Search (87 results, page 1 of 5)

0.3604252 = sum of:
  0.07437435 = product of:
    0.22312303 = sum of:
      0.22312303 = weight(_text_:3a in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.22312303 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.39700332 = queryWeight, product of:
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046827413 = 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)
  0.22312303 = weight(_text_:2f in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
    0.22312303 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
      0.39700332 = queryWeight, product of:
        8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
        0.046827413 = 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)
  0.043894395 = weight(_text_:data in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
    0.043894395 = score(doc=562,freq=4.0), product of:
      0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
        3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
        0.046827413 = queryNorm
      0.29644224 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
        2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
          4.0 = termFreq=4.0
        3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
        0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
  0.019033402 = product of:
    0.038066804 = sum of:
      0.038066804 = weight(_text_:22 in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.038066804 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16398162 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046827413 = 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)

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

0.056957893 = product of:
  0.113915786 = sum of:
    0.057835944 = weight(_text_:data in 119) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.057835944 = score(doc=119,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.39059696 = fieldWeight in 119, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=119)
    0.056079846 = product of:
      0.11215969 = sum of:
        0.11215969 = weight(_text_:processing in 119) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11215969 = score(doc=119,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.5916711 = fieldWeight in 119, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=119)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

In this book Christian Jacquemin shows how the power of natural language processing (NLP) can be used to advance text indexing and information retrieval (IR). Jacquemin's novel tool is FASTR, a parser that normalizes terms and recognizes term variants. Since there are more meanings in a language than there are words, FASTR uses a metagrammar composed of shallow linguistic transformations that describe the morphological, syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic variations of words and terms. The acquired parsed terms can then be applied for precise retrieval and assembly of information. The use of a corpus-based unification grammar to define, recognize, and combine term variants from their base forms allows for intelligent information access to, or "linguistic data tuning" of, heterogeneous texts. FASTR can be used to do automatic controlled indexing, to carry out content-based Web searches through conceptually related alternative query formulations, to abstract scientific and technical extracts, and even to translate and collect terms from multilingual material. Jacquemin provides a comprehensive account of the method and implementation of this innovative retrieval technique for text processing.

LCSH

Language and languages / Variation / Data processing
Terms and phrases / Data processing

Subject

Language and languages / Variation / Data processing
Terms and phrases / Data processing

0.03959743 = product of:
  0.07919486 = sum of:
    0.053759433 = weight(_text_:data in 2502) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.053759433 = score(doc=2502,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.3630661 = fieldWeight in 2502, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2502)
    0.025435425 = product of:
      0.05087085 = sum of:
        0.05087085 = weight(_text_:processing in 2502) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05087085 = score(doc=2502,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.26835677 = fieldWeight in 2502, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2502)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Prior efforts have shown that under certain situations retrieval effectiveness may be improved via the use of data fusion techniques. Although these improvements have been observed from the fusion of result sets from several distinct information retrieval systems, it has often been thought that fusing different document retrieval strategies in a single information retrieval system will lead to similar improvements. In this study, we show that this is not the case. We hold constant systemic differences such as parsing, stemming, phrase processing, and relevance feedback, and fuse result sets generated from highly effective retrieval strategies in the same information retrieval system. From this, we show that data fusion of highly effective retrieval strategies alone shows little or no improvement in retrieval effectiveness. Furthermore, we present a detailed analysis of the performance of modern data fusion approaches, and demonstrate the reasons why they do not perform weIl when applied to this problem. Detailed results and analyses are included to support our conclusions.

0.0332773 = product of:
  0.0665546 = sum of:
    0.03657866 = weight(_text_:data in 123) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03657866 = score(doc=123,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.24703519 = fieldWeight in 123, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=123)
    0.029975938 = product of:
      0.059951875 = sum of:
        0.059951875 = weight(_text_:processing in 123) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.059951875 = score(doc=123,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.3162615 = fieldWeight in 123, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=123)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

LCSH

Data processing

Subject

Data processing

0.028887425 = product of:
  0.05777485 = sum of:
    0.03657866 = weight(_text_:data in 1853) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03657866 = score(doc=1853,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.24703519 = fieldWeight in 1853, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1853)
    0.021196188 = product of:
      0.042392377 = sum of:
        0.042392377 = weight(_text_:processing in 1853) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042392377 = score(doc=1853,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.22363065 = fieldWeight in 1853, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1853)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

