Search (56 results, page 1 of 3)

  • × theme_ss:"Wissensrepräsentation"
  • × type_ss:"el"
  1. Tudhope, D.; Hodge, G.: Terminology registries (2007) 0.07
    0.07385479 = product of:
      0.14770958 = sum of:
        0.14770958 = sum of:
          0.07700737 = weight(_text_:systems in 539) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.07700737 = score(doc=539,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052184064 = queryNorm
              0.48018348 = fieldWeight in 539, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=539)
          0.0707022 = weight(_text_:22 in 539) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.0707022 = score(doc=539,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052184064 = 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)
    
    Content
    Präsentation während der Veranstaltung "Networked Knowledge Organization Systems and Services: The 6th European Networked Knowledge Organization Systems (NKOS) Workshop, Workshop at the 11th ECDL Conference, Budapest, Hungary, September 21st 2007".
    Date
    26.12.2011 13:22:07
  2. Bittner, T.; Donnelly, M.; Winter, S.: Ontology and semantic interoperability (2006) 0.05
    0.053882122 = product of:
      0.107764244 = sum of:
        0.107764244 = sum of:
          0.06534292 = weight(_text_:systems in 4820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.06534292 = score(doc=4820,freq=8.0), product of:
              0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052184064 = queryNorm
              0.4074492 = fieldWeight in 4820, product of:
                2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                  8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4820)
          0.042421322 = weight(_text_:22 in 4820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.042421322 = score(doc=4820,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052184064 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4820, 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=4820)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    One of the major problems facing systems for Computer Aided Design (CAD), Architecture Engineering and Construction (AEC) and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) applications today is the lack of interoperability among the various systems. When integrating software applications, substantial di culties can arise in translating information from one application to the other. In this paper, we focus on semantic di culties that arise in software integration. Applications may use di erent terminologies to describe the same domain. Even when appli-cations use the same terminology, they often associate di erent semantics with the terms. This obstructs information exchange among applications. To cir-cumvent this obstacle, we need some way of explicitly specifying the semantics for each terminology in an unambiguous fashion. Ontologies can provide such specification. It will be the task of this paper to explain what ontologies are and how they can be used to facilitate interoperability between software systems used in computer aided design, architecture engineering and construction, and geographic information processing.
    Date
    3.12.2016 18:39:22
  3. Priss, U.: Description logic and faceted knowledge representation (1999) 0.05
    0.049504973 = product of:
      0.099009946 = sum of:
        0.099009946 = sum of:
          0.056588627 = weight(_text_:systems in 2655) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.056588627 = score(doc=2655,freq=6.0), product of:
              0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052184064 = queryNorm
              0.35286134 = fieldWeight in 2655, product of:
                2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                  6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2655)
          0.042421322 = weight(_text_:22 in 2655) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.042421322 = score(doc=2655,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052184064 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2655, 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=2655)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The term "facet" was introduced into the field of library classification systems by Ranganathan in the 1930's [Ranganathan, 1962]. A facet is a viewpoint or aspect. In contrast to traditional classification systems, faceted systems are modular in that a domain is analyzed in terms of baseline facets which are then synthesized. In this paper, the term "facet" is used in a broader meaning. Facets can describe different aspects on the same level of abstraction or the same aspect on different levels of abstraction. The notion of facets is related to database views, multicontexts and conceptual scaling in formal concept analysis [Ganter and Wille, 1999], polymorphism in object-oriented design, aspect-oriented programming, views and contexts in description logic and semantic networks. This paper presents a definition of facets in terms of faceted knowledge representation that incorporates the traditional narrower notion of facets and potentially facilitates translation between different knowledge representation formalisms. A goal of this approach is a modular, machine-aided knowledge base design mechanism. A possible application is faceted thesaurus construction for information retrieval and data mining. Reasoning complexity depends on the size of the modules (facets). A more general analysis of complexity will be left for future research.
    Date
    22. 1.2016 17:30:31
  4. Beppler, F.D.; Fonseca, F.T.; Pacheco, R.C.S.: Hermeneus: an architecture for an ontology-enabled information retrieval (2008) 0.04
    0.044312872 = product of:
      0.088625744 = sum of:
        0.088625744 = sum of:
          0.04620442 = weight(_text_:systems in 3261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.04620442 = score(doc=3261,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052184064 = queryNorm
              0.28811008 = fieldWeight in 3261, 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=3261)
          0.042421322 = weight(_text_:22 in 3261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.042421322 = score(doc=3261,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052184064 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3261, 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=3261)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Ontologies improve IR systems regarding its retrieval and presentation of information, which make the task of finding information more effective, efficient, and interactive. In this paper we argue that ontologies also greatly improve the engineering of such systems. We created a framework that uses ontology to drive the process of engineering an IR system. We developed a prototype that shows how a domain specialist without knowledge in the IR field can build an IR system with interactive components. The resulting system provides support for users not only to find their information needs but also to extend their state of knowledge. This way, our approach to ontology-enabled information retrieval addresses both the engineering aspect described here and also the usability aspect described elsewhere.
    Date
    28.11.2016 12:43:22
  5. Priss, U.: Faceted knowledge representation (1999) 0.04
    0.043804124 = product of:
      0.08760825 = sum of:
        0.08760825 = sum of:
          0.038116705 = weight(_text_:systems in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.038116705 = score(doc=2654,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052184064 = queryNorm
              0.23767869 = fieldWeight in 2654, 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=2654)
          0.049491543 = weight(_text_:22 in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.049491543 = score(doc=2654,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052184064 = queryNorm
              0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2654, 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=2654)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Faceted Knowledge Representation provides a formalism for implementing knowledge systems. The basic notions of faceted knowledge representation are "unit", "relation", "facet" and "interpretation". Units are atomic elements and can be abstract elements or refer to external objects in an application. Relations are sequences or matrices of 0 and 1's (binary matrices). Facets are relational structures that combine units and relations. Each facet represents an aspect or viewpoint of a knowledge system. Interpretations are mappings that can be used to translate between different representations. This paper introduces the basic notions of faceted knowledge representation. The formalism is applied here to an abstract modeling of a faceted thesaurus as used in information retrieval.
    Date
    22. 1.2016 17:30:31
  6. SKOS Simple Knowledge Organization System Reference : W3C Recommendation 18 August 2009 (2009) 0.02
    0.020007102 = product of:
      0.040014204 = sum of:
        0.040014204 = product of:
          0.08002841 = sum of:
            0.08002841 = weight(_text_:systems in 4688) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08002841 = score(doc=4688,freq=12.0), product of:
                0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = queryNorm
                0.4990213 = fieldWeight in 4688, product of:
                  3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                    12.0 = termFreq=12.0
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4688)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This document defines the Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS), a common data model for sharing and linking knowledge organization systems via the Web. Many knowledge organization systems, such as thesauri, taxonomies, classification schemes and subject heading systems, share a similar structure, and are used in similar applications. SKOS captures much of this similarity and makes it explicit, to enable data and technology sharing across diverse applications. The SKOS data model provides a standard, low-cost migration path for porting existing knowledge organization systems to the Semantic Web. SKOS also provides a lightweight, intuitive language for developing and sharing new knowledge organization systems. It may be used on its own, or in combination with formal knowledge representation languages such as the Web Ontology language (OWL). This document is the normative specification of the Simple Knowledge Organization System. It is intended for readers who are involved in the design and implementation of information systems, and who already have a good understanding of Semantic Web technology, especially RDF and OWL. For an informative guide to using SKOS, see the [SKOS-PRIMER].
