Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × classification_ss:"025.04 / dc22"
  1. O'Connor, B.C.; Kearns, J.; Anderson, R.L.: Doing things with information : beyond indexing and abstracting (2008) 0.01
    0.01376051 = product of:
      0.048161782 = sum of:
        0.019455878 = weight(_text_:libraries in 4297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019455878 = score(doc=4297,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13401186 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04079441 = queryNorm
            0.14518027 = fieldWeight in 4297, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4297)
        0.028705904 = weight(_text_:studies in 4297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028705904 = score(doc=4297,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1627809 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04079441 = queryNorm
            0.17634688 = fieldWeight in 4297, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4297)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    The relationship between a person with a question and a source of information is complex. Indexing and abstracting often fail because too much emphasis is put on the mechanics of description, and too little has been given as to what ought to be represented. Research literature suggests that inappropriate representation results in failed searches a significant number of times, perhaps even in a majority of cases. "Doing Things with Information" seeks to rectify this unfortunate situation by emphasizing methods of modeling and constructing appropriate representations of such questions and documents. Students in programs of information studies will find focal points for discussion about system design and refinement of existing systems. Librarians, scholars, and those who work within large document collections, whether paper or electronic, will find insights into the strengths and weaknesses of the access systems they use.
    Imprint
    Westport, Conn. : Libraries Unlimited
  2. Antoniou, G.; Harmelen, F. van: ¬A semantic Web primer (2004) 0.01
    0.011348697 = product of:
      0.03972044 = sum of:
        0.021779248 = weight(_text_:case in 468) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021779248 = score(doc=468,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17934912 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04079441 = queryNorm
            0.121434934 = fieldWeight in 468, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=468)
        0.01794119 = weight(_text_:studies in 468) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01794119 = score(doc=468,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1627809 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04079441 = queryNorm
            0.110216804 = fieldWeight in 468, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=468)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Footnote
    The next chapter introduces resource description framework (RDF) and RDF schema (RDFS). Unlike XML, RDF provides a foundation for expressing the semantics of dada: it is a standard dada model for machine-processable semantics. Resource description framework schema offers a number of modeling primitives for organizing RDF vocabularies in typed hierarchies. In addition to RDF and RDFS, a query language for RDF, i.e. RQL. is introduced. This chapter and the next chapter are two of the most important chapters in the book. Chapter 4 presents another language called Web Ontology Language (OWL). Because RDFS is quite primitive as a modeling language for the Web, more powerful languages are needed. A richer language. DAML+OIL, is thus proposed as a joint endeavor of the United States and Europe. OWL takes DAML+OIL as the starting point, and aims to be the standardized and broadly accepted ontology language. At the beginning of the chapter, the nontrivial relation with RDF/RDFS is discussed. Then the authors describe the various language elements of OWL in some detail. Moreover, Appendix A contains an abstract OWL syntax. which compresses OWL and makes OWL much easier to read. Chapter 5 covers both monotonic and nonmonotonic rules. Whereas the previous chapter's mainly concentrate on specializations of knowledge representation, this chapter depicts the foundation of knowledge representation and inference. Two examples are also givwn to explain monotonic and non-monotonic rules, respectively. "To get the most out of the chapter. readers had better gain a thorough understanding of predicate logic first. Chapter 6 presents several realistic application scenarios to which the Semantic Web technology can be applied. including horizontal information products at Elsevier, data integration at Audi, skill finding at Swiss Life, a think tank portal at EnerSearch, e-learning. Web services, multimedia collection indexing, online procurement, raid device interoperability. These case studies give us some real feelings about the Semantic Web.
  3. TREC: experiment and evaluation in information retrieval (2005) 0.00
    0.0017371321 = product of:
      0.012159924 = sum of:
        0.012159924 = weight(_text_:libraries in 636) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012159924 = score(doc=636,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13401186 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04079441 = queryNorm
            0.09073767 = fieldWeight in 636, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=636)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Series
    Digital libraries and electronic publishing