In a scientific and technological watch (STW) task, an expert user needs to survey the evolution of research topics in his area of specialisation in order to detect interesting changes. The majority of methods proposing evaluation metrics (bibliometrics and scientometrics studies) for STW rely solely an statistical data analysis methods (Co-citation analysis, co-word analysis). Such methods usually work an structured databases where the units of analysis (words, keywords) are already attributed to documents by human indexers. The advent of huge amounts of unstructured textual data has rendered necessary the integration of natural language processing (NLP) techniques to first extract meaningful units from texts. We propose a method for STW which is NLP-oriented. The method not only analyses texts linguistically in order to extract terms from them, but also uses linguistic relations (syntactic variations) as the basis for clustering. Terms and variation relations are formalised as weighted di-graphs which the clustering algorithm, CPCL (Classification by Preferential Clustered Link) will seek to reduce in order to produces classes. These classes ideally represent the research topics present in the corpus. The results of the classification are subjected to validation by an expert in STW.

0.028887425 = product of:
  0.05777485 = sum of:
    0.03657866 = weight(_text_:data in 4257) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03657866 = score(doc=4257,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.24703519 = fieldWeight in 4257, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4257)
    0.021196188 = product of:
      0.042392377 = sum of:
        0.042392377 = weight(_text_:processing in 4257) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042392377 = score(doc=4257,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.22363065 = fieldWeight in 4257, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4257)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

In today's networked world, a huge amount of data is available in machine-processable form. Likewise, there are any number of search engines and specialized information retrieval (IR) programs that seek to extract relevant information from these data repositories. Most IR systems and Web search engines have been designed for speed and tend to maximize the quantity of information (recall) rather than the relevance of the information (precision) to the query. As a result, search engine users get inundated with information for practically any query, and are forced to scan a large number of potentially relevant items to get to the information of interest. The Holy Grail of IR is to somehow retrieve those and only those documents pertinent to the user's query. Polysemy and synonymy - the fact that often there are several meanings for a word or phrase, and likewise, many ways to express a conceptmake this a very hard task. While conventional IR systems provide usable solutions, there are a number of open problems to be solved, in areas such as syntactic processing, semantic analysis, and user modeling, before we develop systems that "understand" user queries and text collections. Meanwhile, we can use tools and techniques available today to improve the precision of retrieval. In particular, using the approach described in this article, we can approximate understanding using the syntactic structure and patterns of language use that is latent in documents to make IR more effective.

0.02620351 = product of:
  0.10481404 = sum of:
    0.10481404 = sum of:
      0.059951875 = weight(_text_:processing in 2541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.059951875 = score(doc=2541,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046827413 = queryNorm
          0.3162615 = fieldWeight in 2541, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2541)
      0.044862162 = weight(_text_:22 in 2541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.044862162 = score(doc=2541,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.16398162 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046827413 = queryNorm
          0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2541, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2541)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The Specialized Information Services Division (SIS) of the National Library of Medicine (NLM) provides Web access to more than a dozen scientific databases on toxicology and the environment on TOXNET . Search queries on TOXNET often include misspelled or variant English words, medical and scientific jargon and chemical names. Following the example of search engines like Google and ClinicalTrials.gov, we set out to develop a spelling "suggestion" system for increased recall and precision in TOXNET searching. This paper describes development of dictionary technology that can be used in a variety of applications such as orthographic verification, writing aid, natural language processing, and information storage and retrieval. The design of the technology allows building complex applications using the components developed in the earlier phases of the work in a modular fashion without extensive rewriting of computer code. Since many of the potential applications envisioned for this work have on-line or web-based interfaces, the dictionaries and other computer components must have fast response, and must be adaptable to open-ended database vocabularies, including chemical nomenclature. The dictionary vocabulary for this work was derived from SIS and other databases and specialized resources, such as NLM's Unified Medical Language Systems (UMLS) . The resulting technology, A-Z Dictionary (AZdict), has three major constituents: 1) the vocabulary list, 2) the word attributes that define part of speech and morphological relationships between words in the list, and 3) a set of programs that implements the retrieval of words and their attributes, and determines similarity between words (ChemSpell). These three components can be used in various applications such as spelling verification, spelling aid, part-of-speech tagging, paraphrasing, and many other natural language processing functions.

