Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × year_i:[2020 TO 2030}
  • × theme_ss:"Klassifikationstheorie: Elemente / Struktur"
  1. Bergman, M.K..: Hierarchy in knowledge systems (2022) 0.07
    0.07359202 = product of:
      0.0981227 = sum of:
        0.01213797 = weight(_text_:information in 1099) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01213797 = score(doc=1099,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 1099, 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=1099)
        0.0553244 = weight(_text_:standards in 1099) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0553244 = score(doc=1099,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.24621427 = fieldWeight in 1099, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1099)
        0.030660335 = product of:
          0.06132067 = sum of:
            0.06132067 = weight(_text_:organization in 1099) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06132067 = score(doc=1099,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.34114468 = fieldWeight in 1099, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1099)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.75 = coord(3/4)
    
    Abstract
    Hierarchies abound to help us organize our world. A hierarchy places items into a general order, where more 'general' is also more 'abstract'. The etymology of hierarchy is grounded in notions of religious and social rank. This article, after a historical review, focuses on knowledge systems, an interloper of the term hierarchy since at least the 1800s. Hierarchies in knowledge systems include taxonomies, classification systems, or thesauri in information science, and systems for representing information and knowledge to computers, notably ontologies and knowledge representation languages. Hierarchies are the logical underpinning of inference and reasoning in these systems, as well as the scaffolding for classification and inheritance. Hierarchies in knowledge systems express subsumption relations that have flexible variants, which we can represent algorithmically, and thus computationally. This article dissects that variability, leading to a proposed typology of hierarchies useful to knowledge systems. The article argues through a perspective informed by Charles Peirce that natural hierarchies are real, can be logically determined, and are the appropriate basis for knowledge systems. Description logics and semantic language standards reflect this perspective, importantly through their open-world logic and vocabularies for generalized subsumption hierarchies. Recent research suggests possible mechanisms for the emergence of natural hierarchies.
    Content
    Vgl.: https://www.nomos-elibrary.de/10.5771/0943-7444-2022-1/ko-knowledge-organization-jahrgang-49-2022-heft-1.
    Series
    Reviews of concepts in knowledge organization
    Source
    Knowledge organization. 49(2022) no.1, S.40 - 66
  2. Kleineberg, M.: Klassifikation (2023) 0.02
    0.020887807 = product of:
      0.041775614 = sum of:
        0.01699316 = weight(_text_:information in 783) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01699316 = score(doc=783,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 783, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=783)
        0.024782453 = product of:
          0.049564905 = sum of:
            0.049564905 = weight(_text_:organization in 783) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.049564905 = score(doc=783,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.27574396 = fieldWeight in 783, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=783)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Dieser Beitrag nimmt eine informationswissenschaftliche Perspektive ein und betrachtet das Phänomen der Klassifikation als Methode und System der Wissensorganisation. Ein Klassifikationssystem wird dabei als Wissensorganisationssystem (engl. knowledge organization system) verstanden, das vor allem im Bereich der Information und Dokumentation zum Einsatz kommt, um dokumentarische Bezugseinheiten (DBE) mit einem kontrollierten Vokabular zu beschreiben (s. Kapitel B 1 Einführung Wissensorganisation). Als eine solche Dokumentationssprache zeichnet sich ein Klassifikationssystem typischerweise durch seine systematische Ordnung aus und dient der inhaltlichen Groberschließung, eignet sich aber auch als Aufstellungssystematik und Hilfsmittel bei der Recherche wie etwa als systematischer Sucheinstieg oder thematischer Filter für Treffermengen. Beim Information Retrieval liegt die Stärke der klassifikatorischen Erschließung durch das hohe Abstraktionsniveau in Überblicks- und Vollständigkeitsrecherchen.
  3. Machado, L.; Martínez-Ávila, D.; Barcellos Almeida, M.; Borges, M.M.: Towards a moderate realistic foundation for ontological knowledge organization systems : the question of the naturalness of classifications (2023) 0.02
    0.020170141 = product of:
      0.040340282 = sum of:
        0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 894) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01029941 = score(doc=894,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 894, 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=894)
        0.030040871 = product of:
          0.060081743 = sum of:
            0.060081743 = weight(_text_:organization in 894) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.060081743 = score(doc=894,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.33425218 = fieldWeight in 894, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=894)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Several authors emphasize the need for a change in classification theory due to the influence of a dogmatic and monistic ontology supported by an outdated essentialism. These claims tend to focus on the fallibility of knowledge, the need for a pluralistic view, and the theoretical burden of observations. Regardless of the legitimacy of these concerns, there is the risk, when not moderate, to fall into the opposite relativistic extreme. Based on a narrative review of the literature, we aim to reflectively discuss the theoretical foundations that can serve as a basis for a realist position supporting pluralistic ontological classifications. The goal is to show that, against rather conventional solutions, objective scientific-based approaches to natural classifications are presented to be viable, allowing a proper distinction between ontological and taxonomic questions. Supported by critical scientific realism, we consider that such an approach is suitable for the development of ontological Knowledge Organization Systems (KOS). We believe that ontological perspectivism can provide the necessary adaptation to the different granularities of reality.
    Source
    Journal of information science. 54(2023) no.x, S.xx-xx