  7. Hoang, H.H.; Tjoa, A.M: ¬The state of the art of ontology-based query systems : a comparison of existing approaches (2006) 0.02
    0.018862877 = product of:
      0.037725754 = sum of:
        0.037725754 = product of:
          0.07545151 = sum of:
            0.07545151 = weight(_text_:systems in 792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07545151 = score(doc=792,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = queryNorm
                0.4704818 = fieldWeight in 792, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=792)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Based on an in-depth analysis of existing approaches in building ontology-based query systems we discuss and compare the methods, approaches to be used in current query systems using Ontology or the Semantic Web techniques. This paper identifies various relevant research directions in ontology-based querying research. Based on the results of our investigation we summarise the state of the art ontology-based query/search and name areas of further research activities.
  8. Drewer, P.; Massion, F; Pulitano, D: Was haben Wissensmodellierung, Wissensstrukturierung, künstliche Intelligenz und Terminologie miteinander zu tun? (2017) 0.02
    0.01767555 = product of:
      0.0353511 = sum of:
        0.0353511 = product of:
          0.0707022 = sum of:
            0.0707022 = weight(_text_:22 in 5576) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0707022 = score(doc=5576,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = 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
  9. Tomassen, S.L.: Research on ontology-driven information retrieval (2006 (?)) 0.02
    0.01633573 = product of:
      0.03267146 = sum of:
        0.03267146 = product of:
          0.06534292 = sum of:
            0.06534292 = weight(_text_:systems in 4328) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06534292 = score(doc=4328,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = queryNorm
                0.4074492 = fieldWeight in 4328, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4328)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    An increasing number of recent information retrieval systems make use of ontologies to help the users clarify their information needs and come up with semantic representations of documents. A particular concern here is the integration of these semantic approaches with traditional search technology. The research presented in this paper examines how ontologies can be efficiently applied to large-scale search systems for the web. We describe how these systems can be enriched with adapted ontologies to provide both an in-depth understanding of the user's needs as well as an easy integration with standard vector-space retrieval systems. The ontology concepts are adapted to the domain terminology by computing a feature vector for each concept. Later, the feature vectors are used to enrich a provided query. The whole retrieval system is under development as part of a larger Semantic Web standardization project for the Norwegian oil & gas sector.
  10. Bittner, T.: ¬An introduction to formal ontology and how it can facilitate semantic interoperability (2005) 0.02
    0.01633573 = product of:
      0.03267146 = sum of:
        0.03267146 = product of:
          0.06534292 = sum of:
            0.06534292 = weight(_text_:systems in 3272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06534292 = score(doc=3272,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = queryNorm
                0.4074492 = fieldWeight in 3272, 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=3272)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This course gives an introduction to formal ontology and how it can be used to facilitate semantic interoperability of (Geographic) Information Systems.
  11. Broughton, V.: Facet analysis as a fundamental theory for structuring subject organization tools (2007) 0.02
    0.015401474 = product of:
      0.030802948 = sum of:
        0.030802948 = product of:
          0.061605897 = sum of:
            0.061605897 = weight(_text_:systems in 537) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.061605897 = score(doc=537,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = queryNorm
                0.38414678 = fieldWeight in 537, 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=537)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Content
    Präsentation während der Veranstaltung "Networked Knowledge Organization Systems and Services: The 6th European Networked Knowledge Organization Systems (NKOS) Workshop, Workshop at the 11th ECDL Conference, Budapest, Hungary, September 21st 2007".
  12. Urs, S.R.; Angrosh, M.A.: Ontology-based knowledge organization systems in digital libraries : a comparison of experiments in OWL and KAON ontologies (2006 (?)) 0.02
    0.015401474 = product of:
      0.030802948 = sum of:
        0.030802948 = product of:
          0.061605897 = sum of:
            0.061605897 = weight(_text_:systems in 2799) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.061605897 = score(doc=2799,freq=16.0), product of:
                0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = queryNorm
                0.38414678 = fieldWeight in 2799, product of:
                  4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                    16.0 = termFreq=16.0
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2799)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Grounded on a strong belief that ontologies enhance the performance of information retrieval systems, there has been an upsurge of interest in ontologies. Its importance is identified in diverse research fields such as knowledge engineering, knowledge representation, qualitative modeling, language engineering, database design, information integration, object-oriented analysis, information retrieval and extraction, knowledge management and agent-based systems design (Guarino, 1998). While the role-played by ontologies, automatically lends a place of legitimacy for these tools, research in this area gains greater significance in the wake of various challenges faced in the contemporary digital environment. With the objective of overcoming various pitfalls associated with current search mechanisms, ontologies are increasingly used for developing efficient information retrieval systems. An indicator of research interest in the area of ontology is the Swoogle, a search engine for Semantic Web documents, terms and data found on the Web (Ding, Li et al, 2004). Given the complex nature of the digital content archived in digital libraries, ontologies can be employed for designing efficient forms of information retrieval in digital libraries. Knowledge representation assumes greater significance due to its crucial role in ontology development. These systems aid in developing intelligent information systems, wherein the notion of intelligence implies the ability of the system to find implicit consequences of its explicitly represented knowledge (Baader and Nutt, 2003). Knowledge representation formalisms such as 'Description Logics' are used to obtain explicit knowledge representation of the subject domain. These representations are developed into ontologies, which are used for developing intelligent information systems. Against this backdrop, the paper examines the use of Description Logics for conceptually modeling a chosen domain, which would be utilized for developing domain ontologies. The knowledge representation languages identified for this purpose are Web Ontology Language (OWL) and KArlsruhe ONtology (KAON) language. Drawing upon the various technical constructs in developing ontology-based information systems, the paper explains the working of the prototypes and also presents a comparative study of the two prototypes.
  13. Smith, D.A.; Shadbolt, N.R.: FacetOntology : expressive descriptions of facets in the Semantic Web (2012) 0.02
    0.015219918 = product of:
      0.030439837 = sum of:
        0.030439837 = product of:
          0.060879674 = sum of:
            0.060879674 = weight(_text_:systems in 2208) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.060879674 = score(doc=2208,freq=10.0), product of:
                0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = queryNorm
                0.37961838 = fieldWeight in 2208, product of:
                  3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                    10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2208)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The formal structure of the information on the Semantic Web lends itself to faceted browsing, an information retrieval method where users can filter results based on the values of properties ("facets"). Numerous faceted browsers have been created to browse RDF and Linked Data, but these systems use their own ontologies for defining how data is queried to populate their facets. Since the source data is the same format across these systems (specifically, RDF), we can unify the different methods of describing how to quer the underlying data, to enable compatibility across systems, and provide an extensible base ontology for future systems. To this end, we present FacetOntology, an ontology that defines how to query data to form a faceted browser, and a number of transformations and filters that can be applied to data before it is shown to users. FacetOntology overcomes limitations in the expressivity of existing work, by enabling the full expressivity of SPARQL when selecting data for facets. By applying a FacetOntology definition to data, a set of facets are specified, each with queries and filters to source RDF data, which enables faceted browsing systems to be created using that RDF data.
  14. Machado, L.M.O.: Ontologies in knowledge organization (2021) 0.01
    0.014147157 = product of:
      0.028294314 = sum of:
        0.028294314 = product of:
          0.056588627 = sum of:
            0.056588627 = weight(_text_:systems in 198) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.056588627 = score(doc=198,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = queryNorm
                0.35286134 = fieldWeight in 198, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=198)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Within the knowledge organization systems (KOS) set, the term "ontology" is paradigmatic of the terminological ambiguity in different typologies. Contributing to this situation is the indiscriminate association of the term "ontology", both as a specific type of KOS and as a process of categorization, due to the interdisciplinary use of the term with different meanings. We present a systematization of the perspectives of different authors of ontologies, as representational artifacts, seeking to contribute to terminological clarification. Focusing the analysis on the intention, semantics and modulation of ontologies, it was possible to notice two broad perspectives regarding ontologies as artifacts that coexist in the knowledge organization systems spectrum. We have ontologies viewed, on the one hand, as an evolution in terms of complexity of traditional conceptual systems, and on the other hand, as a system that organizes ontological rather than epistemological knowledge. The focus of ontological analysis is the item to model and not the intentions that motivate the construction of the system.
  15. OWL Web Ontology Language Test Cases (2004) 0.01
    0.014140441 = product of:
      0.028280882 = sum of:
        0.028280882 = product of:
          0.056561764 = sum of:
            0.056561764 = weight(_text_:22 in 4685) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.056561764 = score(doc=4685,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4685, 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=4685)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    14. 8.2011 13:33:22
  16. Hauff-Hartig, S.: Wissensrepräsentation durch RDF: Drei angewandte Forschungsbeispiele : Bitte recht vielfältig: Wie Wissensgraphen, Disco und FaBiO Struktur in Mangas und die Humanities bringen (2021) 0.01
    0.014140441 = product of:
      0.028280882 = sum of:
        0.028280882 = product of:
          0.056561764 = sum of:
            0.056561764 = weight(_text_:22 in 318) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.056561764 = score(doc=318,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 318, 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=318)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 5.2021 12:43:05
  17. RDF Semantics (2004) 0.01
    0.013613109 = product of:
      0.027226217 = sum of:
        0.027226217 = product of:
          0.054452434 = sum of:
            0.054452434 = weight(_text_:systems in 3065) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.054452434 = score(doc=3065,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = queryNorm
                0.339541 = fieldWeight in 3065, 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=3065)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This is a specification of a precise semantics, and corresponding complete systems of inference rules, for the Resource Description Framework (RDF) and RDF Schema (RDFS).
  18. SKOS2OWL : Online tool for deriving OWL ontologies from SKOS categorization schemas (2007) 0.01
    0.013613109 = product of:
      0.027226217 = sum of:
        0.027226217 = product of:
          0.054452434 = sum of:
            0.054452434 = weight(_text_:systems in 4691) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.054452434 = score(doc=4691,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = queryNorm
                0.339541 = fieldWeight in 4691, 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=4691)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    SKOS2OWL is an online tool that converts hierarchical classifications available in the W3C SKOS (Simple Knowledge Organization Systems) format into RDF-S or OWL ontologies. In many cases, the resulting ontologies can be used directly. If not, they can be refined using standard ontology engineering tools like e.g. Protégé.
  19. Panzer, M.: Towards the "webification" of controlled subject vocabulary : a case study involving the Dewey Decimal Classification (2007) 0.01
    0.013476291 = product of:
      0.026952581 = sum of:
        0.026952581 = product of:
          0.053905163 = sum of:
            0.053905163 = weight(_text_:systems in 538) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.053905163 = score(doc=538,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = queryNorm
                0.33612844 = fieldWeight in 538, 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=538)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Content
    Präsentation während der Veranstaltung "Networked Knowledge Organization Systems and Services: The 6th European Networked Knowledge Organization Systems (NKOS) Workshop, Workshop at the 11th ECDL Conference, Budapest, Hungary, September 21st 2007".
  20. Lacasta, J.; Nogueras-Iso, J.; López-Pellicer, F.J.; Muro-Medrano, P.R.; Zarazaga-Soria, F.J.: ThManager : an open source tool for creating and visualizing SKOS (2007) 0.01
    0.013476291 = product of:
      0.026952581 = sum of:
        0.026952581 = product of:
          0.053905163 = sum of:
            0.053905163 = weight(_text_:systems in 2349) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.053905163 = score(doc=2349,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = queryNorm
                0.33612844 = fieldWeight in 2349, 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=2349)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Knowledge Organization Systems denotes formally represented knowledge that is used within the context of Digital Libraries to improve data sharing and information retrieval. To increase their use, and to reuse them when possible, it is vital to manage them adequately and to provide them in a standard interchange format. Simple Knowledge Organization Systems (SKOS) seems to be the most promising representation for the type of knowledge models used in digital libraries, but there is a lack of tools that are able to properly manage it. This work presents a tool that fills this gap, facilitating their use in different environments and using SKOS as an interchange format.

Years

Languages

  • e 50
  • d 5

Types

  • a 26
  • x 3
  • n 1
  • r 1
  • s 1
  • More… Less…