Date

14. 8.2004 17:22:56

Source

Online. 28(2004) no.3, S.22-29

0.023530604 = product of:
  0.04706121 = sum of:
    0.02586502 = weight(_text_:data in 1430) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02586502 = score(doc=1430,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.17468026 = fieldWeight in 1430, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1430)
    0.021196188 = product of:
      0.042392377 = sum of:
        0.042392377 = weight(_text_:processing in 1430) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042392377 = score(doc=1430,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.22363065 = fieldWeight in 1430, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1430)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Work on relationships takes place in many communities, including, among others, data modeling, knowledge representation, natural language processing, linguistics, and information retrieval. Unfortunately, continued disciplinary splintering and specialization keeps any one person from being familiar with the full expanse of that work. By including contributions form experts in a variety of disciplines and backgrounds, this volume demonstrates both the parallels that inform work on relationships across a number of fields and the singular emphases that have yet to be fully embraced, The volume is organized into 3 parts: (1) Types of relationships (2) Relationships in knowledge representation and reasoning (3) Applications of relationships

0.022918554 = product of:
  0.091674216 = sum of:
    0.091674216 = sum of:
      0.059951875 = weight(_text_:processing in 4900) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.059951875 = score(doc=4900,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046827413 = queryNorm
          0.3162615 = fieldWeight in 4900, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4900)
      0.03172234 = weight(_text_:22 in 4900) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03172234 = score(doc=4900,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16398162 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046827413 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4900, 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=4900)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

Contents: Manfred Klenner / Henriette Visser: Introduction - Khurshid Ahmad: Writing Linguistics: When I use a word it means what I choose it to mean - Jürgen Handke: 2000 and Beyond: The Potential of New Technologies in Linguistics - Jurij Apresjan / Igor Boguslavsky / Leonid Iomdin / Leonid Tsinman: Lexical Functions in NU: Possible Uses - Hubert Lehmann: Practical Machine Translation and Linguistic Theory - Karin Haenelt: A Contextbased Approach towards Content Processing of Electronic Documents - Petr Sgall / Eva Hajicová: Are Linguistic Frameworks Comparable? - Wolfgang Menzel: Theory and Applications in Computational Linguistics - Is there Common Ground? - Robert Porzel / Michael Strube: Towards Context-adaptive Natural Language Processing Systems - Nicoletta Calzolari: Language Resources in a Multilingual Setting: The European Perspective - Piek Vossen: Computational Linguistics for Theory and Practice.

0.021902263 = product of:
  0.043804526 = sum of:
    0.018105512 = weight(_text_:data in 2677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018105512 = score(doc=2677,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.12227618 = fieldWeight in 2677, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2677)
    0.025699016 = product of:
      0.05139803 = sum of:
        0.05139803 = weight(_text_:processing in 2677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05139803 = score(doc=2677,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.27113777 = fieldWeight in 2677, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2677)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

This paper discusses research that employs methods from Natural Language Processing (NLP) in exploiting the intellectual resources of Knowledge Organization Systems (KOS), particularly in the retrieval of information. A technique for the disambiguation of homographs and nominal compounds in free text, where these are known ambiguous terms in the KOS itself, is described. The use of Roget's Thesaurus as an intermediary in the process is also reported. A short review of the relevant literature in the field is given. Design considerations, results and conclusions are presented from the implementation of a prototype system. The linguistic techniques are applied at two complementary levels, namely an a free text string used as an entry point to the KOS, and an the underlying controlled vocabulary itself.

Content

1. Introduction The need for research into the application of linguistic techniques in Information Retrieval (IR) in general, and a similar need in faceted Knowledge Organization Systems (KOS) has been indicated by various authors. Smeaton (1997) points out the inherent limitations of conventional approaches to IR based an "bags of words", mainly difficulties caused by lexical ambiguity in the words concerned, and goes an to suggest the possibility of using Natural Language Processing (NLP) in query formulation. Past experience with a faceted retrieval system highlighted the need for integrating the linguistic perspective in order to fully utilise the potential of a KOS (Tudhope et al." 2002). The present research seeks to address some of these needs in using NLP to improve the efficacy of KOS tools in query and retrieval systems. Syntactic parsing and part-of-speech tagging can substantially reduce lexical ambiguity through homograph disambiguation. Given the two strings "1 fable the motion" and "I put the motion an the fable", for instance, the parser used in this research clearly indicates that 'fable' in the first string is a verb, while 'table' in the second string is a noun, a distinction that would be missed in the "bag of words" approach. This syntactic disambiguation enables a more precise matching from free text to the controlled vocabulary of a KOS and vice versa. The use of a general linguistic resource, namely Roget's Thesaurus of English Words and Phrases (RTEWP), as an intermediary in this process, is investigated. The adaptation of the Link parser (Sleator & Temperley, 1993) to the purposes of the research is reported. The design and implementation of the early practical stages of the project are described, and the results of the initial experiments are presented and evaluated. Applications of the techniques developed are foreseen in the areas of query disambiguation, information retrieval and automatic indexing. In the first section of the paper a brief review of the literature and relevant current work in the field is presented. The second section includes reports an the development of algorithms, the construction of data sets and theoretical and experimental work undertaken to date. The third section evaluates the results obtained, and outlines directions for future research.

