Search (10 results, page 1 of 1)

0.0033256328 = product of:
  0.013302531 = sum of:
    0.013302531 = weight(_text_:information in 527) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013302531 = score(doc=527,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.21684799 = fieldWeight in 527, 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=527)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Synthesizing and building on many ideas from the literature, this article presents an improved conceptual framework that clarifies the notion of relevance with its many elements, variables, criteria, and situational factors. Relevance is defined as a Relationship (R) between an Information Object (I) and an Information Need (N) (which consists of Topic, User, Problem/Task, and Situation/Context) with focus on R. This defines Relevance-as-is (conceptual relevance, strong relevance). To determine relevance, an Agent A (a person or system) operates on a representation I? of the information object and a representation N? of the information need, resulting in relevance-as-determined (operational measure of relevance, weak relevance, an approximation). Retrieval tests compare relevance-as-determined by different agents. This article discusses and compares two major approaches to conceptualizing relevance: the entity-focused approach (focus on elaborating the entities involved in relevance) and the relationship-focused approach (focus on explicating the relational nature of relevance). The article argues that because relevance is fundamentally a relational construct the relationship-focused approach deserves a higher priority and more attention than it has received. The article further elaborates on the elements of the framework with a focus on clarifying several critical issues on the discourse on relevance.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.1, S.18-35

0.0033256328 = product of:
  0.013302531 = sum of:
    0.013302531 = weight(_text_:information in 1344) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013302531 = score(doc=1344,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.21684799 = fieldWeight in 1344, 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=1344)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This review introduces a comprehensive model of the cognitive process and mechanisms of individual sensemaking to provide a theoretical basis for: - empirical studies that improve our understanding of the cognitive process and mechanisms of sensemaking and integration of results of such studies; - education in critical thinking and sensemaking skills; - the design of sensemaking assistant tools that support and guide users. The paper reviews and extends existing sensemaking models with ideas from learning and cognition. It reviews literature on sensemaking models in human-computer interaction (HCI), cognitive system engineering, organizational communication, and library and information sciences (LIS), learning theories, cognitive psychology, and task-based information seeking. The model resulting from this synthesis moves to a stronger basis for explaining sensemaking behaviors and conceptual changes. The model illustrates the iterative processes of sensemaking, extends existing models that focus on activities by integrating cognitive mechanisms and the creation of instantiated structure elements of knowledge, and different types of conceptual change to show a complete picture of the cognitive processes of sensemaking. The processes and cognitive mechanisms identified provide better foundations for knowledge creation, organization, and sharing practices and a stronger basis for design of sensemaking assistant systems and tools.

Series

Advances in information science

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.9, S.1733-1756

Theme

Information

0.0025760243 = product of:
  0.010304097 = sum of:
    0.010304097 = weight(_text_:information in 2293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010304097 = score(doc=2293,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 2293, 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=2293)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

We illustrate the principle of unified treatment of all authority data for any kind of entities, subjects/topics, places, events, persons, organizations, etc. through the design and implementation of an enriched authority database for organizations, maintained as an integral part of an authority database that also includes subject authority control / classification data, using the same structures for data and common modules for processing and display of data. Organization-related data are stored in information systems of many companies. We specifically examine the case of the World Bank Group (WBG) according to organization role: suppliers, partners, customers, competitors, authors, publishers, or subjects of documents, loan recipients, suppliers for WBG-funded projects and subunits of the organization itself. A central organization authority where each organization is identified by a URI, represented by several names and linked to other organizations through hierarchical and other relationships serves to link data from these disparate information systems. Designing the conceptual structure of a unified authority database requires integrating SKOS, the W3C Organization Ontology and other schemes into one comprehensive ontology. To populate the authority database with organizations, we import data from external sources (e.g., DBpedia and Library of Congress authorities) and internal sources (e.g., the lists of organizations from multiple WBG information systems).

0.0025760243 = product of:
  0.010304097 = sum of:
    0.010304097 = weight(_text_:information in 3311) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010304097 = score(doc=3311,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 3311, 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=3311)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Tools for automatic subject assignment help deal with scale and sustainability in creating and enriching metadata, establishing more connections across and between resources and enhancing consistency. Although some software vendors and experimental researchers claim the tools can replace manual subject indexing, hard scientific evidence of their performance in operating information environments is scarce. A major reason for this is that research is usually conducted in laboratory conditions, excluding the complexities of real-life systems and situations. The article reviews and discusses issues with existing evaluation approaches such as problems of aboutness and relevance assessments, implying the need to use more than a single "gold standard" method when evaluating indexing and retrieval, and proposes a comprehensive evaluation framework. The framework is informed by a systematic review of the literature on evaluation approaches: evaluating indexing quality directly through assessment by an evaluator or through comparison with a gold standard, evaluating the quality of computer-assisted indexing directly in the context of an indexing workflow, and evaluating indexing quality indirectly through analyzing retrieval performance.

