.022607451 = weight(_text_:on in 3464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022607451 = score(doc=3464,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.20619515 = fieldWeight in 3464, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3464)
    0.0144021725 = weight(_text_:information in 3464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0144021725 = score(doc=3464,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 3464, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3464)
    0.014657319 = product of:
      0.029314637 = sum of:
        0.029314637 = weight(_text_:technology in 3464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029314637 = score(doc=3464,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 3464, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3464)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    We propose a new hybrid clustering framework to incorporate text mining with bibliometrics in journal set analysis. The framework integrates two different approaches: clustering ensemble and kernel-fusion clustering. To improve the flexibility and the efficiency of processing large-scale data, we propose an information-based weighting scheme to leverage the effect of multiple data sources in hybrid clustering. Three different algorithms are extended by the proposed weighting scheme and they are employed on a large journal set retrieved from the Web of Science (WoS) database. The clustering performance of the proposed algorithms is systematically evaluated using multiple evaluation methods, and they were cross-compared with alternative methods. Experimental results demonstrate that the proposed weighted hybrid clustering strategy is superior to other methods in clustering performance and efficiency. The proposed approach also provides a more refined structural mapping of journal sets, which is useful for monitoring and detecting new trends in different scientific fields.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.6, S.1105-1119
  15. Ma, Z.; Sun, A.; Cong, G.: On predicting the popularity of newly emerging hashtags in Twitter (2013) 0.03 
    0.030515628 = product of:
  0.050859377 = sum of:
    0.026643137 = weight(_text_:on in 967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026643137 = score(doc=967,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.24300331 = fieldWeight in 967, 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=967)
    0.012001811 = weight(_text_:information in 967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012001811 = score(doc=967,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 967, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=967)
    0.012214432 = product of:
      0.024428863 = sum of:
        0.024428863 = weight(_text_:technology in 967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024428863 = score(doc=967,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 967, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=967)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    Because of Twitter's popularity and the viral nature of information dissemination on Twitter, predicting which Twitter topics will become popular in the near future becomes a task of considerable economic importance. Many Twitter topics are annotated by hashtags. In this article, we propose methods to predict the popularity of new hashtags on Twitter by formulating the problem as a classification task. We use five standard classification models (i.e., Naïve bayes, k-nearest neighbors, decision trees, support vector machines, and logistic regression) for prediction. The main challenge is the identification of effective features for describing new hashtags. We extract 7 content features from a hashtag string and the collection of tweets containing the hashtag and 11 contextual features from the social graph formed by users who have adopted the hashtag. We conducted experiments on a Twitter data set consisting of 31 million tweets from 2 million Singapore-based users. The experimental results show that the standard classifiers using the extracted features significantly outperform the baseline methods that do not use these features. Among the five classifiers, the logistic regression model performs the best in terms of the Micro-F1 measure. We also observe that contextual features are more effective than content features.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.7, S.1399-1410
  16. Vilares, D.; Alonso, M.A.; Gómez-Rodríguez, C.: On the usefulness of lexical and syntactic processing in polarity classification of Twitter messages (2015) 0.03 
    0.030515628 = product of:
  0.050859377 = sum of:
    0.026643137 = weight(_text_:on in 2161) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026643137 = score(doc=2161,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.24300331 = fieldWeight in 2161, 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=2161)
    0.012001811 = weight(_text_:information in 2161) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012001811 = score(doc=2161,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 2161, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2161)
    0.012214432 = product of:
      0.024428863 = sum of:
        0.024428863 = weight(_text_:technology in 2161) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024428863 = score(doc=2161,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 2161, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2161)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    Millions of micro texts are published every day on Twitter. Identifying the sentiment present in them can be helpful for measuring the frame of mind of the public, their satisfaction with respect to a product, or their support of a social event. In this context, polarity classification is a subfield of sentiment analysis focused on determining whether the content of a text is objective or subjective, and in the latter case, if it conveys a positive or a negative opinion. Most polarity detection techniques tend to take into account individual terms in the text and even some degree of linguistic knowledge, but they do not usually consider syntactic relations between words. This article explores how relating lexical, syntactic, and psychometric information can be helpful to perform polarity classification on Spanish tweets. We provide an evaluation for both shallow and deep linguistic perspectives. Empirical results show an improved performance of syntactic approaches over pure lexical models when using large training sets to create a classifier, but this tendency is reversed when small training collections are used.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.9, S.1799-1816
  17. Humphrey, S.M.; Névéol, A.; Browne, A.; Gobeil, J.; Ruch, P.; Darmoni, S.J.: Comparing a rule-based versus statistical system for automatic categorization of MEDLINE documents according to biomedical specialty (2009) 0.03 
    0.029992333 = product of:
  0.04998722 = sum of:
    0.023073634 = weight(_text_:on in 3300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023073634 = score(doc=3300,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.21044704 = fieldWeight in 3300, 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=3300)
    0.014699157 = weight(_text_:information in 3300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014699157 = score(doc=3300,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 3300, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3300)
    0.012214432 = product of:
      0.024428863 = sum of:
        0.024428863 = weight(_text_:technology in 3300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024428863 = score(doc=3300,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 3300, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3300)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    Automatic document categorization is an important research problem in Information Science and Natural Language Processing. Many applications, including, Word Sense Disambiguation and Information Retrieval in large collections, can benefit from such categorization. This paper focuses on automatic categorization of documents from the biomedical literature into broad discipline-based categories. Two different systems are described and contrasted: CISMeF, which uses rules based on human indexing of the documents by the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) controlled vocabulary in order to assign metaterms (MTs), and Journal Descriptor Indexing (JDI), based on human categorization of about 4,000 journals and statistical associations between journal descriptors (JDs) and textwords in the documents. We evaluate and compare the performance of these systems against a gold standard of humanly assigned categories for 100 MEDLINE documents, using six measures selected from trec_eval. The results show that for five of the measures performance is comparable, and for one measure JDI is superior. We conclude that these results favor JDI, given the significantly greater intellectual overhead involved in human indexing and maintaining a rule base for mapping MeSH terms to MTs. We also note a JDI method that associates JDs with MeSH indexing rather than textwords, and it may be worthwhile to investigate whether this JDI method (statistical) and CISMeF (rule-based) might be combined and then evaluated showing they are complementary to one another.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.12, S.2530-2539
  18. Fagni, T.; Sebastiani, F.: Selecting negative examples for hierarchical text classification: An experimental comparison (2010) 0.03 
    0.029300408 = product of:
  0.04883401 = sum of:
    0.023073634 = weight(_text_:on in 4101) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023073634 = score(doc=4101,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.21044704 = fieldWeight in 4101, 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=4101)
    0.0084865615 = weight(_text_:information in 4101) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0084865615 = score(doc=4101,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 4101, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4101)
    0.017273815 = product of:
      0.03454763 = sum of:
        0.03454763 = weight(_text_:technology in 4101) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03454763 = score(doc=4101,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.23268649 = fieldWeight in 4101, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4101)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    Hierarchical text classification (HTC) approaches have recently attracted a lot of interest on the part of researchers in human language technology and machine learning, since they have been shown to bring about equal, if not better, classification accuracy with respect to their "flat" counterparts while allowing exponential time savings at both learning and classification time. A typical component of HTC methods is a "local" policy for selecting negative examples: Given a category c, its negative training examples are by default identified with the training examples that are negative for c and positive for the categories which are siblings of c in the hierarchy. However, this policy has always been taken for granted and never been subjected to careful scrutiny since first proposed 15 years ago. This article proposes a thorough experimental comparison between this policy and three other policies for the selection of negative examples in HTC contexts, one of which (BEST LOCAL (k)) is being proposed for the first time in this article. We compare these policies on the hierarchical versions of three supervised learning algorithms (boosting, support vector machines, and naïve Bayes) by performing experiments on two standard TC datasets, REUTERS-21578 and RCV1-V2.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.11, S.2256-2265
  19. Chung, Y.M.; Lee, J.Y.: ¬A corpus-based approach to comparative evaluation of statistical term association measures (2001) 0.03 
    0.02881626 = product of:
  0.0480271 = sum of:
    0.018839544 = weight(_text_:on in 5769) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018839544 = score(doc=5769,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 5769, 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=5769)
    0.016973123 = weight(_text_:information in 5769) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016973123 = score(doc=5769,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 5769, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5769)
    0.012214432 = product of:
      0.024428863 = sum of:
        0.024428863 = weight(_text_:technology in 5769) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024428863 = score(doc=5769,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 5769, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5769)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    Statistical association measures have been widely applied in information retrieval research, usually employing a clustering of documents or terms on the basis of their relationships. Applications of the association measures for term clustering include automatic thesaurus construction and query expansion. This research evaluates the similarity of six association measures by comparing the relationship and behavior they demonstrate in various analyses of a test corpus. Analysis techniques include comparisons of highly ranked term pairs and term clusters, analyses of the correlation among the association measures using Pearson's correlation coefficient and MDS mapping, and an analysis of the impact of a term frequency on the association values by means of z-score. The major findings of the study are as follows: First, the most similar association measures are mutual information and Yule's coefficient of colligation Y, whereas cosine and Jaccard coefficients, as well as X**2 statistic and likelihood ratio, demonstrate quite similar behavior for terms with high frequency. Second, among all the measures, the X**2 statistic is the least affected by the frequency of terms. Third, although cosine and Jaccard coefficients tend to emphasize high frequency terms, mutual information and Yule's Y seem to overestimate rare terms
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 52(2001) no.4, S.283-296
  20. Chae, G.; Park, J.; Park, J.; Yeo, W.S.; Shi, C.: Linking and clustering artworks using social tags : revitalizing crowd-sourced information on cultural collections (2016) 0.03 
    0.02881626 = product of:
  0.0480271 = sum of:
    0.018839544 = weight(_text_:on in 2852) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018839544 = score(doc=2852,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 2852, 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=2852)
    0.016973123 = weight(_text_:information in 2852) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016973123 = score(doc=2852,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 2852, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2852)
    0.012214432 = product of:
      0.024428863 = sum of:
        0.024428863 = weight(_text_:technology in 2852) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024428863 = score(doc=2852,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 2852, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2852)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    Social tagging is one of the most popular methods for collecting crowd-sourced information in galleries, libraries, archives, and museums (GLAMs). However, when the number of social tags grows rapidly, using them becomes problematic and, as a result, they are often left as simply big data that cannot be used for practical purposes. To revitalize the use of this crowd-sourced information, we propose using social tags to link and cluster artworks based on an experimental study using an online collection at the Gyeonggi Museum of Modern Art (GMoMA). We view social tagging as a folksonomy, where artworks are classified by keywords of the crowd's various interpretations and one artwork can belong to several different categories simultaneously. To leverage this strength of social tags, we used a clustering method called "link communities" to detect overlapping communities in a network of artworks constructed by computing similarities between all artwork pairs. We used this framework to identify semantic relationships and clusters of similar artworks. By comparing the clustering results with curators' manual classification results, we demonstrated the potential of social tagging data for automatically clustering artworks in a way that reflects the dynamic perspectives of crowds.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.4, S.885-899

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 153
  • d 13
  • a 1
  • chi 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 148
  • el 17
  • m 4
  • x 3
  • s 2
  • d 1
  • r 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects