Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

0.032312747 = product of:
  0.064625494 = sum of:
    0.064625494 = product of:
      0.12925099 = sum of:
        0.12925099 = weight(_text_:policy in 363) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12925099 = score(doc=363,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2727254 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05086421 = queryNorm
            0.47392356 = fieldWeight in 363, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=363)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Im Folgenden soll der Frage nachgegangen werden, inwiefern Bibliotheken den Qualitätsanspruch an inhaltserschließende Informationen von Ressourcen durch die Formulierung und Veröffentlichung einer bibliotheksspezifischen, übergeordneten Metadaten-Richtlinie bzw. -Policy - auch im Sinne einer Transparenzoffensive - und deren Anwendung beeinflussen können.

0.028560705 = product of:
  0.05712141 = sum of:
    0.05712141 = product of:
      0.11424282 = sum of:
        0.11424282 = weight(_text_:policy in 1042) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11424282 = score(doc=1042,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.2727254 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05086421 = queryNorm
            0.41889322 = fieldWeight in 1042, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1042)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Natural language processing techniques can be used to analyze the linguistic content of a document to extract missing pieces of metadata. However, accurate metadata extraction may not depend solely on the linguistics, but also on structural problems such as extremely large documents, unordered multi-file documents, and inconsistency in manually labeled metadata. In this work, we start from two standard machine learning solutions to extract pieces of metadata from Environmental Impact Statements, environmental policy documents that are regularly produced under the US National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. We present a series of experiments where we evaluate how these standard approaches are affected by different issues derived from real-world data. We find that metadata extraction can be strongly influenced by nonlinguistic factors such as document length and volume ordering and that the standard machine learning solutions often do not scale well to long documents. We demonstrate how such solutions can be better adapted to these scenarios, and conclude with suggestions for other NLP practitioners cataloging large document collections.

0.010337097 = product of:
  0.020674193 = sum of:
    0.020674193 = product of:
      0.041348387 = sum of:
        0.041348387 = weight(_text_:22 in 266) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041348387 = score(doc=266,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1781178 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05086421 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 266, 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=266)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 5.2021 12:43:05