Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Social tagging"
  • × theme_ss:"Metadaten"
  1. Catarino, M.E.; Baptista, A.A.: Relating folksonomies with Dublin Core (2008) 0.05
    0.05181646 = product of:
      0.07772469 = sum of:
        0.053230833 = weight(_text_:resources in 2652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.053230833 = score(doc=2652,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133685 = queryNorm
            0.28518265 = fieldWeight in 2652, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2652)
        0.024493856 = product of:
          0.048987713 = sum of:
            0.048987713 = weight(_text_:22 in 2652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.048987713 = score(doc=2652,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.17906146 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051133685 = queryNorm
                0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2652, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2652)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Folksonomy is the result of describing Web resources with tags created by Web users. Although it has become a popular application for the description of resources, in general terms Folksonomies are not being conveniently integrated in metadata. However, if the appropriate metadata elements are identified, then further work may be conducted to automatically assign tags to these elements (RDF properties) and use them in Semantic Web applications. This article presents research carried out to continue the project Kinds of Tags, which intends to identify elements required for metadata originating from folksonomies and to propose an application profile for DC Social Tagging. The work provides information that may be used by software applications to assign tags to metadata elements and, therefore, means for tags to be conveniently gathered by metadata interoperability tools. Despite the unquestionably high value of DC and the significance of the already existing properties in DC Terms, the pilot study show revealed a significant number of tags for which no corresponding properties yet existed. A need for new properties, such as Action, Depth, Rate, and Utility was determined. Those potential new properties will have to be validated in a later stage by the DC Social Tagging Community.
    Pages
    S.14-22
    Source
    Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
  2. Social tagging in a linked data environment. Edited by Diane Rasmussen Pennington and Louise F. Spiteri. London, UK: Facet Publishing, 2018. 240 pp. £74.95 (paperback). (ISBN 9781783303380) (2019) 0.03
    0.025093256 = product of:
      0.075279765 = sum of:
        0.075279765 = weight(_text_:resources in 101) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.075279765 = score(doc=101,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133685 = queryNorm
            0.40330917 = fieldWeight in 101, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=101)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    LCSH
    Libraries and museums / Electronic information resources
    Electronic information resources
    Subject
    Libraries and museums / Electronic information resources
    Electronic information resources
  3. Syn, S.Y.; Spring, M.B.: Finding subject terms for classificatory metadata from user-generated social tags (2013) 0.02
    0.017743612 = product of:
      0.053230833 = sum of:
        0.053230833 = weight(_text_:resources in 745) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.053230833 = score(doc=745,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133685 = queryNorm
            0.28518265 = fieldWeight in 745, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=745)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    With the increasing popularity of social tagging systems, the potential for using social tags as a source of metadata is being explored. Social tagging systems can simplify the involvement of a large number of users and improve the metadata-generation process. Current research is exploring social tagging systems as a mechanism to allow nonprofessional catalogers to participate in metadata generation. Because social tags are not from controlled vocabularies, there are issues that have to be addressed in finding quality terms to represent the content of a resource. This research explores ways to obtain a set of tags representing the resource from the tags provided by users. Two metrics are introduced. Annotation Dominance (AD) is a measure of the extent to which a tag term is agreed to by users. Cross Resources Annotation Discrimination (CRAD) is a measure of a tag's potential to classify a collection. It is designed to remove tags that are used too broadly or narrowly. Using the proposed measurements, the research selects important tags (meta-terms) and removes meaningless ones (tag noise) from the tags provided by users. To evaluate the proposed approach to find classificatory metadata candidates, we rely on expert users' relevance judgments comparing suggested tag terms and expert metadata terms. The results suggest that processing of user tags using the two measurements successfully identifies the terms that represent the topic categories of web resource content. The suggested tag terms can be further examined in various usages as semantic metadata for the resources.
  4. Kim, H.L.; Scerri, S.; Breslin, J.G.; Decker, S.; Kim, H.G.: ¬The state of the art in tag ontologies : a semantic model for tagging and folksonomies (2008) 0.01
    0.0057732575 = product of:
      0.017319772 = sum of:
        0.017319772 = product of:
          0.034639545 = sum of:
            0.034639545 = weight(_text_:22 in 2650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.034639545 = score(doc=2650,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17906146 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051133685 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2650, 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=2650)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas