Search (73 results, page 1 of 4)

0.19937156 = product of:
  0.29905733 = sum of:
    0.07476433 = product of:
      0.224293 = sum of:
        0.224293 = weight(_text_:3a in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.224293 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.39908504 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047072954 = queryNorm
            0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 400, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=400)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.224293 = weight(_text_:2f in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.224293 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.39908504 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047072954 = queryNorm
        0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 400, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=400)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Content

Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Faclanthology.org%2FD19-5317.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0ZZFyq5wWTtNTvNkrvjlGA.

0.17420557 = product of:
  0.26130834 = sum of:
    0.04984289 = product of:
      0.14952867 = sum of:
        0.14952867 = weight(_text_:3a in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14952867 = score(doc=5820,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.39908504 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047072954 = queryNorm
            0.3746787 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.21146546 = weight(_text_:2f in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.21146546 = score(doc=5820,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.39908504 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047072954 = queryNorm
        0.5298757 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Content

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Language and Information Technologies. Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cs.cmu.edu%2F~cx%2Fpapers%2Fknowledge_based_text_representation.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0SaTSvhWLTh__Uz_HtOtl3.

0.13291438 = product of:
  0.19937156 = sum of:
    0.04984289 = product of:
      0.14952867 = sum of:
        0.14952867 = weight(_text_:3a in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14952867 = score(doc=701,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.39908504 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047072954 = queryNorm
            0.3746787 = fieldWeight in 701, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=701)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.14952867 = weight(_text_:2f in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14952867 = score(doc=701,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.39908504 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047072954 = queryNorm
        0.3746787 = fieldWeight in 701, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=701)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Content

Vgl.: http%3A%2F%2Fdigbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fvolltexte%2Fdocuments%2F1627&ei=tAtYUYrBNoHKtQb3l4GYBw&usg=AFQjCNHeaxKkKU3-u54LWxMNYGXaaDLCGw&sig2=8WykXWQoDKjDSdGtAakH2Q&bvm=bv.44442042,d.Yms.

0.0293882 = product of:
  0.0881646 = sum of:
    0.0881646 = sum of:
      0.056275915 = weight(_text_:history in 3403) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.056275915 = score(doc=3403,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.21898255 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
            0.047072954 = queryNorm
          0.25698814 = fieldWeight in 3403, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3403)
      0.03188868 = weight(_text_:22 in 3403) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03188868 = score(doc=3403,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16484147 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.047072954 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3403, 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=3403)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

9. 2.2017 19:22:14

Series

History and philosophy of technoscience; 3

0.01875864 = product of:
  0.056275915 = sum of:
    0.056275915 = product of:
      0.11255183 = sum of:
        0.11255183 = weight(_text_:history in 4131) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11255183 = score(doc=4131,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.21898255 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047072954 = queryNorm
            0.5139763 = fieldWeight in 4131, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4131)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

In natural history museums, knowledge organization systems have gradually been migrated from paper-based catalog ledgers to electronic databases; these databases in turn must be migrated from one platform or software version to another. These migrations are by no means straightforward, particularly when one data schema must be mapped to another-or, when a database has been used in other-than-its-intended manner. There are few tools or methods available to support the necessary work of comparing divergent data schemas. Here we present a proof-of-concept in which we compare two versions of a subset of the Specify 6 data model using Euler/X, a logic-based reasoning tool. Specify 6 is a popular natural history museum database system whose data model has undergone several changes over its lifespan. We use Euler/X to produce visualizations (called "possible worlds") of the different ways that two versions of this data model might be mapped to one another. This proof-of-concept lays groundwork for further approaches that could aid data curators in database migration and maintenance work. It also contributes to research on the unique challenges to knowledge organization within natural history museums, and on the applicability of logic-based approaches to database schema migration or crosswalking.

0.016245458 = product of:
  0.048736375 = sum of:
    0.048736375 = product of:
      0.09747275 = sum of:
        0.09747275 = weight(_text_:history in 3400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09747275 = score(doc=3400,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.21898255 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047072954 = queryNorm
            0.44511652 = fieldWeight in 3400, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3400)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Ontology as a branch of philosophy is the science of what is, of the kinds and structures of objects, properties, events, processes and relations in every area of reality. The earliest use of the term 'ontology' (or 'ontologia') seems to have been in 1606 in the book Ogdoas Scholastica by the German Protestant scholastic Jacob Lorhard. For Lorhard, as for many subsequent philosophers, 'ontology' is a synonym of 'metaphysics' (a label meaning literally: 'what comes after the Physics'), a term used by early students of Aristotle to refer to what Aristotle himself called 'first philosophy'. Some philosophers use 'ontology' and 'metaphysics' to refer to two distinct, though interrelated, disciplines, the former to refer to the study of what might exist; the latter to the study of which of the various alternative possible ontologies is in fact true of reality. The term - and the philosophical discipline of ontology - has enjoyed a chequered history since 1606, with a significant expansion, and consolidation, in recent decades. We shall not discuss here the successive rises and falls in philosophical acceptance of the term, but rather focus on certain phases in the history of recent philosophy which are most relevant to the consideration of its recent advance, and increased acceptance, also outside the discipline of philosophy.

Series

History and philosophy of technoscience; 3

0.012996367 = product of:
  0.0389891 = sum of:
    0.0389891 = product of:
      0.0779782 = sum of:
        0.0779782 = weight(_text_:history in 4040) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0779782 = score(doc=4040,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.21898255 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047072954 = queryNorm
            0.35609323 = fieldWeight in 4040, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4040)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Today's semantic web deals with meaning in a very restricted sense and offers static solutions. This is adequate for many scientific, technical purposes and for business transactions requiring machine-to-machine communication, but does not answer the needs of culture. Science, technology and business are concerned primarily with the latest findings, the state of the art, i.e. the paradigm or dominant world-view of the day. In this context, history is considered non-essential because it deals with things that are out of date. By contrast, culture faces a much larger challenge, namely, to re-present changes in ways of knowing; changing meanings in different places at a given time (synchronically) and over time (diachronically). Culture is about both objects and the commentaries on them; about a cumulative body of knowledge; about collective memory and heritage. Here, history plays a central role and older does not mean less important or less relevant. Hence, a Leonardo painting that is 400 years old, or a Greek statue that is 2500 years old, typically have richer commentaries and are often more valuable than their contemporary equivalents. In this context, the science of meaning (semantics) is necessarily much more complex than semantic primitives. A semantic web in the cultural domain must enable us to trace how meaning and knowledge organisation have evolved historically in different cultures. This paper examines five issues to address this challenge: 1) different world-views (i.e. a shift from substance to function and from ontology to multiple ontologies); 2) developments in definitions and meaning; 3) distinctions between words and concepts; 4) new classes of relations; and 5) dynamic models of knowledge organisation. These issues reveal that historical dimensions of cultural diversity in knowledge organisation are also central to classification of biological diversity. New ways are proposed of visualizing knowledge using a time/space horizon to distinguish between universals and particulars. It is suggested that new visualization methods make possible a history of questions as well as of answers, thus enabling dynamic access to cultural and historical dimensions of knowledge. Unlike earlier media, which were limited to recording factual dimensions of collective memory, digital media enable us to explore theories, ways of perceiving, ways of knowing; to enter into other mindsets and world-views and thus to attain novel insights and new levels of tolerance. Some practical consequences are outlined.

0.011255185 = product of:
  0.033765554 = sum of:
    0.033765554 = product of:
      0.06753111 = sum of:
        0.06753111 = weight(_text_:history in 4834) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06753111 = score(doc=4834,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21898255 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047072954 = queryNorm
            0.3083858 = fieldWeight in 4834, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4834)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

In Linked Data, the use of owl:sameAs is ubiquitous in 'inter-linking' data-sets. However, there is a lurking suspicion within the Linked Data community that this use of owl:sameAs may be somehow incorrect, in particular with regards to its interactions with inference. In fact, owl:sameAs can be considered just one type of 'identity link', a link that declares two items to be identical in some fashion. After reviewing the definitions and history of the problem of identity in philosophy and knowledge representation, we outline four alternative readings of owl:sameAs, showing with examples how it is being (ab)used on the Web of data. Then we present possible solutions to this problem by introducing alternative identity links that rely on named graphs.

0.011255185 = product of:
  0.033765554 = sum of:
    0.033765554 = product of:
      0.06753111 = sum of:
        0.06753111 = weight(_text_:history in 2738) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06753111 = score(doc=2738,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21898255 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047072954 = queryNorm
            0.3083858 = fieldWeight in 2738, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2738)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This paper presents an overview of automatic methods for building domain knowledge structures (domain models) from text collections. Applications of domain models have a long history within knowledge engineering and artificial intelligence. In the last couple of decades they have surfaced noticeably as a useful tool within natural language processing, information retrieval and semantic web technology. Inspired by the ubiquitous propagation of domain model structures that are emerging in several research disciplines, we give an overview of the current research landscape and some techniques and approaches. We will also discuss trade-offs between different approaches and point to some recent trends.

0.01062956 = product of:
  0.03188868 = sum of:
    0.03188868 = product of:
      0.06377736 = sum of:
        0.06377736 = weight(_text_:22 in 6089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06377736 = score(doc=6089,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16484147 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047072954 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 6089, 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=6089)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Pages

S.11-22

0.01062956 = product of:
  0.03188868 = sum of:
    0.03188868 = product of:
      0.06377736 = sum of:
        0.06377736 = weight(_text_:22 in 5576) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06377736 = score(doc=5576,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16484147 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047072954 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5576, 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=5576)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

13.12.2017 14:17:22

0.01062956 = product of:
  0.03188868 = sum of:
    0.03188868 = product of:
      0.06377736 = sum of:
        0.06377736 = weight(_text_:22 in 539) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06377736 = score(doc=539,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16484147 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047072954 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 539, 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=539)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

26.12.2011 13:22:07

0.01062956 = product of:
  0.03188868 = sum of:
    0.03188868 = product of:
      0.06377736 = sum of:
        0.06377736 = weight(_text_:22 in 3406) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06377736 = score(doc=3406,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16484147 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047072954 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3406, 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=3406)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

30. 5.2010 16:22:35

0.01062956 = product of:
  0.03188868 = sum of:
    0.03188868 = product of:
      0.06377736 = sum of:
        0.06377736 = weight(_text_:22 in 4523) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06377736 = score(doc=4523,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16484147 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047072954 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4523, 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=4523)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Spektrum der Wissenschaft. 2018, H.1, S.22-27

0.010611489 = product of:
  0.03183447 = sum of:
    0.03183447 = product of:
      0.06366894 = sum of:
        0.06366894 = weight(_text_:history in 578) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06366894 = score(doc=578,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.21898255 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047072954 = queryNorm
            0.2907489 = fieldWeight in 578, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=578)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This research explores current controversies within country dance communities and the implications of cultural and ethical issues related to representation of gender and race in a KOS for an ICH, while investigating the importance of context and the applicability of semantic approaches in the implementation of synonym rings. During development of a controlled vocabulary to represent dance concepts for country dance choreography, this study encountered and considered the importance of history and culture regarding synonymous and near-synonymous terms used to describe dance roles and choreographic elements. A subset of names for the same choreographic concepts across four subdomains of country dance (English country dance, Scottish country dance, contra dance, and modern western square dance) were used as a case study. These concepts included traditionally gendered dance roles and choreographic terms with a racially pejorative history. Through the lens of existing research on ethical knowl­edge organization, this study focused on principles and methods of transparency, multivocality, cultural warrant, cultural hospitality, and intersectionality to conduct a domain analysis of country dance resources. The analysis revealed differing levels of engagement and distinction among dance practitioners and communities for their preferences to use different terms for the same concept. Various lexical, grammatical, affective, social, political, and cultural aspects also emerged as important contextual factors for the use and assignment of terms. As a result, this study proposes the use of semantic annotation to represent those contextual factors and to allow mechanisms of user choice in the design of a country dance knowl­edge organization system. Future research arising from this study would focus on expanding examination to other country dance genres and continued exploration of the use of semantic approaches to represent contextual factors in controlled vocabulary development.

0.00937932 = product of:
  0.028137958 = sum of:
    0.028137958 = product of:
      0.056275915 = sum of:
        0.056275915 = weight(_text_:history in 3743) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056275915 = score(doc=3743,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21898255 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047072954 = queryNorm
            0.25698814 = fieldWeight in 3743, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3743)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

