-
Maniez, J.: Fusion de banques de donnees documentaires at compatibilite des languages d'indexation (1997)
0.06
0.062111672 = product of:
0.093167506 = sum of:
0.018387845 = weight(_text_:information in 2246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018387845 = score(doc=2246,freq=6.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 2246, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2246)
0.07477966 = sum of:
0.032535225 = weight(_text_:systems in 2246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032535225 = score(doc=2246,freq=2.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.2037246 = fieldWeight in 2246, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2246)
0.04224443 = weight(_text_:22 in 2246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04224443 = score(doc=2246,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1819777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2246, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2246)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Discusses the apparently unattainable goal of compatibility of information languages. While controlled languages can improve retrieval performance within a single system, they make cooperation across different systems more difficult. The Internet and downloading accentuate this adverse outcome and the acceleration of data exchange aggravates the problem of compatibility. Defines this familiar concept and demonstrates that coherence is just as necessary as it was for indexing languages, the proliferation of which has created confusion in grouped data banks. Describes 2 types of potential solutions, similar to those applied to automatic translation of natural languages: - harmonizing the information languages themselves, both difficult and expensive, or, the more flexible solution involving automatic harmonization of indexing formulae based on pre established concordance tables. However, structural incompatibilities between post coordinated languages and classifications may lead any harmonization tools up a blind alley, while the paths of a universal concordance model are rare and narrow
- Date
- 1. 8.1996 22:01:00
- Footnote
- Übers. d. Titels: Integration of information data banks and compatibility of indexing languages
-
Fox, E.A.: Lexical relations : enhancing effectiveness of information retrieval systems (1980)
0.05
0.047793493 = product of:
0.07169024 = sum of:
0.02830994 = weight(_text_:information in 5310) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02830994 = score(doc=5310,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.3103276 = fieldWeight in 5310, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5310)
0.0433803 = product of:
0.0867606 = sum of:
0.0867606 = weight(_text_:systems in 5310) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0867606 = score(doc=5310,freq=2.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.5432656 = fieldWeight in 5310, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5310)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
-
Kobrin, R.Y.: On the principles of terminological work in the creation of thesauri for information retrieval systems (1979)
0.04
0.041819304 = product of:
0.06272896 = sum of:
0.024771197 = weight(_text_:information in 2954) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024771197 = score(doc=2954,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 2954, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2954)
0.03795776 = product of:
0.07591552 = sum of:
0.07591552 = weight(_text_:systems in 2954) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07591552 = score(doc=2954,freq=2.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.47535738 = fieldWeight in 2954, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2954)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
-
Schmitz-Esser, W.: Language of general communication and concept compatibility (1996)
0.04
0.041544255 = product of:
0.12463276 = sum of:
0.12463276 = sum of:
0.054225378 = weight(_text_:systems in 6089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054225378 = score(doc=6089,freq=2.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.339541 = fieldWeight in 6089, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=6089)
0.07040738 = weight(_text_:22 in 6089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07040738 = score(doc=6089,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1819777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = 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)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Pages
- S.11-22
- Source
- Compatibility and integration of order systems: Research Seminar Proceedings of the TIP/ISKO Meeting, Warsaw, 13-15 September 1995
-
Free text in information systems: capabilities and limitations (1985)
0.04
0.035845123 = product of:
0.05376768 = sum of:
0.021232454 = weight(_text_:information in 2045) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021232454 = score(doc=2045,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 2045, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2045)
0.032535225 = product of:
0.06507045 = sum of:
0.06507045 = weight(_text_:systems in 2045) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06507045 = score(doc=2045,freq=2.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.4074492 = fieldWeight in 2045, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2045)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
-
Subject indexing systems : concepts, methods and techniques (1998)
0.04
0.035845123 = product of:
0.05376768 = sum of:
0.021232454 = weight(_text_:information in 6022) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021232454 = score(doc=6022,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 6022, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6022)
0.032535225 = product of:
0.06507045 = sum of:
0.06507045 = weight(_text_:systems in 6022) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06507045 = score(doc=6022,freq=2.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.4074492 = fieldWeight in 6022, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6022)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Imprint
- Calcutta : Indian Association of Special Libraries and Information Centres (IASLIC)
-
Fugmann, R.: ¬The analytico-synthetic foundation for large indexing & information retrieval systems : dedicated to Prof. Dr. Werner Schultheis, the vigorous initiator of modern chem. documentation in Germany on the occasion of his 85th birthday (1983)
0.04
0.035561085 = product of:
0.053341627 = sum of:
0.031651475 = weight(_text_:information in 215) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.031651475 = score(doc=215,freq=10.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.3469568 = fieldWeight in 215, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=215)
0.02169015 = product of:
0.0433803 = sum of:
0.0433803 = weight(_text_:systems in 215) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0433803 = score(doc=215,freq=2.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.2716328 = fieldWeight in 215, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=215)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- LCSH
- Information retrieval
- RSWK
- Information und Dokumentation / Systemgrundlage (BVB)
- Subject
- Information und Dokumentation / Systemgrundlage (BVB)
Information retrieval
-
Beghtol, C.: Relationships in classificatory structure and meaning (2001)
0.03
0.0342594 = product of:
0.0513891 = sum of:
0.015013612 = weight(_text_:information in 1138) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015013612 = score(doc=1138,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 1138, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1138)
0.036375485 = product of:
0.07275097 = sum of:
0.07275097 = weight(_text_:systems in 1138) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07275097 = score(doc=1138,freq=10.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.45554203 = fieldWeight in 1138, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1138)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- In a changing information environment, we need to reassess each element of bibliographic control, including classification theories and systems. Every classification system is a theoretical construct imposed an "reality." The classificatory relationships that are assumed to be valuable have generally received less attention than the topics included in the systems. Relationships are functions of both the syntactic and semantic axes of classification systems, and both explicit and implicit relationships are discussed. Examples are drawn from a number of different systems, both bibliographic and non-bibliographic, and the cultural warrant (i. e., the sociocultural context) of classification systems is examined. The part-whole relationship is discussed as an example of a universally valid concept that is treated as a component of the cultural warrant of a classification system.
- Series
- Information science and knowledge management; vol.2
-
Green, R.; Bean, C.A.: Aligning systems of relationships (2006)
0.03
0.029886318 = product of:
0.044829477 = sum of:
0.01415497 = weight(_text_:information in 4949) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01415497 = score(doc=4949,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 4949, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4949)
0.030674506 = product of:
0.061349012 = sum of:
0.061349012 = weight(_text_:systems in 4949) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.061349012 = score(doc=4949,freq=4.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.38414678 = fieldWeight in 4949, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4949)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Source
- Knowledge organization, information systems and other essays: Professor A. Neelameghan Festschrift. Ed. by K.S. Raghavan and K.N. Prasad
-
Zhou, G.D.; Zhang, M.: Extracting relation information from text documents by exploring various types of knowledge (2007)
0.03
0.029462835 = product of:
0.04419425 = sum of:
0.025022687 = weight(_text_:information in 927) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025022687 = score(doc=927,freq=16.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.27429342 = fieldWeight in 927, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=927)
0.019171566 = product of:
0.03834313 = sum of:
0.03834313 = weight(_text_:systems in 927) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03834313 = score(doc=927,freq=4.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.24009174 = fieldWeight in 927, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=927)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Extracting semantic relationships between entities from text documents is challenging in information extraction and important for deep information processing and management. This paper investigates the incorporation of diverse lexical, syntactic and semantic knowledge in feature-based relation extraction using support vector machines. Our study illustrates that the base phrase chunking information is very effective for relation extraction and contributes to most of the performance improvement from syntactic aspect while current commonly used features from full parsing give limited further enhancement. This suggests that most of useful information in full parse trees for relation extraction is shallow and can be captured by chunking. This indicates that a cheap and robust solution in relation extraction can be achieved without decreasing too much in performance. We also demonstrate how semantic information such as WordNet, can be used in feature-based relation extraction to further improve the performance. Evaluation on the ACE benchmark corpora shows that effective incorporation of diverse features enables our system outperform previously best-reported systems. It also shows that our feature-based system significantly outperforms tree kernel-based systems. This suggests that current tree kernels fail to effectively explore structured syntactic information in relation extraction.
- Source
- Information processing and management. 43(2007) no.4, S.969-982
-
Miller, U.; Teitelbaum, R.: Pre-coordination and post-coordination : past and future (2002)
0.03
0.029166719 = product of:
0.043750077 = sum of:
0.024771197 = weight(_text_:information in 1395) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024771197 = score(doc=1395,freq=8.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 1395, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1395)
0.01897888 = product of:
0.03795776 = sum of:
0.03795776 = weight(_text_:systems in 1395) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03795776 = score(doc=1395,freq=2.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.23767869 = fieldWeight in 1395, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1395)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- This article deals with the meaningful processing of information in relation to two systems of Information processing: pre-coordination and post-coordination. The different approaches are discussed, with emphasis an the need for a controlled vocabulary in information retrieval. Assigned indexing, which employs a controlled vocabulary, is described in detail. Types of indexing language can be divided into two broad groups - those using pre-coordinated terms and those depending an post-coordination. They represent two different basic approaches in processing and Information retrieval. The historical development of these two approaches is described, as well as the two tools that apply to these approaches: thesauri and subject headings.
-
Compatibility and integration of order systems : Research Seminar Proceedings of the TIP/ISKO Meeting, Warsaw, 13-15 September 1995 (1996)
0.03
0.026416022 = product of:
0.03962403 = sum of:
0.012511344 = weight(_text_:information in 6050) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012511344 = score(doc=6050,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 6050, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6050)
0.027112689 = product of:
0.054225378 = sum of:
0.054225378 = weight(_text_:systems in 6050) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054225378 = score(doc=6050,freq=8.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.339541 = fieldWeight in 6050, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6050)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Content
- Enthält die Beiträge: SCHMITZ-ESSER, W.: Language of general communication and concept compatibility; RIESTHUIS, G.: Theory of compatibility of information languages; DAHLBERG, I.: The compatibility guidelines - a re-evaluation; SOERGEL, D.: Data structure and software support for integrated thesauri; MURASZKIEWICZ, M., H. RYBINSKI u. W. STRUK: Software problems of merging multilingual thesauri; CHMIELEWSKA-GORCZYCA, E.: Compatibility of indexing tools in multidatabase environment; NEGRINI, G.: Towards structural compatibility between concept systems; SCIBOR, E.: Some remarks on the establishment of concordances between a universal classification system and an interdisciplinary thesaurus; HOPPE, S.: The UMLS - a model for knowledge integration in a subject field; DEXTRE-CLARKE, S.: Integrating thesauri in the agricultural sciences; ROULIN, C.: Bringing multilingual thesauri together: a feasibility study; ZIMMERMANN, H.: Conception and application possibilities of classification concordances in an OPAC environment; SOSINSKA-KALATA, B.: The Universal Decimal Classification as an international standard for knowledge organization in bibliographic databases and library catalogues; WOZNIAK, J. u. T. GLOWACKA: KABA Subject Authority File - an example of an integrated Polish-French-English subject headings system; BABIK, W.: Terminology as a level for the compatibility of indexing languages - some remarks; STANCIKOVA, P.: International integrated database systems linked to multilingual thesauri covering the field of environment and agriculture; SAMEK, T.: Indexing languages integration and the EUROVOC Thesaurus in the Czech Republic; SIWEK, K.: Compatibility discrepancies between Polish and foreign databases; GLINSKI, W. u. M. MURASZKIEWICZ: An intelligent front-end processor for accessing information systems
-
Peters, I.; Weller. K.: Paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations in knowledge organization systems (2008)
0.03
0.026150528 = product of:
0.03922579 = sum of:
0.012385598 = weight(_text_:information in 1593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012385598 = score(doc=1593,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 1593, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1593)
0.026840193 = product of:
0.053680386 = sum of:
0.053680386 = weight(_text_:systems in 1593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.053680386 = score(doc=1593,freq=4.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.33612844 = fieldWeight in 1593, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1593)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Classical knowledge representation methods have been successfully working for years with established - but in a way restricted and vague - relations such as synonymy, hierarchy (meronymy, hyponymy) and unspecified associations. Recent developments like ontologies and folksonomies show new forms of collaboration, indexing and knowledge representation and encourage the reconsideration of standard knowledge relationships for practical use. In a summarizing overview we show which relations are currently used in knowledge organization systems (controlled vocabularies, ontologies and folksonomies) and which relations are expressed explicitly or which may be inherently hidden in them.
- Source
- Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 59(2008) H.2, S.100-107
-
Vickery, B.B.: Structure and function in retrieval languages (2006)
0.03
0.025346328 = product of:
0.03801949 = sum of:
0.015013612 = weight(_text_:information in 5584) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015013612 = score(doc=5584,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 5584, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5584)
0.023005879 = product of:
0.046011757 = sum of:
0.046011757 = weight(_text_:systems in 5584) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.046011757 = score(doc=5584,freq=4.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.28811008 = fieldWeight in 5584, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5584)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to summarize the varied structural characteristics which may be present in retrieval languages. Design/methodology/approach - The languages serve varied purposes in information systems, and a number of these are identified. The relations between structure and function are discussed and suggestions made as to the most suitable structures needed for various purposes. Findings - A quantitative approach has been developed: a simple measure is the number of separate terms in a retrieval language, but this has to be related to the scope of its subject field. Some ratio of terms to items in the field seems a more suitable measure of the average specificity of the terms. Other aspects can be quantified - for example, the average number of links in hierarchical chains, or the average number of cross-references in a thesaurus. Originality/value - All the approaches to the analysis of retrieval language reported in this paper are of continuing value. Some practical studies of computer information systems undertaken by Aslib Research Department have suggested a further approach.
-
Engerer, V.: Control and syntagmatization : vocabulary requirements in information retrieval thesauri and natural language lexicons (2017)
0.03
0.025000047 = product of:
0.03750007 = sum of:
0.021232454 = weight(_text_:information in 3678) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021232454 = score(doc=3678,freq=8.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 3678, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3678)
0.016267613 = product of:
0.032535225 = sum of:
0.032535225 = weight(_text_:systems in 3678) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032535225 = score(doc=3678,freq=2.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.2037246 = fieldWeight in 3678, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3678)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- This paper explores the relationships between natural language lexicons in lexical semantics and thesauri in information retrieval research. These different areas of knowledge have different restrictions on use of vocabulary; thesauri are used only in information search and retrieval contexts, whereas lexicons are mental systems and generally applicable in all domains of life. A set of vocabulary requirements that defines the more concrete characteristics of vocabulary items in the 2 contexts can be derived from this framework: lexicon items have to be learnable, complex, transparent, etc., whereas thesaurus terms must be effective, current and relevant, searchable, etc. The differences in vocabulary properties correlate with 2 other factors, the well-known dimension of Control (deliberate, social activities of building and maintaining vocabularies), and Syntagmatization, which is less known and describes vocabulary items' varying formal preparedness to exit the thesaurus/lexicon, enter into linear syntactic constructions, and, finally, acquire communicative functionality. It is proposed that there is an inverse relationship between Control and Syntagmatization.
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 68(2017) no.6, S.1480-1490
-
Dextre Clarke, S.G.: Thesaural relationships (2001)
0.02
0.024685455 = product of:
0.037028182 = sum of:
0.012385598 = weight(_text_:information in 1149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012385598 = score(doc=1149,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 1149, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1149)
0.024642585 = product of:
0.04928517 = sum of:
0.04928517 = weight(_text_:22 in 1149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04928517 = score(doc=1149,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1819777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1149, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1149)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Date
- 22. 9.2007 15:45:57
- Series
- Information science and knowledge management; vol.2
-
Boteram, F.: Semantische Relationen in Dokumentationssprachen : vom Thesaurus zum semantischen Netz (2010)
0.02
0.024685455 = product of:
0.037028182 = sum of:
0.012385598 = weight(_text_:information in 4792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012385598 = score(doc=4792,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 4792, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4792)
0.024642585 = product of:
0.04928517 = sum of:
0.04928517 = weight(_text_:22 in 4792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04928517 = score(doc=4792,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1819777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4792, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4792)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Moderne Verfahren des Information Retrieval verlangen nach aussagekräftigen und detailliert relationierten Dokumentationssprachen. Der selektive Transfer einzelner Modellierungsstrategien aus dem Bereich semantischer Technologien für die Gestaltung und Relationierung bestehender Dokumentationssprachen wird diskutiert. In Form einer Taxonomie wird ein hierarchisch strukturiertes Relationeninventar definiert, welches sowohl hinreichend allgemeine als auch zahlreiche spezifische Relationstypen enthält, die eine detaillierte und damit aussagekräftige Relationierung des Vokabulars ermöglichen. Das bringt einen Zugewinn an Übersichtlichkeit und Funktionalität. Im Gegensatz zu anderen Ansätzen und Überlegungen zur Schaffung von Relationeninventaren entwickelt der vorgestellte Vorschlag das Relationeninventar aus der Begriffsmenge eines bestehenden Gegenstandsbereichs heraus.
- Source
- Wissensspeicher in digitalen Räumen: Nachhaltigkeit - Verfügbarkeit - semantische Interoperabilität. Proceedings der 11. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation, Konstanz, 20. bis 22. Februar 2008. Hrsg.: J. Sieglerschmidt u. H.P.Ohly
-
Bodenreider, O.; Bean, C.A.: Relationships among knowledge structures : vocabulary integration within a subject domain (2001)
0.02
0.023896746 = product of:
0.03584512 = sum of:
0.01415497 = weight(_text_:information in 1145) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01415497 = score(doc=1145,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 1145, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1145)
0.02169015 = product of:
0.0433803 = sum of:
0.0433803 = weight(_text_:systems in 1145) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0433803 = score(doc=1145,freq=2.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.2716328 = fieldWeight in 1145, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1145)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- The structure of terminology systems can be seen as one way to organize knowledge. This paper focuses an three types of relationships among terms: synonymy, hierarchical relationships, and explicit mapping relationships. Examples drawn from various medical vocabularies illustrate each type of relationship. The integration of disparate terminological knowledge structures in the Unified Medical Language System is presented and discussed.
- Series
- Information science and knowledge management; vol.2
-
Rolling, L.: ¬The role of graphic display of concept relationships in indexing and retrieval vocabularies (1985)
0.02
0.021132817 = product of:
0.031699225 = sum of:
0.010009075 = weight(_text_:information in 3646) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010009075 = score(doc=3646,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.10971737 = fieldWeight in 3646, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3646)
0.02169015 = product of:
0.0433803 = sum of:
0.0433803 = weight(_text_:systems in 3646) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0433803 = score(doc=3646,freq=8.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.2716328 = fieldWeight in 3646, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3646)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- The use of diagrams to express relationships in classification is not new. Many classificationists have used this approach, but usually in a minor display to make a point or for part of a difficult relational situation. Ranganathan, for example, used diagrams for some of his more elusive concepts. The thesaurus in particular and subject headings in general, with direct and indirect crossreferences or equivalents, need many more diagrams than normally are included to make relationships and even semantics clear. A picture very often is worth a thousand words. Rolling has used directed graphs (arrowgraphs) to join terms as a practical method for rendering relationships between indexing terms lucid. He has succeeded very weIl in this endeavor. Four diagrams in this selection are all that one needs to explain how to employ the system; from initial listing to completed arrowgraph. The samples of his work include illustration of off-page connectors between arrowgraphs. The great advantage to using diagrams like this is that they present relations between individual terms in a format that is easy to comprehend. But of even greater value is the fact that one can use his arrowgraphs as schematics for making three-dimensional wire-and-ball models, in which the relationships may be seen even more clearly. In fact, errors or gaps in relations are much easier to find with this methodology. One also can get across the notion of the threedimensionality of classification systems with such models. Pettee's "hand reaching up and over" (q.v.) is not a figment of the imagination. While the actual hand is a wire or stick, the concept visualized is helpful in illuminating the three-dimensional figure that is latent in all systems that have cross-references or "broader," "narrower," or, especially, "related" terms. Classification schedules, being hemmed in by the dimensions of the printed page, also benefit from such physical illustrations. Rolling, an engineer by conviction, was the developer of information systems for the Cobalt Institute, the European Atomic Energy Community, and European Coal and Steel Community. He also developed and promoted computer-aided translation at the Commission of the European Communities in Luxembourg. One of his objectives has always been to increase the efficiency of mono- and multilingual thesauri for use in multinational information systems.
-
Mai, J.-E.: Actors, domains, and constraints in the design and construction of controlled vocabularies (2008)
0.02
0.020833371 = product of:
0.031250056 = sum of:
0.017693711 = weight(_text_:information in 1921) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017693711 = score(doc=1921,freq=8.0), product of:
0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 1921, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1921)
0.013556344 = product of:
0.027112689 = sum of:
0.027112689 = weight(_text_:systems in 1921) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027112689 = score(doc=1921,freq=2.0), product of:
0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.051966466 = queryNorm
0.1697705 = fieldWeight in 1921, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1921)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Classification schemes, thesauri, taxonomies, and other controlled vocabularies play important roles in the organization and retrieval of information in many different environments. While the design and construction of controlled vocabularies have been prescribed at the technical level in great detail over the past decades, the methodological level has been somewhat neglected. However, classification research has in recent years focused on developing approaches to the analysis of users, domains, and activities that could produce requirements for the design of controlled vocabularies. Researchers have often argued that the design, construction, and use of controlled vocabularies need to be based on analyses and understandings of the contexts in which these controlled vocabularies function. While one would assume that the growing body of research on human information behavior might help guide the development of controlled vocabularies shed light on these contexts, unfortunately, much of the research in this area is descriptive in nature and of little use for systems design. This paper discusses these trends and outlines a holistic approach that demonstrates how the design of controlled vocabularies can be informed by investigations of people's interactions with information. This approach is based on the Cognitive Work Analysis framework and outlines several dimensions of human-information interactions. Application of this approach will result is a comprehensive understanding of the contexts in which the controlled vocabulary will function and which can be used for the development of for the development of controlled vocabularies.