Series

Advances in information science

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.1, S.3-16

0.002379629 = product of:
  0.009518516 = sum of:
    0.009518516 = weight(_text_:information in 4721) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009518516 = score(doc=4721,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 4721, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4721)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Challenges and opportunities for knowledge organization in the digital age: proceedings of the Fifteenth International ISKO Conference, 9-11 July 2018, Porto, Portugal / organized by: International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), ISKO Spain and Portugal Chapter, University of Porto - Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Research Centre in Communication, Information and Digital Culture (CIC.digital) - Porto. Eds.: F. Ribeiro u. M.E. Cerveira

0.002379629 = product of:
  0.009518516 = sum of:
    0.009518516 = weight(_text_:information in 4825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009518516 = score(doc=4825,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 4825, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4825)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Challenges and opportunities for knowledge organization in the digital age: proceedings of the Fifteenth International ISKO Conference, 9-11 July 2018, Porto, Portugal / organized by: International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), ISKO Spain and Portugal Chapter, University of Porto - Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Research Centre in Communication, Information and Digital Culture (CIC.digital) - Porto. Eds.: F. Ribeiro u. M.E. Cerveira

0.0021033147 = product of:
  0.008413259 = sum of:
    0.008413259 = weight(_text_:information in 2376) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008413259 = score(doc=2376,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 2376, 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=2376)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Knowledge organization is needed everywhere. Its importance is marked by its pervasiveness. This paper will show many areas, tasks, and functions where proper use of knowledge organization, construed as broadly as the term implies, provides support for learning and understanding, for sense making and meaning making, for inference, and for discovery by people and computer programs and thereby will make the world a better place. The paper focuses not on metadata but rather on structuring and representing the actual data or knowledge itself and argues for more communication between the largely separated KO, ontology, data modeling, and semantic web communities to address the many problems that need better solutions. In particular, the paper discusses the application of knowledge organization in knowledge bases for question answering and cognitive systems, knowledge bases for information extraction from text or multimedia, linked data, big data and data analytics, electronic health records as one example, influence diagrams (causal maps), dynamic system models, process diagrams, concept maps, and other node-link diagrams, information systems in organizations, knowledge organization for understanding and learning, and knowledge transfer between domains. The paper argues for moving beyond triples to a more powerful representation using entities and multi-way relationships but not attributes.

0.0020821756 = product of:
  0.008328702 = sum of:
    0.008328702 = weight(_text_:information in 1400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008328702 = score(doc=1400,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 1400, 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=1400)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This paper discusses and illustrates through examples how meaningful or deep learning can be supported through well-structured presentation of material, through giving learners schemas they can use to organize knowledge in their minds, and through helping learners to understand knowledge organization principles they can use to construct their own schemas. It is a call to all authors, educators and information designers to pay attention to meaningful presentation that expresses the internal structure of the domain and facilitates the learner's assimilation of concepts and their relationships.

0.0017847219 = product of:
  0.0071388874 = sum of:
    0.0071388874 = weight(_text_:information in 3939) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0071388874 = score(doc=3939,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 3939, 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=3939)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This article proposes an approach to mapping between Knowledge Organization Systems (KOS), including ontologies, classifications, taxonomies, and thesauri and even natural languages, that is based on deep semantics. In this approach, concepts in each KOS are expressed through canonical expressions, such as description logic formulas, that combine atomic (or elemental) concepts drawn from a core classification. Relationships between concepts within or across KOS can then be derived by reasoning over the canonical expressions. The canonical expressions can also be used to provide a facet-based query formulation front-end for free-text search. The article illustrates this approach through many examples. It presents methods for the efficient construction of canonical expressions (linguistic analysis, exploiting information in the KOS and their hierarchies, and crowdsourcing) that make this approach feasible.

0.0014872681 = product of:
  0.0059490725 = sum of:
    0.0059490725 = weight(_text_:information in 2127) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0059490725 = score(doc=2127,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 2127, 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=2127)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.8, S.1616-1644