In 2008 the FRBR/CRM Harmonisation Working Group has achieved a major milestone: a complete version of the object-oriented definition of FRBR (FRBRoo) was released for comment. After a brief overview of the history and context of the Working Group, this paper focuses on the primary contributions resulting from this work. - FRBRoo is a self-contained document which expresses the concepts of FRBR using the objectoriented methodology and framework of CIDOC CRM. It is an alternative view on library conceptualisation for a different purpose, not a replacement for FRBR. - This 'translation' process presented an opportunity to verify and confirm FRBR's internal consistency. - FRBRoo offers a common view of library and museum documentation as two kinds of information from memory institutions. Such a common view is necessary to provide interoperable information systems for all users interested in accessing common or related content. - The analysis provided an opportunity for mutual enrichment of FRBR and CIDOC CRM. Examples include: - - Addition of the modelling of time and events to FRBR, which can be seen in its application to the publishing process - - Clarification of the manifestation entity - - Explicit modelling of performances and recordings in FRBR - - Adding the work entity to CRM - - Adding the identifier assignment process to CRM. - Producing a formalisation which is more suited for implementation with object-oriented tools, and which facilitates the testing and adoption of FRBR concepts in implementations with different functional specifications and in different environments.

0.00937932 = product of:
  0.028137958 = sum of:
    0.028137958 = product of:
      0.056275915 = sum of:
        0.056275915 = weight(_text_:history in 831) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056275915 = score(doc=831,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21898255 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047072954 = queryNorm
            0.25698814 = fieldWeight in 831, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=831)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Knowledge tends to be structured differently in different types of information resources and information genres due to the different purposes of the resource/genre, and the characteristics of the media or format of the resource. This study investigates subject organization in three types of information resources: books (i.e. monographs), Web directories and information websites that provide information on particular subjects. Twelve subjects (topics) were selected in the areas of science, arts/humanities and social science, and two books, two Web directories and two information websites were sampled for each subject. The top two levels of the hierarchical subject organization in each resource were harvested and analyzed. Books have the highest proportion of general subject categories (e.g. history, theory and definition) and process categories (indicating step-by-step instructions). Information websites have the highest proportion of target user categories and genre-specific categories (e.g. about us and contact us), whereas Web directories have the highest proportion of specialty categories (i.e. sub-disciplines), industry-role categories (e.g. stores, schools and associations) and format categories (e.g. books, blogs and videos). Some disciplinary differences were also identified.

0.00937932 = product of:
  0.028137958 = sum of:
    0.028137958 = product of:
      0.056275915 = sum of:
        0.056275915 = weight(_text_:history in 2257) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056275915 = score(doc=2257,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21898255 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047072954 = queryNorm
            0.25698814 = fieldWeight in 2257, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2257)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The Future of Information Architecture examines issues surrounding why information is processed, stored and applied in the way that it has, since time immemorial. Contrary to the conventional wisdom held by many scholars in human history, the recurrent debate on the explanation of the most basic categories of information (eg space, time causation, quality, quantity) has been misconstrued, to the effect that there exists some deeper categories and principles behind these categories of information - with enormous implications for our understanding of reality in general. To understand this, the book is organised in to four main parts: Part I begins with the vital question concerning the role of information within the context of the larger theoretical debate in the literature. Part II provides a critical examination of the nature of data taxonomy from the main perspectives of culture, society, nature and the mind. Part III constructively invesitgates the world of information network from the main perspectives of culture, society, nature and the mind. Part IV proposes six main theses in the authors synthetic theory of information architecture, namely, (a) the first thesis on the simpleness-complicatedness principle, (b) the second thesis on the exactness-vagueness principle (c) the third thesis on the slowness-quickness principle (d) the fourth thesis on the order-chaos principle, (e) the fifth thesis on the symmetry-asymmetry principle, and (f) the sixth thesis on the post-human stage.

0.00937932 = product of:
  0.028137958 = sum of:
    0.028137958 = product of:
      0.056275915 = sum of:
        0.056275915 = weight(_text_:history in 3183) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056275915 = score(doc=3183,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21898255 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047072954 = queryNorm
            0.25698814 = fieldWeight in 3183, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3183)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Content

Contents: 1. Introduction: Kinds of Division; 2. The Basics of Logical Division; 3. History; 4. Formalization; 5. The Rules; 6. The Status of the Rules; 7. The Process of Logical Division; 8. Conclusion

0.00937932 = product of:
  0.028137958 = sum of:
    0.028137958 = product of:
      0.056275915 = sum of:
        0.056275915 = weight(_text_:history in 3398) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056275915 = score(doc=3398,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21898255 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047072954 = queryNorm
            0.25698814 = fieldWeight in 3398, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3398)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Series

History and philosophy of technoscience; 3