-
Broekstra, J.; Kampman, A.; Harmelen, F. van: Sesame: a generic architecture for storing and querying RDF and RDF schema (2004)
0.13
0.13087691 = product of:
0.21812819 = sum of:
0.1878335 = weight(_text_:section in 4403) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.1878335 = score(doc=4403,freq=12.0), product of:
0.26305357 = queryWeight, product of:
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.7140504 = fieldWeight in 4403, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4403)
0.013321568 = weight(_text_:on in 4403) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013321568 = score(doc=4403,freq=2.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 4403, 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=4403)
0.016973123 = weight(_text_:information in 4403) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016973123 = score(doc=4403,freq=8.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 4403, 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=4403)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- The resource description framework (RDF) is a W3C recommendation for the formulation of meta-data on the World Wide Web. RDF Schema (RDFS) extends this standard with the means to specify domain vocabulary and object structures. These techniques will enable the enrichment of the Web with machine-processable semantics, thus giving rise to what has been dubbed the Semantic Web. We have developed Sesame, an architecture for storage and querying of RDF and RDFS information. Sesame allows persistent storage of RDF data and schema information, and provides access methods to that information through export and querying modules. It features ways of caching information and offers support for concurrency control. This chapter is organized as follows: In Section 5.2 we discuss why a query language specifically tailored to RDF and RDFS is needed, over and above existing query languages such as XQuery. In Section 5.3 we look at Sesame's modular architecture in some detail. In Section 5.4 we give an overview of the SAIL API and a brief comparison to other RDF API approaches. Section 5.5 discusses our experiences with Sesame to date, and Section 5.6 looks into possible future developments. Finally, we provide our conclusions in Section 5.7.
-
Kruk, S.R.; McDaniel, B.: Conclusions: The future of semantic digital libraries (2009)
0.12
0.123989895 = product of:
0.15498737 = sum of:
0.10735579 = weight(_text_:section in 3372) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10735579 = score(doc=3372,freq=2.0), product of:
0.26305357 = queryWeight, product of:
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.40811378 = fieldWeight in 3372, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3372)
0.018650195 = weight(_text_:on in 3372) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018650195 = score(doc=3372,freq=2.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.17010231 = fieldWeight in 3372, 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=3372)
0.011881187 = weight(_text_:information in 3372) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011881187 = score(doc=3372,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 3372, 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=3372)
0.017100206 = product of:
0.03420041 = sum of:
0.03420041 = weight(_text_:technology in 3372) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03420041 = score(doc=3372,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.23034787 = fieldWeight in 3372, 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=3372)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.8 = coord(4/5)
- Abstract
- Through out this book we showed that Semantic Digital Libraries are no longer an abstract concept; we have presented both underlying technologies, examples of semantic digital libraries, and their applications. However, the bright future of this technology only begins, and we expect more and more genuine applications of semantic digital libraries to emerge. In this section we will spotlight on three of, in our opinion, the most promising of applications: semantic museums, eLearning 2.0, and semantic digital libraries in enterprises.
- Theme
- Information Gateway
-
Prud'hommeaux, E.; Gayo, E.: RDF ventures to boldly meet your most pedestrian needs (2015)
0.10
0.10322505 = product of:
0.17204174 = sum of:
0.092019245 = weight(_text_:section in 2024) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.092019245 = score(doc=2024,freq=2.0), product of:
0.26305357 = queryWeight, product of:
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.34981182 = fieldWeight in 2024, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2024)
0.0101838745 = weight(_text_:information in 2024) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0101838745 = score(doc=2024,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2024, 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=2024)
0.06983863 = sum of:
0.029314637 = weight(_text_:technology in 2024) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029314637 = score(doc=2024,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 2024, 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=2024)
0.040523995 = weight(_text_:22 in 2024) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040523995 = score(doc=2024,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2024, 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=2024)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Footnote
- Contribution to a special section "Linked data and the charm of weak semantics".
- Source
- Bulletin of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 41(2015) no.4, S.18-22
-
Davies, J.; Duke, A.; Stonkus, A.: OntoShare: evolving ontologies in a knowledge sharing system (2004)
0.09
0.089287184 = product of:
0.11160898 = sum of:
0.075912006 = weight(_text_:section in 4409) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.075912006 = score(doc=4409,freq=4.0), product of:
0.26305357 = queryWeight, product of:
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.28858003 = fieldWeight in 4409, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4409)
0.009325097 = weight(_text_:on in 4409) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009325097 = score(doc=4409,freq=2.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.08505116 = fieldWeight in 4409, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4409)
0.01782178 = weight(_text_:information in 4409) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01782178 = score(doc=4409,freq=18.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.20365247 = fieldWeight in 4409, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4409)
0.008550103 = product of:
0.017100206 = sum of:
0.017100206 = weight(_text_:technology in 4409) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017100206 = score(doc=4409,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.115173936 = fieldWeight in 4409, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4409)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.8 = coord(4/5)
- Abstract
- We saw in the introduction how the Semantic Web makes possible a new generation of knowledge management tools. We now turn our attention more specifically to Semantic Web based support for virtual communities of practice. The notion of communities of practice has attracted much attention in the field of knowledge management. Communities of practice are groups within (or sometimes across) organizations who share a common set of information needs or problems. They are typically not a formal organizational unit but an informal network, each sharing in part a common agenda and shared interests or issues. In one example it was found that a lot of knowledge sharing among copier engineers took place through informal exchanges, often around a water cooler. As well as local, geographically based communities, trends towards flexible working and globalisation have led to interest in supporting dispersed communities using Internet technology. The challenge for organizations is to support such communities and make them effective. Provided with an ontology meeting the needs of a particular community of practice, knowledge management tools can arrange knowledge assets into the predefined conceptual classes of the ontology, allowing more natural and intuitive access to knowledge. Knowledge management tools must give users the ability to organize information into a controllable asset. Building an intranet-based store of information is not sufficient for knowledge management; the relationships within the stored information are vital. These relationships cover such diverse issues as relative importance, context, sequence, significance, causality and association. The potential for knowledge management tools is vast; not only can they make better use of the raw information already available, but they can sift, abstract and help to share new information, and present it to users in new and compelling ways.
In this chapter, we describe the OntoShare system which facilitates and encourages the sharing of information between communities of practice within (or perhaps across) organizations and which encourages people - who may not previously have known of each other's existence in a large organization - to make contact where there are mutual concerns or interests. As users contribute information to the community, a knowledge resource annotated with meta-data is created. Ontologies defined using the resource description framework (RDF) and RDF Schema (RDFS) are used in this process. RDF is a W3C recommendation for the formulation of meta-data for WWW resources. RDF(S) extends this standard with the means to specify domain vocabulary and object structures - that is, concepts and the relationships that hold between them. In the next section, we describe in detail the way in which OntoShare can be used to share and retrieve knowledge and how that knowledge is represented in an RDF-based ontology. We then proceed to discuss in Section 10.3 how the ontologies in OntoShare evolve over time based on user interaction with the system and motivate our approach to user-based creation of RDF-annotated information resources. The way in which OntoShare can help to locate expertise within an organization is then described, followed by a discussion of the sociotechnical issues of deploying such a tool. Finally, a planned evaluation exercise and avenues for further research are outlined.
-
Kavouras, M.; Kokla, M.: Theories of geographic concepts : ontological approaches to semantic integration (2008)
0.09
0.08706535 = product of:
0.14510891 = sum of:
0.12269233 = weight(_text_:section in 3275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.12269233 = score(doc=3275,freq=8.0), product of:
0.26305357 = queryWeight, product of:
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.46641576 = fieldWeight in 3275, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3275)
0.010657255 = weight(_text_:on in 3275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010657255 = score(doc=3275,freq=2.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.097201325 = fieldWeight in 3275, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3275)
0.011759326 = weight(_text_:information in 3275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011759326 = score(doc=3275,freq=6.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.1343758 = fieldWeight in 3275, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3275)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- Written by experts in the field, this book addresses theoretical, formal, and pragmatic issues of geographic knowledge representation and integration based on an ontological approach. The first section sets the context by emphasizing the importance of philosophical, cognitive, and formal theories in preserving the semantics of geographic concepts during ontology development and integration. Section two exhausts all theoretical issues related to the subject and section three introduces a number of formal tools. Section four introduces a general method with the necessary steps to ontology integration and applies it to a number of ontology integration cases.
- Content
- Introduction -- Geographic ontologies -- Semantic interoperability -- Ontologies -- Concepts -- Semantics -- Knowledge representation instruments -- Formal concept analysis -- Conceptual graphs -- Channel theory -- Description logics -- Natural language and semantic information extraction -- Similarity -- Integration framework -- Integration approaches -- Integration guidelines -- Epilogue.
- LCSH
- Geographic information systems
- Subject
- Geographic information systems
-
Corcho, O.; Poveda-Villalón, M.; Gómez-Pérez, A.: Ontology engineering in the era of linked data (2015)
0.08
0.08180231 = product of:
0.13633718 = sum of:
0.10735579 = weight(_text_:section in 3293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10735579 = score(doc=3293,freq=2.0), product of:
0.26305357 = queryWeight, product of:
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.40811378 = fieldWeight in 3293, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3293)
0.011881187 = weight(_text_:information in 3293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011881187 = score(doc=3293,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 3293, 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=3293)
0.017100206 = product of:
0.03420041 = sum of:
0.03420041 = weight(_text_:technology in 3293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03420041 = score(doc=3293,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.23034787 = fieldWeight in 3293, 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=3293)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Footnote
- Contribution to a special section "Linked data and the charm of weak semantics".
- Source
- Bulletin of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 41(2015) no.4, S.13-17
-
Khoo, S.G.; Na, J.-C.: Semantic relations in information science (2006)
0.08
0.07536412 = product of:
0.09420515 = sum of:
0.046009623 = weight(_text_:section in 1978) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.046009623 = score(doc=1978,freq=2.0), product of:
0.26305357 = queryWeight, product of:
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.17490591 = fieldWeight in 1978, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1978)
0.023978824 = weight(_text_:on in 1978) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023978824 = score(doc=1978,freq=18.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.21870299 = fieldWeight in 1978, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1978)
0.016888045 = weight(_text_:information in 1978) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016888045 = score(doc=1978,freq=22.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.19298252 = fieldWeight in 1978, product of:
4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
22.0 = termFreq=22.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1978)
0.0073286593 = product of:
0.014657319 = sum of:
0.014657319 = weight(_text_:technology in 1978) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014657319 = score(doc=1978,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.09872051 = fieldWeight in 1978, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1978)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.8 = coord(4/5)
- Abstract
- This chapter examines the nature of semantic relations and their main applications in information science. The nature and types of semantic relations are discussed from the perspectives of linguistics and psychology. An overview of the semantic relations used in knowledge structures such as thesauri and ontologies is provided, as well as the main techniques used in the automatic extraction of semantic relations from text. The chapter then reviews the use of semantic relations in information extraction, information retrieval, question-answering, and automatic text summarization applications. Concepts and relations are the foundation of knowledge and thought. When we look at the world, we perceive not a mass of colors but objects to which we automatically assign category labels. Our perceptual system automatically segments the world into concepts and categories. Concepts are the building blocks of knowledge; relations act as the cement that links concepts into knowledge structures. We spend much of our lives identifying regular associations and relations between objects, events, and processes so that the world has an understandable structure and predictability. Our lives and work depend on the accuracy and richness of this knowledge structure and its web of relations. Relations are needed for reasoning and inferencing. Chaffin and Herrmann (1988b, p. 290) noted that "relations between ideas have long been viewed as basic to thought, language, comprehension, and memory." Aristotle's Metaphysics (Aristotle, 1961; McKeon, expounded on several types of relations. The majority of the 30 entries in a section of the Metaphysics known today as the Philosophical Lexicon referred to relations and attributes, including cause, part-whole, same and opposite, quality (i.e., attribute) and kind-of, and defined different types of each relation. Hume (1955) pointed out that there is a connection between successive ideas in our minds, even in our dreams, and that the introduction of an idea in our mind automatically recalls an associated idea. He argued that all the objects of human reasoning are divided into relations of ideas and matters of fact and that factual reasoning is founded on the cause-effect relation. His Treatise of Human Nature identified seven kinds of relations: resemblance, identity, relations of time and place, proportion in quantity or number, degrees in quality, contrariety, and causation. Mill (1974, pp. 989-1004) discoursed on several types of relations, claiming that all things are either feelings, substances, or attributes, and that attributes can be a quality (which belongs to one object) or a relation to other objects.
Linguists in the structuralist tradition (e.g., Lyons, 1977; Saussure, 1959) have asserted that concepts cannot be defined on their own but only in relation to other concepts. Semantic relations appear to reflect a logical structure in the fundamental nature of thought (Caplan & Herrmann, 1993). Green, Bean, and Myaeng (2002) noted that semantic relations play a critical role in how we represent knowledge psychologically, linguistically, and computationally, and that many systems of knowledge representation start with a basic distinction between entities and relations. Green (2001, p. 3) said that "relationships are involved as we combine simple entities to form more complex entities, as we compare entities, as we group entities, as one entity performs a process on another entity, and so forth. Indeed, many things that we might initially regard as basic and elemental are revealed upon further examination to involve internal structure, or in other words, internal relationships." Concepts and relations are often expressed in language and text. Language is used not just for communicating concepts and relations, but also for representing, storing, and reasoning with concepts and relations. We shall examine the nature of semantic relations from a linguistic and psychological perspective, with an emphasis on relations expressed in text. The usefulness of semantic relations in information science, especially in ontology construction, information extraction, information retrieval, question-answering, and text summarization is discussed. Research and development in information science have focused on concepts and terms, but the focus will increasingly shift to the identification, processing, and management of relations to achieve greater effectiveness and refinement in information science techniques. Previous chapters in ARIST on natural language processing (Chowdhury, 2003), text mining (Trybula, 1999), information retrieval and the philosophy of language (Blair, 2003), and query expansion (Efthimiadis, 1996) provide a background for this discussion, as semantic relations are an important part of these applications.
- Source
- Annual review of information science and technology. 40(2006), S.157-228
-
Stojanovic, N.: Ontology-based Information Retrieval : methods and tools for cooperative query answering (2005)
0.07
0.07486399 = product of:
0.09357999 = sum of:
0.052783445 = product of:
0.15835033 = sum of:
0.15835033 = weight(_text_:3a in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.15835033 = score(doc=701,freq=2.0), product of:
0.42262965 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.3746787 = fieldWeight in 701, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=701)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.010657255 = weight(_text_:on in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010657255 = score(doc=701,freq=2.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.097201325 = fieldWeight in 701, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=701)
0.020367747 = weight(_text_:information in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020367747 = score(doc=701,freq=18.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.23274568 = fieldWeight in 701, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=701)
0.009771545 = product of:
0.01954309 = sum of:
0.01954309 = weight(_text_:technology in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01954309 = score(doc=701,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.13162735 = fieldWeight in 701, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=701)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.8 = coord(4/5)
- Abstract
- By the explosion of possibilities for a ubiquitous content production, the information overload problem reaches the level of complexity which cannot be managed by traditional modelling approaches anymore. Due to their pure syntactical nature traditional information retrieval approaches did not succeed in treating content itself (i.e. its meaning, and not its representation). This leads to a very low usefulness of the results of a retrieval process for a user's task at hand. In the last ten years ontologies have been emerged from an interesting conceptualisation paradigm to a very promising (semantic) modelling technology, especially in the context of the Semantic Web. From the information retrieval point of view, ontologies enable a machine-understandable form of content description, such that the retrieval process can be driven by the meaning of the content. However, the very ambiguous nature of the retrieval process in which a user, due to the unfamiliarity with the underlying repository and/or query syntax, just approximates his information need in a query, implies a necessity to include the user in the retrieval process more actively in order to close the gap between the meaning of the content and the meaning of a user's query (i.e. his information need). This thesis lays foundation for such an ontology-based interactive retrieval process, in which the retrieval system interacts with a user in order to conceptually interpret the meaning of his query, whereas the underlying domain ontology drives the conceptualisation process. In that way the retrieval process evolves from a query evaluation process into a highly interactive cooperation between a user and the retrieval system, in which the system tries to anticipate the user's information need and to deliver the relevant content proactively. Moreover, the notion of content relevance for a user's query evolves from a content dependent artefact to the multidimensional context-dependent structure, strongly influenced by the user's preferences. This cooperation process is realized as the so-called Librarian Agent Query Refinement Process. In order to clarify the impact of an ontology on the retrieval process (regarding its complexity and quality), a set of methods and tools for different levels of content and query formalisation is developed, ranging from pure ontology-based inferencing to keyword-based querying in which semantics automatically emerges from the results. Our evaluation studies have shown that the possibilities to conceptualize a user's information need in the right manner and to interpret the retrieval results accordingly are key issues for realizing much more meaningful information retrieval systems.
- Content
- Vgl.: http%3A%2F%2Fdigbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fvolltexte%2Fdocuments%2F1627&ei=tAtYUYrBNoHKtQb3l4GYBw&usg=AFQjCNHeaxKkKU3-u54LWxMNYGXaaDLCGw&sig2=8WykXWQoDKjDSdGtAakH2Q&bvm=bv.44442042,d.Yms.
-
Gayathri, R.; Uma, V.: Ontology based knowledge representation technique, domain modeling languages and planners for robotic path planning : a survey (2018)
0.07
0.070913404 = product of:
0.11818901 = sum of:
0.092019245 = weight(_text_:section in 5605) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.092019245 = score(doc=5605,freq=2.0), product of:
0.26305357 = queryWeight, product of:
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.34981182 = fieldWeight in 5605, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5605)
0.015985882 = weight(_text_:on in 5605) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015985882 = score(doc=5605,freq=2.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.14580199 = fieldWeight in 5605, 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=5605)
0.0101838745 = weight(_text_:information in 5605) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0101838745 = score(doc=5605,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 5605, 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=5605)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR & R) has become one of the promising fields of Artificial Intelligence. KR is dedicated towards representing information about the domain that can be utilized in path planning. Ontology based knowledge representation and reasoning techniques provide sophisticated knowledge about the environment for processing tasks or methods. Ontology helps in representing the knowledge about environment, events and actions that help in path planning and making robots more autonomous. Knowledge reasoning techniques can infer new conclusion and thus aids planning dynamically in a non-deterministic environment. In the initial sections, the representation of knowledge using ontology and the techniques for reasoning that could contribute in path planning are discussed in detail. In the following section, we also provide comparison of various planning domain modeling languages, ontology editors, planners and robot simulation tools.
- Content
- Part of special issue: SI on Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning. Vgl.: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.icte.2018.04.008.
-
Baião Salgado Silva, G.; Lima, G.Â. Borém de Oliveira: Using topic maps in establishing compatibility of semantically structured hypertext contents (2012)
0.07
0.06967728 = product of:
0.116128795 = sum of:
0.023073634 = weight(_text_:on in 633) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023073634 = score(doc=633,freq=6.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.21044704 = fieldWeight in 633, 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=633)
0.016973123 = weight(_text_:information in 633) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016973123 = score(doc=633,freq=8.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 633, 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=633)
0.076082036 = sum of:
0.042312037 = weight(_text_:technology in 633) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042312037 = score(doc=633,freq=6.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.2849816 = fieldWeight in 633, 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=633)
0.03377 = weight(_text_:22 in 633) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03377 = score(doc=633,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 633, 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=633)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- Considering the characteristics of hypertext systems and problems such as cognitive overload and the disorientation of users, this project studies subject hypertext documents that have undergone conceptual structuring using facets for content representation and improvement of information retrieval during navigation. The main objective was to assess the possibility of the application of topic map technology for automating the compatibilization process of these structures. For this purpose, two dissertations from the UFMG Information Science Post-Graduation Program were adopted as samples. Both dissertations had been duly analyzed and structured on the MHTX (Hypertextual Map) prototype database. The faceted structures of both dissertations, which had been represented in conceptual maps, were then converted into topic maps. It was then possible to use the merge property of the topic maps to promote the semantic interrelationship between the maps and, consequently, between the hypertextual information resources proper. The merge results were then analyzed in the light of theories dealing with the compatibilization of languages developed within the realm of information technology and librarianship from the 1960s on. The main goals accomplished were: (a) the detailed conceptualization of the merge process of the topic maps, considering the possible compatibilization levels and the applicability of this technology in the integration of faceted structures; and (b) the production of a detailed sequence of steps that may be used in the implementation of topic maps based on faceted structures.
- Date
- 22. 2.2013 11:39:23
-
Bouramoul, A.: ¬The semantic dimension in information retrieval, from document indexing to query reformulation (2011)
0.07
0.06749723 = product of:
0.11249538 = sum of:
0.07668271 = weight(_text_:section in 4740) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07668271 = score(doc=4740,freq=2.0), product of:
0.26305357 = queryWeight, product of:
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.29150987 = fieldWeight in 4740, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4740)
0.018839544 = weight(_text_:on in 4740) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018839544 = score(doc=4740,freq=4.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 4740, 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=4740)
0.016973123 = weight(_text_:information in 4740) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016973123 = score(doc=4740,freq=8.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 4740, 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=4740)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- In the context of this research, we present an approach for representing the semantic content of documents and guiding the automatic query reformulation using a domain ontology. The aim is to improve the performance of information retrieval systems. In order to operationalize our proposal, the development of a set of external resources was needed, so we have constructed the 'AnimOnto' domain ontology relating to the animals domain and a document base that covers the same field. They were used to test and validate our proposal. Specifically, we propose in this paper a general architecture based on three complementary processes, this architecture uses the ontology during the semantic indexing stage and in the query reformulation phase. We also describe the 'AnimeSe Finder' tool (Animal Semantic Finder). The latter has the advantage of being generic and adaptable to other search types. It is possible to use another ontology with another document base for a new domain, to exploit the general functionalities offered by the 'AnimeSe Finder' tool.
- Content
- Beitrag innerhalb einer Special Section: Knowledge Organization, Competitive Intelligence, and Information Systems - Papers from 4th International Conference on "Information Systems & Economic Intelligence," February 17-19th, 2011. Marrakech - Morocco. Vgl.: http://www.ergon-verlag.de/isko_ko/downloads/ko_38_2011_5f.pdf.
-
Zeng, Q.; Yu, M.; Yu, W.; Xiong, J.; Shi, Y.; Jiang, M.: Faceted hierarchy : a new graph type to organize scientific concepts and a construction method (2019)
0.07
0.067179896 = product of:
0.11196649 = sum of:
0.07917517 = product of:
0.2375255 = sum of:
0.2375255 = weight(_text_:3a in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.2375255 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
0.42262965 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 400, 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=400)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.022607451 = weight(_text_:on in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022607451 = score(doc=400,freq=4.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.20619515 = fieldWeight in 400, 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=400)
0.0101838745 = weight(_text_:information in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0101838745 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 400, 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=400)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- On a scientific concept hierarchy, a parent concept may have a few attributes, each of which has multiple values being a group of child concepts. We call these attributes facets: classification has a few facets such as application (e.g., face recognition), model (e.g., svm, knn), and metric (e.g., precision). In this work, we aim at building faceted concept hierarchies from scientific literature. Hierarchy construction methods heavily rely on hypernym detection, however, the faceted relations are parent-to-child links but the hypernym relation is a multi-hop, i.e., ancestor-to-descendent link with a specific facet "type-of". We use information extraction techniques to find synonyms, sibling concepts, and ancestor-descendent relations from a data science corpus. And we propose a hierarchy growth algorithm to infer the parent-child links from the three types of relationships. It resolves conflicts by maintaining the acyclic structure of a hierarchy.
- Content
- Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Faclanthology.org%2FD19-5317.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0ZZFyq5wWTtNTvNkrvjlGA.
-
Soergel, D.: Digital libraries and knowledge organization (2009)
0.06
0.06472421 = product of:
0.10787367 = sum of:
0.07668271 = weight(_text_:section in 672) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07668271 = score(doc=672,freq=2.0), product of:
0.26305357 = queryWeight, product of:
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.29150987 = fieldWeight in 672, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=672)
0.018976528 = weight(_text_:information in 672) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018976528 = score(doc=672,freq=10.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.21684799 = fieldWeight in 672, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=672)
0.012214432 = product of:
0.024428863 = sum of:
0.024428863 = weight(_text_:technology in 672) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024428863 = score(doc=672,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 672, 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=672)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- This chapter describes not so much what digital libraries are but what digital libraries with semantic support could and should be. It discusses the nature of Knowledge Organization Systems (KOS) and how KOS can support digital library users. It projects a vision for designers to make and for users to demand better digital libraries. What is a digital library? The term \Digital Library" (DL) is used to refer to a range of systems, from digital object and metadata repositories, reference-linking systems, archives, and content management systems to complex systems that integrate advanced digital library services and support for research and practice communities. A DL may offer many technology-enabled functions and services that support users, both as information producers and as information users. Many of these functions appear in information systems that would not normally be considered digital libraries, making boundaries even more blurry. Instead of pursuing the hopeless quest of coming up with the definition of digital library, we present a framework that allows a clear and somewhat standardized description of any information system so that users can select the system(s) that best meet their requirements. Section 2 gives a broad outline for more detail see the DELOS DL Reference Model.
- Theme
- Information Gateway
-
Conde, A.; Larrañaga, M.; Arruarte, A.; Elorriaga, J.A.; Roth, D.: litewi: a combined term extraction and entity linking method for eliciting educational ontologies from textbooks (2016)
0.06
0.06365425 = product of:
0.10609042 = sum of:
0.023073634 = weight(_text_:on in 2645) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023073634 = score(doc=2645,freq=6.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.21044704 = fieldWeight in 2645, 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=2645)
0.014699157 = weight(_text_:information in 2645) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014699157 = score(doc=2645,freq=6.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 2645, 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=2645)
0.06831763 = sum of:
0.03454763 = weight(_text_:technology in 2645) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03454763 = score(doc=2645,freq=4.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.23268649 = fieldWeight in 2645, 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=2645)
0.03377 = weight(_text_:22 in 2645) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03377 = score(doc=2645,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2645, 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=2645)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- Major efforts have been conducted on ontology learning, that is, semiautomatic processes for the construction of domain ontologies from diverse sources of information. In the past few years, a research trend has focused on the construction of educational ontologies, that is, ontologies to be used for educational purposes. The identification of the terminology is crucial to build ontologies. Term extraction techniques allow the identification of the domain-related terms from electronic resources. This paper presents LiTeWi, a novel method that combines current unsupervised term extraction approaches for creating educational ontologies for technology supported learning systems from electronic textbooks. LiTeWi uses Wikipedia as an additional information source. Wikipedia contains more than 30 million articles covering the terminology of nearly every domain in 288 languages, which makes it an appropriate generic corpus for term extraction. Furthermore, given that its content is available in several languages, it promotes both domain and language independence. LiTeWi is aimed at being used by teachers, who usually develop their didactic material from textbooks. To evaluate its performance, LiTeWi was tuned up using a textbook on object oriented programming and then tested with two textbooks of different domains-astronomy and molecular biology.
- Date
- 22. 1.2016 12:38:14
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.2, S.380-399
-
Kleineberg, M.: ¬The blind men and the elephant : towards an organization of epistemic contexts (2013)
0.06
0.062405292 = product of:
0.104008816 = sum of:
0.07668271 = weight(_text_:section in 1074) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07668271 = score(doc=1074,freq=2.0), product of:
0.26305357 = queryWeight, product of:
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.29150987 = fieldWeight in 1074, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1074)
0.018839544 = weight(_text_:on in 1074) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018839544 = score(doc=1074,freq=4.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 1074, 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=1074)
0.0084865615 = weight(_text_:information in 1074) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0084865615 = score(doc=1074,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 1074, 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=1074)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- In the last two decades of knowledge organization (KO) research, there has been an increasing interest in the context-dependent nature of human knowledge. Contextualism maintains that knowledge is not available in a neutral and objective way, but is always interwoven with the process of knowledge production and the prerequisites of the knower. As a first step towards a systematic organization of epistemic contexts, the concept of knowledge will be considered in its ontological (WHAT) and epistemological (WHO) including methodological (HOW) dimensions. In current KO research, however, either the contextualism is not fully implemented (classification-as-ontology) or the ambition for a context-transcending universal KOS seems to have been abandoned (classification-as-epistemology). Based on a combined ontology and epistemology it will be argued that a phenomena-based approach to KO as stipulated by the León Manifesto, for example, requires a revision of the underlying phenomenon concept as a relation between the known object (WHAT) and the knowing subject (WHO), which is constituted by the application of specific methods (HOW). While traditional subject indexing of documents often relies on the organizing principle "levels of being" (WHAT), for a future context indexing, two novel principles are proposed, namely "levels of knowing" (WHO) and "integral methodological pluralism" (HOW).
- Footnote
- Part of a section "Papers from the 13th Meeting of the German ISKO "Theory, Information, and Organization of Knowledge," Potsdam, 19-20 March 2013"
-
Styltsvig, H.B.: Ontology-based information retrieval (2006)
0.06
0.058660645 = product of:
0.09776774 = sum of:
0.061346166 = weight(_text_:section in 1154) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.061346166 = score(doc=1154,freq=2.0), product of:
0.26305357 = queryWeight, product of:
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.23320788 = fieldWeight in 1154, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1154)
0.018458908 = weight(_text_:on in 1154) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018458908 = score(doc=1154,freq=6.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.16835764 = fieldWeight in 1154, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1154)
0.017962666 = weight(_text_:information in 1154) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017962666 = score(doc=1154,freq=14.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.20526241 = fieldWeight in 1154, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1154)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- In this thesis, we will present methods for introducing ontologies in information retrieval. The main hypothesis is that the inclusion of conceptual knowledge such as ontologies in the information retrieval process can contribute to the solution of major problems currently found in information retrieval. This utilization of ontologies has a number of challenges. Our focus is on the use of similarity measures derived from the knowledge about relations between concepts in ontologies, the recognition of semantic information in texts and the mapping of this knowledge into the ontologies in use, as well as how to fuse together the ideas of ontological similarity and ontological indexing into a realistic information retrieval scenario. To achieve the recognition of semantic knowledge in a text, shallow natural language processing is used during indexing that reveals knowledge to the level of noun phrases. Furthermore, we briefly cover the identification of semantic relations inside and between noun phrases, as well as discuss which kind of problems are caused by an increase in compoundness with respect to the structure of concepts in the evaluation of queries. Measuring similarity between concepts based on distances in the structure of the ontology is discussed. In addition, a shared nodes measure is introduced and, based on a set of intuitive similarity properties, compared to a number of different measures. In this comparison the shared nodes measure appears to be superior, though more computationally complex. Some of the major problems of shared nodes which relate to the way relations differ with respect to the degree they bring the concepts they connect closer are discussed. A generalized measure called weighted shared nodes is introduced to deal with these problems. Finally, the utilization of concept similarity in query evaluation is discussed. A semantic expansion approach that incorporates concept similarity is introduced and a generalized fuzzy set retrieval model that applies expansion during query evaluation is presented. While not commonly used in present information retrieval systems, it appears that the fuzzy set model comprises the flexibility needed when generalizing to an ontology-based retrieval model and, with the introduction of a hierarchical fuzzy aggregation principle, compound concepts can be handled in a straightforward and natural manner.
- Imprint
- Roskilde : Roskilde University, Computer Science Section
-
Cui, H.: Competency evaluation of plant character ontologies against domain literature (2010)
0.05
0.051731754 = product of:
0.08621959 = sum of:
0.013321568 = weight(_text_:on in 3466) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013321568 = score(doc=3466,freq=2.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 3466, 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=3466)
0.014699157 = weight(_text_:information in 3466) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014699157 = score(doc=3466,freq=6.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 3466, 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=3466)
0.05819886 = sum of:
0.024428863 = weight(_text_:technology in 3466) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024428863 = score(doc=3466,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 3466, 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=3466)
0.03377 = weight(_text_:22 in 3466) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03377 = score(doc=3466,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3466, 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=3466)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- Specimen identification keys are still the most commonly created tools used by systematic biologists to access biodiversity information. Creating identification keys requires analyzing and synthesizing large amounts of information from specimens and their descriptions and is a very labor-intensive and time-consuming activity. Automating the generation of identification keys from text descriptions becomes a highly attractive text mining application in the biodiversity domain. Fine-grained semantic annotation of morphological descriptions of organisms is a necessary first step in generating keys from text. Machine-readable ontologies are needed in this process because most biological characters are only implied (i.e., not stated) in descriptions. The immediate question to ask is How well do existing ontologies support semantic annotation and automated key generation? With the intention to either select an existing ontology or develop a unified ontology based on existing ones, this paper evaluates the coverage, semantic consistency, and inter-ontology agreement of a biodiversity character ontology and three plant glossaries that may be turned into ontologies. The coverage and semantic consistency of the ontology/glossaries are checked against the authoritative domain literature, namely, Flora of North America and Flora of China. The evaluation results suggest that more work is needed to improve the coverage and interoperability of the ontology/glossaries. More concepts need to be added to the ontology/glossaries and careful work is needed to improve the semantic consistency. The method used in this paper to evaluate the ontology/glossaries can be used to propose new candidate concepts from the domain literature and suggest appropriate definitions.
- Date
- 1. 6.2010 9:55:22
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.6, S.1144-1165
-
Kiren, T.: ¬A clustering based indexing technique of modularized ontologies for information retrieval (2017)
0.05
0.05070856 = product of:
0.08451426 = sum of:
0.010657255 = weight(_text_:on in 4399) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010657255 = score(doc=4399,freq=2.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.097201325 = fieldWeight in 4399, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4399)
0.019202897 = weight(_text_:information in 4399) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019202897 = score(doc=4399,freq=16.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 4399, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4399)
0.054654106 = sum of:
0.027638106 = weight(_text_:technology in 4399) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027638106 = score(doc=4399,freq=4.0), product of:
0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.1861492 = fieldWeight in 4399, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4399)
0.027015999 = weight(_text_:22 in 4399) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027015999 = score(doc=4399,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 4399, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4399)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- Indexing plays a vital role in Information Retrieval. With the availability of huge volume of information, it has become necessary to index the information in such a way to make easier for the end users to find the information they want efficiently and accurately. Keyword-based indexing uses words as indexing terms. It is not capable of capturing the implicit relation among terms or the semantics of the words in the document. To eliminate this limitation, ontology-based indexing came into existence, which allows semantic based indexing to solve complex and indirect user queries. Ontologies are used for document indexing which allows semantic based information retrieval. Existing ontologies or the ones constructed from scratch are used presently for indexing. Constructing ontologies from scratch is a labor-intensive task and requires extensive domain knowledge whereas use of an existing ontology may leave some important concepts in documents un-annotated. Using multiple ontologies can overcome the problem of missing out concepts to a great extent, but it is difficult to manage (changes in ontologies over time by their developers) multiple ontologies and ontology heterogeneity also arises due to ontologies constructed by different ontology developers. One possible solution to managing multiple ontologies and build from scratch is to use modular ontologies for indexing.
Modular ontologies are built in modular manner by combining modules from multiple relevant ontologies. Ontology heterogeneity also arises during modular ontology construction because multiple ontologies are being dealt with, during this process. Ontologies need to be aligned before using them for modular ontology construction. The existing approaches for ontology alignment compare all the concepts of each ontology to be aligned, hence not optimized in terms of time and search space utilization. A new indexing technique is proposed based on modular ontology. An efficient ontology alignment technique is proposed to solve the heterogeneity problem during the construction of modular ontology. Results are satisfactory as Precision and Recall are improved by (8%) and (10%) respectively. The value of Pearsons Correlation Coefficient for degree of similarity, time, search space requirement, precision and recall are close to 1 which shows that the results are significant. Further research can be carried out for using modular ontology based indexing technique for Multimedia Information Retrieval and Bio-Medical information retrieval.
- Content
- Submitted to the Faculty of the Computer Science and Engineering Department of the University of Engineering and Technology Lahore in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Computer Science (2009 - 009-PhD-CS-04). Vgl.: http://prr.hec.gov.pk/jspui/bitstream/123456789/8375/1/Taybah_Kiren_Computer_Science_HSR_2017_UET_Lahore_14.12.2017.pdf.
- Date
- 20. 1.2015 18:30:22
- Imprint
- Lahore : University of Engineering and Technology / Department of Computer Science and Engineering
-
¬The Semantic Web - ISWC 2010 : 9th International Semantic Web Conference, ISWC 2010, Shanghai, China, November 7-11, 2010, Revised Selected Papers, Part I. (2010)
0.05
0.047275607 = product of:
0.07879268 = sum of:
0.061346166 = weight(_text_:section in 4707) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.061346166 = score(doc=4707,freq=2.0), product of:
0.26305357 = queryWeight, product of:
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.23320788 = fieldWeight in 4707, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4707)
0.010657255 = weight(_text_:on in 4707) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010657255 = score(doc=4707,freq=2.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.097201325 = fieldWeight in 4707, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4707)
0.0067892494 = weight(_text_:information in 4707) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0067892494 = score(doc=4707,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.0775819 = fieldWeight in 4707, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4707)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- The two-volume set LNCS 6496 and 6497 constitutes the refereed proceedings of the 9th International Semantic Web Conference, ISWC 2010, held in Shanghai, China, during November 7-11, 2010. Part I contains 51 papers out of 578 submissions to the research track. Part II contains 18 papers out of 66 submissions to the semantic Web in-use track, 6 papers out of 26 submissions to the doctoral consortium track, and also 4 invited talks. Each submitted paper were carefully reviewed. The International Semantic Web Conferences (ISWC) constitute the major international venue where the latest research results and technical innovations on all aspects of the Semantic Web are presented. ISWC brings together researchers, practitioners, and users from the areas of artificial intelligence, databases, social networks, distributed computing, Web engineering, information systems, natural language processing, soft computing, and human computer interaction to discuss the major challenges and proposed solutions, the success stories and failures, as well the visions that can advance research and drive innovation in the Semantic Web.
- Footnote
- Vgl. unter: http://www.springerlink.com/content/978-3-642-17745-3/#section=829448&page=13&locus=1.
-
Schmitz-Esser, W.: Formalizing terminology-based knowledge for an ontology independently of a particular language (2008)
0.05
0.04585068 = product of:
0.1146267 = sum of:
0.092019245 = weight(_text_:section in 1680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.092019245 = score(doc=1680,freq=2.0), product of:
0.26305357 = queryWeight, product of:
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.34981182 = fieldWeight in 1680, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1680)
0.022607451 = weight(_text_:on in 1680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022607451 = score(doc=1680,freq=4.0), product of:
0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.049850095 = queryNorm
0.20619515 = fieldWeight in 1680, 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=1680)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- 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.
- Source
- Kompatibilität, Medien und Ethik in der Wissensorganisation - Compatibility, Media and Ethics in Knowledge Organization: Proceedings der 10. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation Wien, 3.-5. Juli 2006 - Proceedings of the 10th Conference of the German Section of the International Society of Knowledge Organization Vienna, 3-5 July 2006. Ed.: H.P. Ohly, S. Netscher u. K. Mitgutsch
