Search (44 results, page 1 of 3)

0.19658335 = product of:
  0.3931667 = sum of:
    0.12819892 = weight(_text_:english in 2629) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12819892 = score(doc=2629,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.21787451 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.3797226 = idf(docFreq=553, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04049921 = queryNorm
        0.58840716 = fieldWeight in 2629, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.3797226 = idf(docFreq=553, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2629)
    0.21796653 = weight(_text_:speaking in 2629) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.21796653 = score(doc=2629,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.2840921 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.014756 = idf(docFreq=107, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04049921 = queryNorm
        0.767239 = fieldWeight in 2629, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          7.014756 = idf(docFreq=107, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2629)
    0.04700123 = product of:
      0.09400246 = sum of:
        0.09400246 = weight(_text_:countries in 2629) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09400246 = score(doc=2629,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22186631 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.478287 = idf(docFreq=501, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04049921 = queryNorm
            0.42368966 = fieldWeight in 2629, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.478287 = idf(docFreq=501, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2629)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(3/6)

Abstract

The survey described in this article investigates the attitudes of librarians in German- and English-speaking countries toward subject indexing in general, and automatic subject indexing in particular. The results show great similarity between attitudes in both language areas. Respondents agree that the current quality standards should be upheld and dismiss critical voices claiming that subject indexing has lost relevance. With regard to automatic subject indexing, respondents demonstrate considerable skepticism-both with regard to the likely timeframe and the expected quality of such systems. The author considers how this low acceptance poses a difficulty for those involved in change management.

0.058279987 = product of:
  0.17483996 = sum of:
    0.06475023 = weight(_text_:english in 3151) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06475023 = score(doc=3151,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21787451 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.3797226 = idf(docFreq=553, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04049921 = queryNorm
        0.2971905 = fieldWeight in 3151, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.3797226 = idf(docFreq=553, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3151)
    0.11008973 = weight(_text_:speaking in 3151) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11008973 = score(doc=3151,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2840921 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.014756 = idf(docFreq=107, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04049921 = queryNorm
        0.3875142 = fieldWeight in 3151, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          7.014756 = idf(docFreq=107, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3151)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

Arabic news articles in electronic collections are difficult to study. Browsing by category is rarely supported. Although helpful machine-learning methods have been applied successfully to similar situations for English news articles, limited research has been completed to yield suitable solutions for Arabic news. In connection with a Qatar National Research Fund (QNRF)-funded project to build digital library community and infrastructure in Qatar, we developed software for browsing a collection of about 237,000 Arabic news articles, which should be applicable to other Arabic news collections. We designed a simple taxonomy for Arabic news stories that is suitable for the needs of Qatar and other nations, is compatible with the subject codes of the International Press Telecommunications Council, and was enhanced with the aid of a librarian expert as well as five Arabic-speaking volunteers. We developed tailored stemming (i.e., a new Arabic light stemmer called P-Stemmer) and automatic classification methods (the best being binary Support Vector Machines classifiers) to work with the taxonomy. Using evaluation techniques commonly used in the information retrieval community, including 10-fold cross-validation and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, we showed that our approach to stemming and classification is superior to state-of-the-art techniques.

0.054578602 = product of:
  0.1637358 = sum of:
    0.08807178 = weight(_text_:speaking in 5499) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08807178 = score(doc=5499,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2840921 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.014756 = idf(docFreq=107, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04049921 = queryNorm
        0.31001136 = fieldWeight in 5499, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          7.014756 = idf(docFreq=107, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5499)
    0.07566403 = sum of:
      0.05371569 = weight(_text_:countries in 5499) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05371569 = score(doc=5499,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.22186631 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.478287 = idf(docFreq=501, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04049921 = queryNorm
          0.24210837 = fieldWeight in 5499, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.478287 = idf(docFreq=501, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5499)
      0.021948336 = weight(_text_:22 in 5499) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.021948336 = score(doc=5499,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14182134 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04049921 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 5499, 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=5499)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

Footnote

Beitrag in einem Special Issue: Information Science in the German-speaking Countries.

0.01726673 = product of:
  0.103600375 = sum of:
    0.103600375 = weight(_text_:english in 2570) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.103600375 = score(doc=2570,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21787451 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.3797226 = idf(docFreq=553, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04049921 = queryNorm
        0.4755048 = fieldWeight in 2570, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.3797226 = idf(docFreq=553, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2570)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Discusses natural languages and the natural language implementations of Westlaw's full-text legal documents, Westlaw Is Natural. Natural language is not aritificial intelligence but a hybrid of linguistics, mathematics and statistics. Provides 3 classes of retrieval models. Explains how Westlaw processes an English query. Assesses WIN. Covers WIN enhancements; the natural language features of Congressional Quarterly's Washington Alert using a document for a query; the personal librarian front end search software and Dowquest from Dow Jones news/retrieval. Conmsiders whether natural language encourages fuzzy thinking and whether Boolean logic will still be needed

0.015261777 = product of:
  0.09157066 = sum of:
    0.09157066 = weight(_text_:english in 3667) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09157066 = score(doc=3667,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.21787451 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.3797226 = idf(docFreq=553, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04049921 = queryNorm
        0.42029083 = fieldWeight in 3667, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.3797226 = idf(docFreq=553, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3667)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Descriptive metadata play a key role in finding relevant search results in large amounts of unstructured data. However, current scientific audiovisual media are provided with little metadata, which makes them hard to find, let alone individual sequences. In this paper, the TIB / AV-Portal is presented as a use case where methods concerning the automatic generation of metadata, a semantic search and cross-lingual retrieval (German/English) have already been applied. These methods result in a better discoverability of the scientific audiovisual media hosted in the portal. Text, speech, and image content of the video are automatically indexed by specialised GND (Gemeinsame Normdatei) subject headings. A semantic search is established based on properties of the GND ontology. The cross-lingual retrieval uses English 'translations' that were derived by an ontology mapping (DBpedia i. a.). Further ways of increasing the discoverability and reuse of the metadata are publishing them as Linked Open Data and interlinking them with other data sets.

0.015108388 = product of:
  0.09065033 = sum of:
    0.09065033 = weight(_text_:english in 1793) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09065033 = score(doc=1793,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21787451 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.3797226 = idf(docFreq=553, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04049921 = queryNorm
        0.41606668 = fieldWeight in 1793, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.3797226 = idf(docFreq=553, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1793)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Presents a model of drawing index terms from text. The approach uses no stop list, stemmer, or other language and domain specific component, allowing operation in any language or domain with only trivial modification. The method uses n-grams counts, achieving a function similar to, but more general than, a stemmer. The generated index terms, called 'highlights', are suitable for identifying the topic for perusal and selection. An extension is also described and demonstrated which selects index terms to represent a subset of documents, distinguishing them from the corpus. Presents some experimental results, showing operation in English, Spanish, German, Georgian, Russian and Japanese

0.015108388 = product of:
  0.09065033 = sum of:
    0.09065033 = weight(_text_:english in 3319) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09065033 = score(doc=3319,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21787451 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.3797226 = idf(docFreq=553, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04049921 = queryNorm
        0.41606668 = fieldWeight in 3319, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.3797226 = idf(docFreq=553, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3319)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

In this brief communication, we evaluate the use of two stopword lists for the English language (one comprising 571 words and another with 9) and compare them with a search approach accounting for all word forms. We show that through implementing the original Okapi form or certain ones derived from the Divergence from Randomness (DFR) paradigm, significantly lower performance levels may result when using short or no stopword lists. For other DFR models and a revised Okapi implementation, performance differences between approaches using short or long stopword lists or no list at all are usually not statistically significant. Similar conclusions can be drawn when using other natural languages such as French, Hindi, or Persian.

0.012950047 = product of:
  0.07770028 = sum of:
    0.07770028 = weight(_text_:english in 3187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07770028 = score(doc=3187,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21787451 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.3797226 = idf(docFreq=553, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04049921 = queryNorm
        0.3566286 = fieldWeight in 3187, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.3797226 = idf(docFreq=553, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3187)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

The quality of stemming algorithms is typically measured in two different ways: (i) how accurately they map the variant forms of a word to the same stem; or (ii) how much improvement they bring to Information Retrieval systems. In this article, we evaluate various stemming algorithms, in four languages, in terms of accuracy and in terms of their aid to Information Retrieval. The aim is to assess whether the most accurate stemmers are also the ones that bring the biggest gain in Information Retrieval. Experiments in English, French, Portuguese, and Spanish show that this is not always the case, as stemmers with higher error rates yield better retrieval quality. As a byproduct, we also identified the most accurate stemmers and the best for Information Retrieval purposes.

0.012209422 = product of:
  0.07325653 = sum of:
    0.07325653 = weight(_text_:english in 3650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07325653 = score(doc=3650,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.21787451 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.3797226 = idf(docFreq=553, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04049921 = queryNorm
        0.33623266 = fieldWeight in 3650, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.3797226 = idf(docFreq=553, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3650)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

The attempt to computerize a process, such as indexing, abstracting, classifying, or retrieving information, begins with an analysis of the process into its intellectual and nonintellectual components. That part of the process which is amenable to computerization is mechanical or algorithmic. What is not is intellectual or creative and requires human intervention. Gerard Salton has been an innovator, experimenter, and promoter in the area of mechanized information systems since the early 1960s. He has been particularly ingenious at analyzing the process of information retrieval into its algorithmic components. He received a doctorate in applied mathematics from Harvard University before moving to the computer science department at Cornell, where he developed a prototype automatic retrieval system called SMART. Working with this system he and his students contributed for over a decade to our theoretical understanding of the retrieval process. On a more practical level, they have contributed design criteria for operating retrieval systems. The following selection presents one of the early descriptions of the SMART system; it is valuable as it shows the direction automatic retrieval methods were to take beyond simple word-matching techniques. These include various word normalization techniques to improve recall, for instance, the separation of words into stems and affixes; the correlation and clustering, using statistical association measures, of related terms; and the identification, using a concept thesaurus, of synonymous, broader, narrower, and sibling terms. They include, as weIl, techniques, both linguistic and statistical, to deal with the thorny problem of how to automatically extract from texts index terms that consist of more than one word. They include weighting techniques and various documentrequest matching algorithms. Significant among the latter are those which produce a retrieval output of citations ranked in relevante order. During the 1970s, Salton and his students went an to further refine these various techniques, particularly the weighting and statistical association measures. Many of their early innovations seem commonplace today. Some of their later techniques are still ahead of their time and await technological developments for implementation. The particular focus of the selection that follows is an the evaluation of a particular component of the SMART system, a multilingual thesaurus. By mapping English language expressions and their German equivalents to a common concept number, the thesaurus permitted the automatic processing of German language documents against English language queries and vice versa. The results of the evaluation, as it turned out, were somewhat inconclusive. However, this SMART experiment suggested in a bold and optimistic way how one might proceed to answer such complex questions as What is meant by retrieval language compatability? How it is to be achieved, and how evaluated?

0.010791706 = product of:
  0.06475023 = sum of:
    0.06475023 = weight(_text_:english in 658) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06475023 = score(doc=658,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21787451 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.3797226 = idf(docFreq=553, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04049921 = queryNorm
        0.2971905 = fieldWeight in 658, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.3797226 = idf(docFreq=553, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=658)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Automated text classification is an important function for many AI systems relevant to libraries, including automated subject indexing and classification. When implemented using the traditional natural language processing (NLP) paradigm, one key part of the process is the normalization of words using stemming or lemmatization, which reduces the amount of linguistic variation and often improves the quality of classification. In this paper, we compare the output of seven different text lemmatization algorithms as well as two baseline methods. We measure how the choice of method affects the quality of text classification using example corpora in three languages. The experiments have been performed using the open source Annif toolkit for automated subject indexing and classification, but should generalize also to other NLP toolkits and similar text classification tasks. The results show that lemmatization methods in most cases outperform baseline methods in text classification particularly for Finnish and Swedish text, but not English, where baseline methods are most effective. The differences between lemmatization methods are quite small. The systematic comparison will help optimize text classification pipelines and inform the further development of the Annif toolkit to incorporate a wider choice of normalization methods.

