Search (64 results, page 1 of 4)

0.042432062 = product of:
  0.084864125 = sum of:
    0.084864125 = product of:
      0.16972825 = sum of:
        0.16972825 = weight(_text_:commerce in 3084) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.16972825 = score(doc=3084,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.32931858 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.5970206 = idf(docFreq=163, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04991929 = queryNorm
            0.51539224 = fieldWeight in 3084, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              6.5970206 = idf(docFreq=163, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3084)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Ontologies have moved beyond the domains of library science, philosophy, and knowledge representation. They are now the concerns of marketing departments, CEOs, and mainstream business. Research analyst companies such as Forrester Research report on the critical roles of ontologies in support of browsing and search for e-commerce and in support of interoperability for facilitation of knowledge management and configuration. One now sees ontologies used as central controlled vocabularies that are integrated into catalogues, databases, web publications, knowledge management applications, etc. Large ontologies are essential components in many online applications including search (such as Yahoo and Lycos), e-commerce (such as Amazon and eBay), configuration (such as Dell and PC-Order), etc. One also sees ontologies that have long life spans, sometimes in multiple projects (such as UMLS, SIC codes, etc.). Such diverse usage generates many implications for ontology environments. In this paper, we will discuss ontologies and requirements in their current instantiations on the web today. We will describe some desirable properties of ontologies. We will also discuss how both simple and complex ontologies are being and may be used to support varied applications. We will conclude with a discussion of emerging trends in ontologies and their environments and briefly mention our evolving ontology evolution environment.

0.042005595 = product of:
  0.08401119 = sum of:
    0.08401119 = product of:
      0.16802238 = sum of:
        0.16802238 = weight(_text_:commerce in 3792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.16802238 = score(doc=3792,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32931858 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.5970206 = idf(docFreq=163, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04991929 = queryNorm
            0.51021224 = fieldWeight in 3792, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.5970206 = idf(docFreq=163, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3792)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This entry introduces ontologies as a potential "silver bullet" for knowledge management, enterprise application integration, and e-commerce. Ontologies enable knowledge sharing and knowledge reuse. The degree to which an ontology is machine-understandable, its formality, is determined by the language used for the specification of the ontology. There exists a trade-off between the expressiveness of an ontology language and the modeling support it provides for the ontology developer. This entry also describes how different knowledge representation formalisms, together with the Web languages XML and RDF, have influenced the development of the Web ontology language OWL.

0.03964253 = product of:
  0.07928506 = sum of:
    0.07928506 = product of:
      0.23785518 = sum of:
        0.23785518 = weight(_text_:3a in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.23785518 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.42321628 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04991929 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

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

0.036004797 = product of:
  0.07200959 = sum of:
    0.07200959 = product of:
      0.14401919 = sum of:
        0.14401919 = weight(_text_:commerce in 2357) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14401919 = score(doc=2357,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32931858 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.5970206 = idf(docFreq=163, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04991929 = queryNorm
            0.4373248 = fieldWeight in 2357, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.5970206 = idf(docFreq=163, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2357)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Ontology plays an essential role in recognizing the meaning of the information in Web documents. It has been shown that extracting concepts is easier than building relationships among them. For a defined set of concepts, many existing algorithms produce all possible relationships for that set. This makes the process of refining the relationships almost impossible. A new algorithm is needed to reduce the number of relationships among a defined set of concepts produced by existing algorithms. This article contributes such an algorithm, which enables a domain-knowledge expert to refine the relationships linking a set of concepts. In the research reported here, text-mining tools have been used to extract concepts in the domain of e-commerce laws. A new algorithm has been proposed to reduce the number of extracted relationships. It groups the concepts according to the number of relationships with other concepts and provides formalization. An experiment and software have been built, proving that reducing the number of relationships will reduce the efforts needed from a human expert.

0.036004797 = product of:
  0.07200959 = sum of:
    0.07200959 = product of:
      0.14401919 = sum of:
        0.14401919 = weight(_text_:commerce in 2737) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14401919 = score(doc=2737,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32931858 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.5970206 = idf(docFreq=163, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04991929 = queryNorm
            0.4373248 = fieldWeight in 2737, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.5970206 = idf(docFreq=163, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2737)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In recent years, knowledge structuring is assuming important roles in several real world applications such as decision support, cooperative problem solving, e-commerce, Semantic Web and, even in planning systems. Ontologies play an important role in supporting automated processes to access information and are at the core of new strategies for the development of knowledge-based systems. Yet, developing an ontology is a time-consuming task which often needs an accurate domain expertise to tackle structural and logical difficulties in the definition of concepts as well as conceivable relationships. This work presents an ontology-based retrieval approach, that supports data organization and visualization and provides a friendly navigation model. It exploits the fuzzy extension of the Formal Concept Analysis theory to elicit conceptualizations from datasets and generate a hierarchy-based representation of extracted knowledge. An intuitive graphical interface provides a multi-facets view of the built ontology. Through a transparent query-based retrieval, final users navigate across concepts, relations and population.

0.036004797 = product of:
  0.07200959 = sum of:
    0.07200959 = product of:
      0.14401919 = sum of:
        0.14401919 = weight(_text_:commerce in 5876) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14401919 = score(doc=5876,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32931858 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.5970206 = idf(docFreq=163, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04991929 = queryNorm
            0.4373248 = fieldWeight in 5876, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.5970206 = idf(docFreq=163, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5876)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Mining product reviews and sentiment analysis are of great significance, whether for academic research purposes or optimizing business strategies. We propose a feature-level sentiment analysis framework based on rules parsing and fine-grained domain ontology for Chinese reviews. Fine-grained ontology is used to describe synonymous expressions of product features, which are reflected in word changes in online reviews. First, a semiautomatic construction method is developed by using Word2Vec for fine-grained ontology. Then, featurelevel sentiment analysis that combines rules parsing and the fine-grained domain ontology is conducted to extract explicit and implicit features from product reviews. Finally, the domain sentiment dictionary and context sentiment dictionary are established to identify sentiment polarities for the extracted feature-sentiment combinations. An experiment is conducted on the basis of product reviews crawled from Chinese e-commerce websites. The results demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach.

0.030003997 = product of:
  0.060007993 = sum of:
    0.060007993 = product of:
      0.120015986 = sum of:
        0.120015986 = weight(_text_:commerce in 776) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.120015986 = score(doc=776,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32931858 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.5970206 = idf(docFreq=163, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04991929 = queryNorm
            0.36443734 = fieldWeight in 776, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.5970206 = idf(docFreq=163, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=776)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Research in ontology has, in recent years, become widespread in the field of information systems, in various areas of sciences, in business, in economy, and in industry. The importance of ontologies is increasingly recognized in fields diverse as in e-commerce, semantic web, enterprise, information integration, information science, qualitative modeling of physical systems, natural language processing, knowledge engineering, and databases. Ontologies provide formal specifications and harmonized definitions of concepts used to represent knowledge of specific domains. An ontology supplies a unifying framework for communication, it establishes a basis for knowledge organization and knowledge representation and contributes to theory formation and modeling of a specific domain. In the current paper, we present and discuss principles of organization and representation of knowledge that grew out of the use of formal ontology. The core of the discussed ontological framework is a top-level ontology, called GFO (General Formal Ontology), which is being developed at the University of Leipzig. These principles make use of the onto-axiomatic method, of graduated conceptualizations, of levels of reality, and of top-level-supported methods for ontology-development. We explore the interrelations between formal ontology and knowledge organization, and argue for a close interaction between both fields

0.030003997 = product of:
  0.060007993 = sum of:
    0.060007993 = product of:
      0.120015986 = sum of:
        0.120015986 = weight(_text_:commerce in 822) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.120015986 = score(doc=822,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32931858 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.5970206 = idf(docFreq=163, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04991929 = queryNorm
            0.36443734 = fieldWeight in 822, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.5970206 = idf(docFreq=163, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=822)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

We discuss the needs of a knowledge organization scheme for supporting Web-based software applications. We show how it differs from traditional knowledge organization schemes due to the virtual, dynamic, ad-hoc, userspecific and application-specific nature of Web-based knowledge. The sheer size of Web resources also adds to the complexity of organizing knowledge on the Web. As such, a standard, global scheme such as a single ontology for classifying and organizing all Web-based content is unrealistic. There is nevertheless a strong and immediate need for effective knowledge organization schemes to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of Web-based applications. In this context, we propose a novel knowledge organization scheme wherein concepts in the ontology of a domain are semantically interlinked with specific pieces of Web-based content using a rich hyper-linking structure known as Superlinks with well-defined semantic roles. We illustrate how such a knowledge organization scheme improves the efficiency and effectiveness of a Web-based e-commerce retail store.

