Search (85 results, page 1 of 5)

  • × theme_ss:"Semantische Interoperabilität"
  1. Vetere, G.; Lenzerini, M.: Models for semantic interoperability in service-oriented architectures (2005) 0.14
    0.1360539 = product of:
      0.34013474 = sum of:
        0.085033685 = product of:
          0.25510105 = sum of:
            0.25510105 = weight(_text_:3a in 306) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.25510105 = score(doc=306,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.38905874 = queryWeight, product of:
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04589033 = queryNorm
                0.65568775 = fieldWeight in 306, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=306)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
        0.25510105 = weight(_text_:2f in 306) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.25510105 = score(doc=306,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.38905874 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04589033 = queryNorm
            0.65568775 = fieldWeight in 306, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=306)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Content
    Vgl.: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5386707&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D5386707.
  2. Gabler, S.: Vergabe von DDC-Sachgruppen mittels eines Schlagwort-Thesaurus (2021) 0.10
    0.09718136 = product of:
      0.24295339 = sum of:
        0.060738347 = product of:
          0.18221503 = sum of:
            0.18221503 = weight(_text_:3a in 1000) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.18221503 = score(doc=1000,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.38905874 = queryWeight, product of:
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04589033 = queryNorm
                0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 1000, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1000)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
        0.18221503 = weight(_text_:2f in 1000) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18221503 = score(doc=1000,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.38905874 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04589033 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 1000, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1000)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Content
    Master thesis Master of Science (Library and Information Studies) (MSc), Universität Wien. Advisor: Christoph Steiner. Vgl.: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/371680244_Vergabe_von_DDC-Sachgruppen_mittels_eines_Schlagwort-Thesaurus. DOI: 10.25365/thesis.70030. Vgl. dazu die Präsentation unter: https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=0CAIQw7AJahcKEwjwoZzzytz_AhUAAAAAHQAAAAAQAg&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwiki.dnb.de%2Fdownload%2Fattachments%2F252121510%2FDA3%2520Workshop-Gabler.pdf%3Fversion%3D1%26modificationDate%3D1671093170000%26api%3Dv2&psig=AOvVaw0szwENK1or3HevgvIDOfjx&ust=1687719410889597&opi=89978449.
  3. Golub, K.; Tudhope, D.; Zeng, M.L.; Zumer, M.: Terminology registries for knowledge organization systems : functionality, use, and attributes (2014) 0.05
    0.05057575 = product of:
      0.12643938 = sum of:
        0.026986076 = weight(_text_:technology in 1347) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026986076 = score(doc=1347,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13667917 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04589033 = queryNorm
            0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 1347, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1347)
        0.09945331 = sum of:
          0.06214827 = weight(_text_:aspects in 1347) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.06214827 = score(doc=1347,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.20741826 = queryWeight, product of:
                4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
                0.04589033 = queryNorm
              0.29962775 = fieldWeight in 1347, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1347)
          0.03730504 = weight(_text_:22 in 1347) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03730504 = score(doc=1347,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16070013 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.04589033 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1347, 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=1347)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Terminology registries (TRs) are a crucial element of the infrastructure required for resource discovery services, digital libraries, Linked Data, and semantic interoperability generally. They can make the content of knowledge organization systems (KOS) available both for human and machine access. The paper describes the attributes and functionality for a TR, based on a review of published literature, existing TRs, and a survey of experts. A domain model based on user tasks is constructed and a set of core metadata elements for use in TRs is proposed. Ideally, the TR should allow searching as well as browsing for a KOS, matching a user's search while also providing information about existing terminology services, accessible to both humans and machines. The issues surrounding metadata for KOS are also discussed, together with the rationale for different aspects and the importance of a core set of KOS metadata for future machine-based access; a possible core set of metadata elements is proposed. This is dealt with in terms of practical experience and in relation to the Dublin Core Application Profile.
    Date
    22. 8.2014 17:12:54
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.9, S.1901-1916
  4. Schneider, R.: Web 3.0 ante portas? : Integration von Social Web und Semantic Web (2008) 0.05
    0.047803313 = product of:
      0.11950828 = sum of:
        0.09774701 = weight(_text_:social in 4184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09774701 = score(doc=4184,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04589033 = queryNorm
            0.53416204 = fieldWeight in 4184, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4184)
        0.021761272 = product of:
          0.043522544 = sum of:
            0.043522544 = weight(_text_:22 in 4184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.043522544 = score(doc=4184,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16070013 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04589033 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4184, 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=4184)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Das Medium Internet ist im Wandel, und mit ihm ändern sich seine Publikations- und Rezeptionsbedingungen. Welche Chancen bieten die momentan parallel diskutierten Zukunftsentwürfe von Social Web und Semantic Web? Zur Beantwortung dieser Frage beschäftigt sich der Beitrag mit den Grundlagen beider Modelle unter den Aspekten Anwendungsbezug und Technologie, beleuchtet darüber hinaus jedoch auch deren Unzulänglichkeiten sowie den Mehrwert einer mediengerechten Kombination. Am Beispiel des grammatischen Online-Informationssystems grammis wird eine Strategie zur integrativen Nutzung der jeweiligen Stärken skizziert.
    Date
    22. 1.2011 10:38:28
    Source
    Kommunikation, Partizipation und Wirkungen im Social Web, Band 1. Hrsg.: A. Zerfaß u.a
  5. Mayr, P.; Petras, V.: Building a Terminology Network for Search : the KoMoHe project (2008) 0.03
    0.03127821 = product of:
      0.07819553 = sum of:
        0.056434255 = weight(_text_:social in 2618) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056434255 = score(doc=2618,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04589033 = queryNorm
            0.30839854 = fieldWeight in 2618, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2618)
        0.021761272 = product of:
          0.043522544 = sum of:
            0.043522544 = weight(_text_:22 in 2618) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.043522544 = score(doc=2618,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16070013 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04589033 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2618, 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=2618)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    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
  6. Metadata and semantics research : 10th International Conference, MTSR 2016, Göttingen, Germany, November 22-25, 2016, Proceedings (2016) 0.03
    0.03127821 = product of:
      0.07819553 = sum of:
        0.056434255 = weight(_text_:social in 3283) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056434255 = score(doc=3283,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04589033 = queryNorm
            0.30839854 = fieldWeight in 3283, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3283)
        0.021761272 = product of:
          0.043522544 = sum of:
            0.043522544 = weight(_text_:22 in 3283) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.043522544 = score(doc=3283,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16070013 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04589033 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3283, 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=3283)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    This book constitutes the refereed proceedings of the 10th Metadata and Semantics Research Conference, MTSR 2016, held in Göttingen, Germany, in November 2016. The 26 full papers and 6 short papers presented were carefully reviewed and selected from 67 submissions. The papers are organized in several sessions and tracks: Digital Libraries, Information Retrieval, Linked and Social Data, Metadata and Semantics for Open Repositories, Research Information Systems and Data Infrastructures, Metadata and Semantics for Agriculture, Food and Environment, Metadata and Semantics for Cultural Collections and Applications, European and National Projects.
  7. Garcia Marco, F.J.: Compatibility & heterogeneity in knowledge organization : some reflections around a case study in the field of consumer information (2008) 0.03
    0.029020393 = product of:
      0.07255098 = sum of:
        0.057007212 = weight(_text_:social in 1678) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.057007212 = score(doc=1678,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04589033 = queryNorm
            0.3115296 = fieldWeight in 1678, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1678)
        0.015543767 = product of:
          0.031087535 = sum of:
            0.031087535 = weight(_text_:22 in 1678) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031087535 = score(doc=1678,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16070013 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04589033 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1678, 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=1678)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    A case study in compatibility and heterogeneity of knowledge organization (KO) systems and processes is presented. It is based in the experience of the author in the field of information for consumer protection, a good example of the emerging transdisciplinary applied social sciences. The activities and knowledge organization problems and solutions of the Aragonian Consumers' Information and Documentation Centre are described and analyzed. Six assertions can be concluded: a) heterogeneity and compatibility are certainly an inherent problem in knowledge organization and also in practical domains; b) knowledge organization is also a social task, not only a lögical one; c) knowledge organization is affected by economical and efficiency considerations; d) knowledge organization is at the heart of Knowledge Management; e) identifying and maintaining the focus in interdisciplinary fields is a must; f the different knowledge organization tools of a institution must be considered as an integrated system, pursuing a unifying model.
    Date
    16. 3.2008 18:22:50
  8. Levergood, B.; Farrenkopf, S.; Frasnelli, E.: ¬The specification of the language of the field and interoperability : cross-language access to catalogues and online libraries (CACAO) (2008) 0.03
    0.026809895 = product of:
      0.06702474 = sum of:
        0.04837222 = weight(_text_:social in 2646) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04837222 = score(doc=2646,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04589033 = queryNorm
            0.26434162 = fieldWeight in 2646, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2646)
        0.01865252 = product of:
          0.03730504 = sum of:
            0.03730504 = weight(_text_:22 in 2646) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03730504 = score(doc=2646,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16070013 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04589033 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2646, 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=2646)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    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
  9. 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
    0.025494397 = product of:
      0.12747198 = sum of:
        0.12747198 = weight(_text_:social in 101) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12747198 = score(doc=101,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04589033 = queryNorm
            0.69660133 = fieldWeight in 101, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=101)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    Social tagging, hashtags, and geotags are used across a variety of platforms (Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, WordPress, Instagram) in different countries and cultures. This book, representing researchers and practitioners across different information professions, explores how social tags can link content across a variety of environments. Most studies of social tagging have tended to focus on applications like library catalogs, blogs, and social bookmarking sites. This book, in setting out a theoretical background and the use of a series of case studies, explores the role of hashtags as a form of linked data?without the complex implementation of RDF and other Semantic Web technologies.
    LCSH
    Social media
    RSWK
    Linked Data / Social Tagging
    Subject
    Social media
    Linked Data / Social Tagging
    Theme
    Social tagging
  10. Lauser, B.; Johannsen, G.; Caracciolo, C.; Hage, W.R. van; Keizer, J.; Mayr, P.: Comparing human and automatic thesaurus mapping approaches in the agricultural domain (2008) 0.02
    0.02234158 = product of:
      0.055853948 = sum of:
        0.04031018 = weight(_text_:social in 2627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04031018 = score(doc=2627,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04589033 = queryNorm
            0.22028469 = fieldWeight in 2627, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2627)
        0.015543767 = product of:
          0.031087535 = sum of:
            0.031087535 = weight(_text_:22 in 2627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031087535 = score(doc=2627,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16070013 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04589033 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2627, 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=2627)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    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
  11. Godby, C.J.; Smith, D.; Childress, E.: Encoding application profiles in a computational model of the crosswalk (2008) 0.02
    0.02234158 = product of:
      0.055853948 = sum of:
        0.04031018 = weight(_text_:social in 2649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04031018 = score(doc=2649,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04589033 = queryNorm
            0.22028469 = fieldWeight in 2649, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2649)
        0.015543767 = product of:
          0.031087535 = sum of:
            0.031087535 = weight(_text_:22 in 2649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031087535 = score(doc=2649,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16070013 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04589033 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2649, 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=2649)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    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
  12. Candela, G.: ¬An automatic data quality approach to assess semantic data from cultural heritage institutions (2023) 0.02
    0.021298012 = product of:
      0.05324503 = sum of:
        0.03148376 = weight(_text_:technology in 997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03148376 = score(doc=997,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13667917 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04589033 = queryNorm
            0.23034787 = fieldWeight in 997, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=997)
        0.021761272 = product of:
          0.043522544 = sum of:
            0.043522544 = weight(_text_:22 in 997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.043522544 = score(doc=997,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16070013 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04589033 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 997, 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=997)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Date
    22. 6.2023 18:23:31
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 74(2023) no.7, S.866-878
  13. Euzenat, J.; Shvaiko, P.: Ontology matching (2010) 0.02
    0.017873263 = product of:
      0.04468316 = sum of:
        0.032248147 = weight(_text_:social in 168) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032248147 = score(doc=168,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04589033 = queryNorm
            0.17622775 = fieldWeight in 168, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=168)
        0.012435013 = product of:
          0.024870027 = sum of:
            0.024870027 = weight(_text_:22 in 168) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.024870027 = score(doc=168,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16070013 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04589033 = queryNorm
                0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 168, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=168)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Ontologies are viewed as the silver bullet for many applications, but in open or evolving systems, different parties can adopt different ontologies. This increases heterogeneity problems rather than reducing heterogeneity. This book proposes ontology matching as a solution to the problem of semantic heterogeneity, offering researchers and practitioners a uniform framework of reference to currently available work. The techniques presented apply to database schema matching, catalog integration, XML schema matching and more. Ontologies tend to be found everywhere. They are viewed as the silver bullet for many applications, such as database integration, peer-to-peer systems, e-commerce, semantic web services, or social networks. However, in open or evolving systems, such as the semantic web, different parties would, in general, adopt different ontologies. Thus, merely using ontologies, like using XML, does not reduce heterogeneity: it just raises heterogeneity problems to a higher level. Euzenat and Shvaiko's book is devoted to ontology matching as a solution to the semantic heterogeneity problem faced by computer systems. Ontology matching aims at finding correspondences between semantically related entities of different ontologies. These correspondences may stand for equivalence as well as other relations, such as consequence, subsumption, or disjointness, between ontology entities. Many different matching solutions have been proposed so far from various viewpoints, e.g., databases, information systems, artificial intelligence. With Ontology Matching, researchers and practitioners will find a reference book which presents currently available work in a uniform framework. In particular, the work and the techniques presented in this book can equally be applied to database schema matching, catalog integration, XML schema matching and other related problems. The objectives of the book include presenting (i) the state of the art and (ii) the latest research results in ontology matching by providing a detailed account of matching techniques and matching systems in a systematic way from theoretical, practical and application perspectives.
    Date
    20. 6.2012 19:08:22
  14. Tonkin, E.; Baptista, A.A.; Hooland, S. van; Resmini, A.; Mendéz, E.; Neville, L.: Kinds of Tags : a collaborative research study on tag usage and structure (2007) 0.02
    0.015962018 = product of:
      0.07981009 = sum of:
        0.07981009 = weight(_text_:social in 531) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07981009 = score(doc=531,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04589033 = queryNorm
            0.43614143 = fieldWeight in 531, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=531)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    KoT (Kinds of Tags) is an ongoing joint collaborative research effort with many participants worldwide, including the University of Minho, UKOLN, the University of Bologna, the Université Libre de Bruxelles and La Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. It is focused on the analysis of tags that are in common use in the practice of social tagging, with the aim of discovering how easily tags can be 'normalised' for interoperability with standard metadata environments such as the DC Metadata Terms.
    Theme
    Social tagging
  15. Marcondes, C.H.: Towards a vocabulary to implement culturally relevant relationships between digital collections in heritage institutions (2020) 0.02
    0.015212866 = product of:
      0.038032163 = sum of:
        0.022488397 = weight(_text_:technology in 5757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022488397 = score(doc=5757,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13667917 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04589033 = queryNorm
            0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 5757, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5757)
        0.015543767 = product of:
          0.031087535 = sum of:
            0.031087535 = weight(_text_:22 in 5757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031087535 = score(doc=5757,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16070013 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04589033 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5757, 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=5757)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Cultural heritage institutions are publishing their digital collections over the web as LOD. This is is a new step in the patrimonialization and curatorial processes developed by such institutions. Many of these collections are thematically superimposed and complementary. Frequently, objects in these collections present culturally relevant relationships, such as a book about a painting, or a draft or sketch of a famous painting, etc. LOD technology enables such heritage records to be interlinked, achieving interoperability and adding value to digital collections, thus empowering heritage institutions. An aim of this research is characterizing such culturally relevant relationships and organizing them in a vocabulary. Use cases or examples of relationships between objects suggested by curators or mentioned in literature and in the conceptual models as FRBR/LRM, CIDOC CRM and RiC-CM, were collected and used as examples or inspiration of cultural relevant relationships. Relationships identified are collated and compared for identifying those with the same or similar meaning, synthesized and normalized. A set of thirty-three culturally relevant relationships are identified and formalized as a LOD property vocabulary to be used by digital curators to interlink digital collections. The results presented are provisional and a starting point to be discussed, tested, and enhanced.
    Date
    4. 3.2020 14:22:41
  16. Heckner, M.; Mühlbacher, S.; Wolff, C.: Tagging tagging : a classification model for user keywords in scientific bibliography management systems (2007) 0.01
    0.01442181 = product of:
      0.07210905 = sum of:
        0.07210905 = weight(_text_:social in 533) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07210905 = score(doc=533,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04589033 = queryNorm
            0.39405724 = fieldWeight in 533, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=533)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    Recently, a growing amount of systems that allow personal content annotation (tagging) are being created, ranging from personal sites for organising bookmarks (del.icio.us), photos (flickr.com) or videos (video.google.com, youtube.com) to systems for managing bibliographies for scientific research projects (citeulike.org, connotea.org). Simultaneously, a debate on the pro and cons of allowing users to add personal keywords to digital content has arisen. One recurrent point-of-discussion is whether tagging can solve the well-known vocabulary problem: In order to support successful retrieval in complex environments, it is necessary to index an object with a variety of aliases (cf. Furnas 1987). In this spirit, social tagging enhances the pool of rigid, traditional keywording by adding user-created retrieval vocabularies. Furthermore, tagging goes beyond simple personal content-based keywords by providing meta-keywords like funny or interesting that "identify qualities or characteristics" (Golder and Huberman 2006, Kipp and Campbell 2006, Kipp 2007, Feinberg 2006, Kroski 2005). Contrarily, tagging systems are claimed to lead to semantic difficulties that may hinder the precision and recall of tagging systems (e.g. the polysemy problem, cf. Marlow 2006, Lakoff 2005, Golder and Huberman 2006). Empirical research on social tagging is still rare and mostly from a computer linguistics or librarian point-of-view (Voß 2007) which focus either on the automatic statistical analyses of large data sets, or intellectually inspect single cases of tag usage: Some scientists studied the evolution of tag vocabularies and tag distribution in specific systems (Golder and Huberman 2006, Hammond 2005). Others concentrate on tagging behaviour and tagger characteristics in collaborative systems. (Hammond 2005, Kipp and Campbell 2007, Feinberg 2006, Sen 2006). However, little research has been conducted on the functional and linguistic characteristics of tags.1 An analysis of these patterns could show differences between user wording and conventional keywording. In order to provide a reasonable basis for comparison, a classification system for existing tags is needed.
    Therefore our main research questions are as follows: - Is it possible to discover regular patterns in tag usage and to establish a stable category model? - Does a specific tagging language comparable to internet slang or chatspeak evolve? - How do social tags differ from traditional (author / expert) keywords? - To what degree are social tags taken from or findable in the full text of the tagged resource? - Do tags in a research literature context go beyond simple content description (e.g. tags indicating time or task-related information, cf. Kipp et al. 2006)?
    Theme
    Social tagging
  17. Mayr, P.; Petras, V.; Walter, A.-K.: Results from a German terminology mapping effort : intra- and interdisciplinary cross-concordances between controlled vocabularies (2007) 0.01
    0.012619085 = product of:
      0.06309542 = sum of:
        0.06309542 = weight(_text_:social in 542) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06309542 = score(doc=542,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04589033 = queryNorm
            0.34480008 = fieldWeight in 542, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=542)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    In 2004, the German Federal Ministry for Education and Research funded a major terminology mapping initiative at the GESIS Social Science Information Centre in Bonn (GESIS-IZ), which will find its conclusion this year. The task of this terminology mapping initiative was to organize, create and manage 'crossconcordances' between major controlled vocabularies (thesauri, classification systems, subject heading lists) centred around the social sciences but quickly extending to other subject areas. Cross-concordances are intellectually (manually) created crosswalks that determine equivalence, hierarchy, and association relations between terms from two controlled vocabularies. Most vocabularies have been related bilaterally, that is, there is a cross-concordance relating terms from vocabulary A to vocabulary B as well as a cross-concordance relating terms from vocabulary B to vocabulary A (bilateral relations are not necessarily symmetrical). Till August 2007, 24 controlled vocabularies from 11 disciplines will be connected with vocabulary sizes ranging from 2,000 - 17,000 terms per vocabulary. To date more than 260,000 relations are generated. A database including all vocabularies and cross-concordances was built and a 'heterogeneity service' developed, a web service, which makes the cross-concordances available for other applications. Many cross-concordances are already implemented and utilized for the German Social Science Information Portal Sowiport (www.sowiport.de), which searches bibliographical and other information resources (incl. 13 databases with 10 different vocabularies and ca. 2.5 million references).
    In the final phase of the project, a major evaluation effort is under way to test and measure the effectiveness of the vocabulary mappings in an information system environment. Actual user queries are tested in a distributed search environment, where several bibliographic databases with different controlled vocabularies are searched at the same time. Three query variations are compared to each other: a free-text search without focusing on using the controlled vocabulary or terminology mapping; a controlled vocabulary search, where terms from one vocabulary (a 'home' vocabulary thought to be familiar to the user of a particular database) are used to search all databases; and finally, a search, where controlled vocabulary terms are translated into the terms of the respective controlled vocabulary of the database. For evaluation purposes, types of cross-concordances are distinguished between intradisciplinary vocabularies (vocabularies within the social sciences) and interdisciplinary vocabularies (social sciences to other disciplines as well as other combinations). Simultaneously, an extensive quantitative analysis is conducted aimed at finding patterns in terminology mappings that can explain trends in the effectiveness of terminology mappings, particularly looking at overlapping terms, types of determined relations (equivalence, hierarchy etc.), size of participating vocabularies, etc. This project is the largest terminology mapping effort in Germany. The number and variety of controlled vocabularies targeted provide an optimal basis for insights and further research opportunities. To our knowledge, terminology mapping efforts have rarely been evaluated with stringent qualitative and quantitative measures. This research should contribute in this area. For the NKOS workshop, we plan to present an overview of the project and participating vocabularies, an introduction to the heterogeneity service and its application as well as some of the results and findings of the evaluation, which will be concluded in August.
  18. Gracy, K.F.; Zeng, M.L.; Skirvin, L.: Exploring methods to improve access to Music resources by aligning library Data with Linked Data : a report of methodologies and preliminary findings (2013) 0.01
    0.012170292 = product of:
      0.030425731 = sum of:
        0.017990718 = weight(_text_:technology in 1096) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017990718 = score(doc=1096,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13667917 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04589033 = queryNorm
            0.13162735 = fieldWeight in 1096, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1096)
        0.012435013 = product of:
          0.024870027 = sum of:
            0.024870027 = weight(_text_:22 in 1096) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.024870027 = score(doc=1096,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16070013 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04589033 = queryNorm
                0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1096, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1096)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Date
    28.10.2013 17:22:17
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.10, S.2078-2099
  19. Isaac, A.; Wang, S.; Zinn, C.; Matthezing, H.; Meij, L. van der; Schlobach, S.: Evaluating thesaurus alignments for semantic interoperability in the library domain (2009) 0.01
    0.010177087 = product of:
      0.050885435 = sum of:
        0.050885435 = weight(_text_:technology in 1650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.050885435 = score(doc=1650,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13667917 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04589033 = queryNorm
            0.3722984 = fieldWeight in 1650, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1650)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    Thesaurus alignments play an important role in realizing efficient access to heterogeneous cultural-heritage data. Current technology, however, provides only limited value for such access because it fails to bridge the gap between theoretical study and practical application requirements. This article explores common real-world library problems and identifies solutions that focus on the application-embedded study, development, and evaluation of matching technology.
  20. Fiala, S.: Deutscher Bibliothekartag Leipzig 2007 : Sacherschließung - Informationsdienstleistung nach Mass (2007) 0.01
    0.009674444 = product of:
      0.04837222 = sum of:
        0.04837222 = weight(_text_:social in 415) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04837222 = score(doc=415,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04589033 = queryNorm
            0.26434162 = fieldWeight in 415, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=415)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Content
    Jan Lüth (Kiel) zeigte mit seinem Vortrag "Inhaltserschließung durch Nutzerinnen und Nutzer: Ergebnisse eines Tests mit Internetquellen der Virtuellen Fachbibliothek EconBiz" als letzter an diesem Nachmittag eine alternative neue Methode der Erschließung. Für diesen Test wurde eine Teilmenge der im EconBiz-Fachinformationsführer enthaltenen Internetquellen in Social-Bookmarking-Webseiten angeboten, und es wurde beobachtet, inwieweit diese Internetquellen nachgenutzt und durch Schlagworte (Tags) ergänzt wurden. Social-Bookmarking-Webseiten ermöglichen eine private, aber auch öffentliche Verwaltung von Lesezeichen im Internet, welche mit freien Schlagwörtern (Tags), einem Titel und/oder einer Beschreibung versehen werden können. Diese Inhalte werden indexiert und somit werden verschiedene Sprachen, Begriffe und Schreibweisen suchbar. Ziel des Tests sollen Ergebnisse über Potenzial und Einsatzmöglichkeiten von Social-Bookmarking-Systemen im Kontext einer virtuellen Fachbibliothek sein. Als Fazit lässt sich sagen, dass Social Bookmarking sehr aufschlussreich sein kann, um neue Quellen zu erschließen und auszuwählen, und dass ein sehr großes Potenzial vorhanden ist, wenn viele Anwender viele Inhalte einbringen."

Authors

Languages

  • e 70
  • d 14

Types

  • a 57
  • el 24
  • m 8
  • s 5
  • x 3
  • More… Less…