0.007554194 = product of:
  0.045325164 = sum of:
    0.045325164 = weight(_text_:english in 6671) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045325164 = score(doc=6671,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21787451 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.3797226 = idf(docFreq=553, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04049921 = queryNorm
        0.20803334 = fieldWeight in 6671, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.3797226 = idf(docFreq=553, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=6671)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Content

HARMAN, D.: Relevance feedback revisited; AALBERSBERG, I.J.: Incremental relevance feedback; TAGUE-SUTCLIFFE, J.: Measuring the informativeness of a retrieval process; LEWIS, D.D.: An evaluation of phrasal and clustered representations on a text categorization task; BLOSSEVILLE, M.J., G. HÉBRAIL, M.G. MONTEIL u. N. PÉNOT: Automatic document classification: natural language processing, statistical analysis, and expert system techniques used together; MASAND, B., G. LINOFF u. D. WALTZ: Classifying news stories using memory based reasoning; KEEN, E.M.: Term position ranking: some new test results; CROUCH, C.J. u. B. YANG: Experiments in automatic statistical thesaurus construction; GREFENSTETTE, G.: Use of syntactic context to produce term association lists for text retrieval; ANICK, P.G. u. R.A. FLYNN: Versioning of full-text information retrieval system; BURKOWSKI, F.J.: Retrieval activities in a database consisting of heterogeneous collections; DEERWESTER, S.C., K. WACLENA u. M. LaMAR: A textual object management system; NIE, J.-Y.:Towards a probabilistic modal logic for semantic-based information retrieval; WANG, A.W., S.K.M. WONG u. Y.Y. YAO: An analysis of vector space models based on computational geometry; BARTELL, B.T., G.W. COTTRELL u. R.K. BELEW: Latent semantic indexing is an optimal special case of multidimensional scaling; GLAVITSCH, U. u. P. SCHÄUBLE: A system for retrieving speech documents; MARGULIS, E.L.: N-Poisson document modelling; HESS, M.: An incrementally extensible document retrieval system based on linguistics and logical principles; COOPER, W.S., F.C. GEY u. D.P. DABNEY: Probabilistic retrieval based on staged logistic regression; FUHR, N.: Integration of probabilistic fact and text retrieval; CROFT, B., L.A. SMITH u. H. TURTLE: A loosely-coupled integration of a text retrieval system and an object-oriented database system; DUMAIS, S.T. u. J. NIELSEN: Automating the assignement of submitted manuscripts to reviewers; GOST, M.A. u. M. MASOTTI: Design of an OPAC database to permit different subject searching accesses; ROBERTSON, A.M. u. P. WILLETT: Searching for historical word forms in a database of 17th century English text using spelling correction methods; FAX, E.A., Q.F. CHEN u. L.S. HEATH: A faster algorithm for constructing minimal perfect hash functions; MOFFAT, A. u. J. ZOBEL: Parameterised compression for sparse bitmaps; GRANDI, F., P. TIBERIO u. P. Zezula: Frame-sliced patitioned parallel signature files; ALLEN, B.: Cognitive differences in end user searching of a CD-ROM index; SONNENWALD, D.H.: Developing a theory to guide the process of designing information retrieval systems; CUTTING, D.R., J.O. PEDERSEN, D. KARGER, u. J.W. TUKEY: Scatter/ Gather: a cluster-based approach to browsing large document collections; CHALMERS, M. u. P. CHITSON: Bead: Explorations in information visualization; WILLIAMSON, C. u. B. SHNEIDERMAN: The dynamic HomeFinder: evaluating dynamic queries in a real-estate information exploring system