0.030003997 = product of:
  0.060007993 = sum of:
    0.060007993 = product of:
      0.120015986 = sum of:
        0.120015986 = weight(_text_:commerce in 3297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.120015986 = score(doc=3297,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32931858 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.5970206 = idf(docFreq=163, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04991929 = queryNorm
            0.36443734 = fieldWeight in 3297, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.5970206 = idf(docFreq=163, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3297)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Ontologies have proven to be an essential element in many applications. They are used in agent systems, knowledge management systems, and e-commerce platforms. They can also generate natural language, integrate intelligent information, provide semantic-based access to the Internet, and extract information from texts in addition to being used in many other applications to explicitly declare the knowledge embedded in them. However, not only are ontologies useful for applications in which knowledge plays a key role, but they can also trigger a major change in current Web contents. This change is leading to the third generation of the Web-known as the Semantic Web-which has been defined as "the conceptual structuring of the Web in an explicit machine-readable way."1 This definition does not differ too much from the one used for defining an ontology: "An ontology is an explicit, machinereadable specification of a shared conceptualization."2 In fact, new ontology-based applications and knowledge architectures are developing for this new Web. A common claim for all of these approaches is the need for languages to represent the semantic information that this Web requires-solving the heterogeneous data exchange in this heterogeneous environment. Here, we don't decide which language is best of the Semantic Web. Rather, our goal is to help developers find the most suitable language for their representation needs. The authors analyze the most representative ontology languages created for the Web and compare them using a common framework.

0.026428355 = product of:
  0.05285671 = sum of:
    0.05285671 = product of:
      0.15857013 = sum of:
        0.15857013 = weight(_text_:3a in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15857013 = score(doc=701,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.42321628 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04991929 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

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.

0.026428355 = product of:
  0.05285671 = sum of:
    0.05285671 = product of:
      0.15857013 = sum of:
        0.15857013 = weight(_text_:3a in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15857013 = score(doc=5820,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.42321628 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04991929 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

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.

0.024003197 = product of:
  0.048006393 = sum of:
    0.048006393 = product of:
      0.096012786 = sum of:
        0.096012786 = weight(_text_:commerce in 771) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.096012786 = score(doc=771,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32931858 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.5970206 = idf(docFreq=163, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04991929 = queryNorm
            0.29154986 = fieldWeight in 771, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.5970206 = idf(docFreq=163, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=771)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Research in ontology has in recent years become widespread in the field of information systems, in distinct areas of sciences, in business, in economy, and in industry. The importance of ontologies is increasingly recognized in fields diverse as in e-commerce, semantic web, enterprise, information integration, qualitative modelling of physical systems, natural language processing, knowledge engineering, and databases. Ontologies provide formal specifications and harmonized definitions of concepts used to represent knowledge of specific domains. An ontology supplies a unifying framework for communication and establishes the basis of the knowledge about a specific domain. The term ontology has two meanings, it denotes, on the one hand, a research area, on the other hand, a system of organized knowledge. A system of knowledge may exhibit various degrees of formality; in the strongest sense it is an axiomatized and formally represented theory. which is denoted throughout this paper by the term axiomatized ontology. We use the term formal ontology to name an area of research which is becoming a science similar as formal or mathematical logic. Formal ontology is an evolving science which is concerned with the systematic development of axiomatic theories describing forms, modes, and views of being of the world at different levels of abstraction and granularity. Formal ontology combines the methods of mathematical logic with principles of philosophy, but also with the methods of artificial intelligence and linguistics. At themost general level of abstraction, formal ontology is concerned with those categories that apply to every area of the world. The application of formal ontology to domains at different levels of generality yields knowledge systems which are called, according to the level of abstraction, Top Level Ontologies or Foundational Ontologies, Core Domain or Domain Ontologies. Top level or foundational ontologies apply to every area of the world, in contrast to the various Generic, Domain Core or Domain Ontologies, which are associated to more restricted fields of interest. A foundational ontology can serve as a unifying framework for representation and integration of knowledge and may support the communication and harmonisation of conceptual systems. The current paper presents an overview about the current stage of the foundational ontology GFO.

0.016908437 = product of:
  0.033816874 = sum of:
    0.033816874 = product of:
      0.06763375 = sum of:
        0.06763375 = weight(_text_:22 in 6089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06763375 = score(doc=6089,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17480884 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04991929 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Pages

S.11-22

0.016908437 = product of:
  0.033816874 = sum of:
    0.033816874 = product of:
      0.06763375 = sum of:
        0.06763375 = weight(_text_:22 in 5576) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06763375 = score(doc=5576,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17480884 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04991929 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

13.12.2017 14:17:22

0.016908437 = product of:
  0.033816874 = sum of:
    0.033816874 = product of:
      0.06763375 = sum of:
        0.06763375 = weight(_text_:22 in 539) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06763375 = score(doc=539,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17480884 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04991929 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

26.12.2011 13:22:07

0.016908437 = product of:
  0.033816874 = sum of:
    0.033816874 = product of:
      0.06763375 = sum of:
        0.06763375 = weight(_text_:22 in 3406) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06763375 = score(doc=3406,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17480884 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04991929 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

30. 5.2010 16:22:35

0.016908437 = product of:
  0.033816874 = sum of:
    0.033816874 = product of:
      0.06763375 = sum of:
        0.06763375 = weight(_text_:22 in 4523) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06763375 = score(doc=4523,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17480884 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04991929 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

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

0.015001998 = product of:
  0.030003997 = sum of:
    0.030003997 = product of:
      0.060007993 = sum of:
        0.060007993 = weight(_text_:commerce in 4393) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.060007993 = score(doc=4393,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32931858 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.5970206 = idf(docFreq=163, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04991929 = queryNorm
            0.18221867 = fieldWeight in 4393, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.5970206 = idf(docFreq=163, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=4393)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Vgl. auch Mitgliederbrief Ernst-Schröder-Zentrum, Nr.41: "Die aktuelle Entwicklung insbesondere der Internettechnologien führte in den letzten Jahren zu einem Wieder-Erwachen des Interesses von Forschern und Anwendern an (technischen) Ontologien. Typische Visionen in diesem Zusammenhang sind das ,Semantic Web' und das ,Internet der Dinge' (Web 3.0). Technische Ontologien sind formale, zeichenvermittelte symbolische Repräsentationen von lebensweltlichen Zusammenhängen, die notwendigerweise zu einem großen Teil von ihrem Kontextbezug gelöst werden und über die ursprünglichen lebensweltlichen Zusammenhänge hinaus computerverarbeitbar verfügbar werden. Häufig werden dafür XML-basierte Beschreibungssprachen eingesetzt wie z.B. der OWL-Standard. Trotz des großen Interesses sind jedoch umfangreiche und erfolgreiche Beispiele von in größerem Umfang praktisch eingesetzten (technischen) Ontologien eher die Ausnahme. Die zentrale Fragestellung unseres Beitrags ist daher, ob es eventuell grundlegendere (möglicherweise auch außertechnische) Hürden gibt auf dem Weg zu einer Verwirklichung der oft visionären Vorstellungen, wie z.B. zukünftig E-Commerce und E-Business und ,Wissensmanagement' durch technische Ontologien unterstützt werden könnten: Oder ist alles vielleicht ,nur' eine Frage der Zeit, bis wir durch ausreichend leistungsfähige Technologien für solche technischen Ontologien die Versprechungen des ,Internet der Dinge' verwirklichen können?

0.014347285 = product of:
  0.02869457 = sum of:
    0.02869457 = product of:
      0.05738914 = sum of:
        0.05738914 = weight(_text_:22 in 3355) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05738914 = score(doc=3355,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17480884 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04991929 = queryNorm
            0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 3355, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3355)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 1.2017 16:54:03
22. 1.2017 17:10:56

0.013526749 = product of:
  0.027053498 = sum of:
    0.027053498 = product of:
      0.054106995 = sum of:
        0.054106995 = weight(_text_:22 in 3376) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054106995 = score(doc=3376,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17480884 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04991929 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3376, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3376)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

31. 7.2010 16:58:22