0.019398764 = product of:
  0.077595055 = sum of:
    0.077595055 = weight(_text_:data in 609) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.077595055 = score(doc=609,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.52404076 = fieldWeight in 609, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=609)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Purpose - Aims to measure syllable aggregation consistency of Romanized Chinese data in the title fields of bibliographic records. Also aims to verify if the term frequency distributions satisfy conventional bibliometric laws. Design/methodology/approach - Uses Cooper's interindexer formula to evaluate aggregation consistency within and between two sets of Chinese bibliographic data. Compares the term frequency distributions of polysyllabic words and monosyllabic characters (for vernacular and Romanized data) with the Lotka and the generalised Zipf theoretical distributions. The fits are tested with the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. Findings - Finds high internal aggregation consistency within each data set but some aggregation discrepancy between sets. Shows that word (polysyllabic) distributions satisfy Lotka's law but that character (monosyllabic) distributions do not abide by the law. Research limitations/implications - The findings are limited to only two sets of bibliographic data (for aggregation consistency analysis) and to one set of data for the frequency distribution analysis. Only two bibliometric distributions are tested. Internal consistency within each database remains fairly high. Therefore the main argument against syllable aggregation does not appear to hold true. The analysis revealed that Chinese words and characters behave differently in terms of frequency distribution but that there is no noticeable difference between vernacular and Romanized data. The distribution of Romanized characters exhibits the worst case in terms of fit to either Lotka's or Zipf's laws, which indicates that Romanized data in aggregated form appear to be a preferable option. Originality/value - Provides empirical data on consistency and distribution of Romanized Chinese titles in bibliographic records.

0.014987969 = product of:
  0.059951875 = sum of:
    0.059951875 = product of:
      0.11990375 = sum of:
        0.11990375 = weight(_text_:processing in 1081) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11990375 = score(doc=1081,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.632523 = fieldWeight in 1081, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1081)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

For undergraduate or advanced undergraduate courses in Classical Natural Language Processing, Statistical Natural Language Processing, Speech Recognition, Computational Linguistics, and Human Language Processing. An explosion of Web-based language techniques, merging of distinct fields, availability of phone-based dialogue systems, and much more make this an exciting time in speech and language processing. The first of its kind to thoroughly cover language technology at all levels and with all modern technologies this text takes an empirical approach to the subject, based on applying statistical and other machine-learning algorithms to large corporations. The authors cover areas that traditionally are taught in different courses, to describe a unified vision of speech and language processing. Emphasis is on practical applications and scientific evaluation. An accompanying Website contains teaching materials for instructors, with pointers to language processing resources on the Web. The Second Edition offers a significant amount of new and extended material.

0.014837332 = product of:
  0.05934933 = sum of:
    0.05934933 = product of:
      0.11869866 = sum of:
        0.11869866 = weight(_text_:processing in 4844) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11869866 = score(doc=4844,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.6261658 = fieldWeight in 4844, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4844)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Information processing and management. 36(2000) no.5, S.717-736

0.014837332 = product of:
  0.05934933 = sum of:
    0.05934933 = product of:
      0.11869866 = sum of:
        0.11869866 = weight(_text_:processing in 6421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11869866 = score(doc=6421,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.6261658 = fieldWeight in 6421, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6421)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Information processing and management. 36(2000) no.1, S.155-205

0.014631464 = product of:
  0.058525857 = sum of:
    0.058525857 = weight(_text_:data in 5197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.058525857 = score(doc=5197,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.3952563 = fieldWeight in 5197, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5197)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

A sample of 600 Dialog and Swiss-Prot full text records in genetics and molecular biology were parsed and term frequencies calculated to provide data for a test of Benoit's visualization model for retrieval. A retrieved set is displayed graphically allowing for manipulation of document and concept relationships in real time, which hopefully will reveal unanticipated relationships.