0.007316112 = product of:
  0.04389667 = sum of:
    0.04389667 = product of:
      0.08779334 = sum of:
        0.08779334 = weight(_text_:22 in 402) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08779334 = score(doc=402,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14182134 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04049921 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 402, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=402)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Source

Information processing and management. 22(1986) no.6, S.465-476

0.006401598 = product of:
  0.038409587 = sum of:
    0.038409587 = product of:
      0.076819174 = sum of:
        0.076819174 = weight(_text_:22 in 262) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.076819174 = score(doc=262,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14182134 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04049921 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 262, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=262)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Date

20.10.2000 12:22:23

0.006401598 = product of:
  0.038409587 = sum of:
    0.038409587 = product of:
      0.076819174 = sum of:
        0.076819174 = weight(_text_:22 in 6265) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.076819174 = score(doc=6265,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14182134 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04049921 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6265, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6265)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Source

Information outlook. 9(2005) no.8, S.22-23

0.005487084 = product of:
  0.032922503 = sum of:
    0.032922503 = product of:
      0.065845005 = sum of:
        0.065845005 = weight(_text_:22 in 58) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.065845005 = score(doc=58,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14182134 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04049921 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 58, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=58)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Date

14. 6.2015 22:12:44

0.005487084 = product of:
  0.032922503 = sum of:
    0.032922503 = product of:
      0.065845005 = sum of:
        0.065845005 = weight(_text_:22 in 5887) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.065845005 = score(doc=5887,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14182134 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04049921 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 5887, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5887)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Source

Wissen in Aktion: Wege des Knowledge Managements. 22. Online-Tagung der DGI, Frankfurt am Main, 2.-4.5.2000. Proceedings. Hrsg.: R. Schmidt

0.005487084 = product of:
  0.032922503 = sum of:
    0.032922503 = product of:
      0.065845005 = sum of:
        0.065845005 = weight(_text_:22 in 2051) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.065845005 = score(doc=2051,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14182134 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04049921 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 2051, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2051)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Date

14. 6.2015 22:12:56

0.005487084 = product of:
  0.032922503 = sum of:
    0.032922503 = product of:
      0.065845005 = sum of:
        0.065845005 = weight(_text_:22 in 5629) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.065845005 = score(doc=5629,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14182134 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04049921 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 5629, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5629)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Source

B.I.T.online. 22(2019) H.2, S.163-166

0.005395853 = product of:
  0.032375116 = sum of:
    0.032375116 = weight(_text_:english in 1875) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032375116 = score(doc=1875,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21787451 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.3797226 = idf(docFreq=553, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04049921 = queryNorm
        0.14859524 = fieldWeight in 1875, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.3797226 = idf(docFreq=553, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1875)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Content

"Until now, so-called computer vision has largely been limited to recognizing individual objects. The new software, described on Monday by researchers at Google and at Stanford University, teaches itself to identify entire scenes: a group of young men playing Frisbee, for example, or a herd of elephants marching on a grassy plain. The software then writes a caption in English describing the picture. Compared with human observations, the researchers found, the computer-written descriptions are surprisingly accurate. The advances may make it possible to better catalog and search for the billions of images and hours of video available online, which are often poorly described and archived. At the moment, search engines like Google rely largely on written language accompanying an image or video to ascertain what it contains. "I consider the pixel data in images and video to be the dark matter of the Internet," said Fei-Fei Li, director of the Stanford Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, who led the research with Andrej Karpathy, a graduate student. "We are now starting to illuminate it." Dr. Li and Mr. Karpathy published their research as a Stanford University technical report. The Google team published their paper on arXiv.org, an open source site hosted by Cornell University.

0.0045725703 = product of:
  0.027435422 = sum of:
    0.027435422 = product of:
      0.054870844 = sum of:
        0.054870844 = weight(_text_:22 in 1952) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054870844 = score(doc=1952,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14182134 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04049921 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 1952, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1952)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Date

16. 8.1998 12:51:22