0.014458986 = product of:
  0.057835944 = sum of:
    0.057835944 = weight(_text_:data in 591) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.057835944 = score(doc=591,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.39059696 = fieldWeight in 591, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=591)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

In contemporary query languages, the user is responsible for navigation among semantically related data. Because of the huge amount of data and the complex structural relationships among data in modern applications, it is unrealistic to suppose that the user could know completely the content and structure of the available information. There are several query languages whose purpose is to facilitate navigation in unknown structures of databases. However, the background assumption of these languages is that the user knows how data are related to each other semantically in the structure at hand. So far only little attention has been paid to how unknown semantic associations among available data can be discovered. We address this problem in this article. A semantic association between two entities can be constructed if a sequence of relationships expressed explicitly in a database can be found that connects these entities to each other. This sequence may contain several other entities through which the original entities are connected to each other indirectly. We introduce an expressive and declarative query language for discovering semantic associations. Our query language is able, for example, to discover semantic associations between entities for which only some of the characteristics are known. Further, it integrates the manipulation of semantic associations with the manipulation of documents that may contain information on entities in semantic associations.

0.013439858 = product of:
  0.053759433 = sum of:
    0.053759433 = weight(_text_:data in 4811) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.053759433 = score(doc=4811,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.3630661 = fieldWeight in 4811, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4811)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

As more online databases are integrated into digital libraries, the issue of quality control of the data becomes increasingly important, especially as it relates to the effective retrieval of information. Authority work, the need to discover and reconcile variant forms of strings in bibliographical entries, will become more critical in the future. Spelling variants, misspellings, and transliteration differences will all increase the difficulty of retrieving information. We investigate a number of approximate string matching techniques that have traditionally been used to help with this problem. We then introduce the notion of approximate word matching and show how it can be used to improve detection and categorization of variant forms. We demonstrate the utility of these approaches using data from the Astrophysics Data System and show how we can reduce the human effort involved in the creation of authority files

0.01293251 = product of:
  0.05173004 = sum of:
    0.05173004 = weight(_text_:data in 604) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05173004 = score(doc=604,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.34936053 = fieldWeight in 604, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=604)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Modern information retrieval systems use keywords within documents as indexing terms for search of relevant documents. As Chinese is an ideographic character-based language, the words in the texts are not delimited by white spaces. Indexing of Chinese documents is impossible without a proper segmentation algorithm. Many Chinese segmentation algorithms have been proposed in the past. Traditional segmentation algorithms cannot operate without a large dictionary or a large corpus of training data. Nowadays, the Web has become the largest corpus that is ideal for Chinese segmentation. Although most search engines have problems in segmenting texts into proper words, they maintain huge databases of documents and frequencies of character sequences in the documents. Their databases are important potential resources for segmentation. In this paper, we propose a segmentation algorithm by mining Web data with the help of search engines. On the other hand, the Romanized pinyin of Chinese language indicates boundaries of words in the text. Our algorithm is the first to utilize the Romanized pinyin to segmentation. It is the first unified segmentation algorithm for the Chinese language from different geographical areas, and it is also domain independent because of the nature of the Web. Experiments have been conducted on the datasets of a recent Chinese segmentation competition. The results show that our algorithm outperforms the traditional algorithms in terms of precision and recall. Moreover, our algorithm can effectively deal with the problems of segmentation ambiguity, new word (unknown word) detection, and stop words.

Theme

Data Mining

0.012717713 = product of:
  0.05087085 = sum of:
    0.05087085 = product of:
      0.1017417 = sum of:
        0.1017417 = weight(_text_:processing in 3177) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1017417 = score(doc=3177,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.53671354 = fieldWeight in 3177, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3177)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.011990375 = product of:
  0.0479615 = sum of:
    0.0479615 = product of:
      0.095923 = sum of:
        0.095923 = weight(_text_:processing in 3138) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.095923 = score(doc=3138,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.5060184 = fieldWeight in 3138, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3138)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This entry gives an overview of work to date on natural language processing (NLP) using artificial neural networks (ANN). It is in three main parts: the first gives a brief introduction to ANNs, the second outlines some of the main issues in ANN-based NLP, and the third surveys specific application areas. Each part cites a representative selection of research literature that itself contains pointers to further reading.