Search (38 results, page 1 of 2)

0.080756076 = product of:
  0.16151215 = sum of:
    0.13954473 = weight(_text_:social in 4855) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13954473 = score(doc=4855,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.75541914 = fieldWeight in 4855, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4855)
    0.021967428 = product of:
      0.043934856 = sum of:
        0.043934856 = weight(_text_:22 in 4855) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043934856 = score(doc=4855,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4855, 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=4855)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Während in den vergangenen Monaten Themen wie Web 2.0 und Social Software ein erstaunliches Konjunkturhoch erlebt haben, vollzieht sich weitgehend abseits der öffentlichen Wahrnehmung eine technologische Komplementärinnovation. Die wachsende Adaption semantischer Technologien zu Zwecken der strukturierten Erschließung von "Web 2.0 Content", aber auch der Einsatz von Social Software zur kollaborativen Anreicherung von Web Content mit maschinenlesbaren Metadaten sind Ausdruck eines Trends in Richtung "Social Semantic Web". Bezeichnendes Merkmal dieser Entwicklung ist die voranschreitende Konvergenz zwischen Social Software und Semantic Web Technologien. Dieser Beitrag hat das Ziel ein allgemeines Bewusstsein und Verständnis dieser Entwicklung zu schaffen und nähert sich dem Phänomen aus einer nichttechnischen Perspektive.

Pages

S.3-22

Source

Social Semantic Web: Web 2.0, was nun? Hrsg.: A. Blumauer u. T. Pellegrini

0.06032023 = product of:
  0.12064046 = sum of:
    0.09867303 = weight(_text_:social in 4184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09867303 = score(doc=4184,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = 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)
    0.021967428 = product of:
      0.043934856 = sum of:
        0.043934856 = weight(_text_:22 in 4184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043934856 = score(doc=4184,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

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

0.05638309 = product of:
  0.11276618 = sum of:
    0.08138413 = weight(_text_:social in 2090) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08138413 = score(doc=2090,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.44056937 = fieldWeight in 2090, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2090)
    0.031382043 = product of:
      0.062764086 = sum of:
        0.062764086 = weight(_text_:22 in 2090) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.062764086 = score(doc=2090,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2090, 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=2090)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Source

Metadata and semantics research: 10th International Conference, MTSR 2016, Göttingen, Germany, November 22-25, 2016, Proceedings. Eds.: E. Garoufallou

0.040378038 = product of:
  0.080756076 = sum of:
    0.06977236 = weight(_text_:social in 2665) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06977236 = score(doc=2665,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.37770957 = fieldWeight in 2665, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2665)
    0.010983714 = product of:
      0.021967428 = sum of:
        0.021967428 = weight(_text_:22 in 2665) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021967428 = score(doc=2665,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 2665, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2665)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Platforms for social computing connect users via shared references to people with whom they have relationships, events attended, places lived in or traveled to, and topics such as favorite books or movies. Since free text is insufficient for expressing such references precisely and unambiguously, many social computing platforms coin identifiers for topics, places, events, and people and provide interfaces for finding and selecting these identifiers from controlled lists. Using these interfaces, users collaboratively construct a web of links among entities. This model needn't be limited to social networking sites. Understanding an item in a digital library or museum requires context: information about the topics, places, events, and people to which the item is related. Students, journalists and investigators traditionally discover this kind of context by asking "the four Ws": what, where, when and who. The DCMI Kernel Metadata Community has recognized the four Ws as fundamental elements of descriptions (Kunze & Turner, 2007). Making better use of metadata to answer these questions via links to appropriate contextual resources has been our focus in a series of research projects over the past few years. Currently we are building a system for enabling readers of any text to relate any topic, place, event or person mentioned in the text to the best explanatory resources available. This system is being developed with two different corpora: a diverse variety of biographical texts characterized by very rich and dense mentions of people, events, places and activities, and a large collection of newly-scanned books, journals and manuscripts relating to Irish culture and history. Like a social computing platform, our system consists of tools for referring to topics, places, events or people, disambiguating these references by linking them to unique identifiers, and using the disambiguated references to provide useful information in context and to link to related resources. Yet current social computing platforms, while usually amenable to importing and exporting data, tend to mint proprietary identifiers and expect links to be traversed using their own interfaces. We take a different approach, using identifiers from both established and emerging naming authorities, representing relationships using standardized metadata vocabularies, and publishing those representations using standard protocols so that links can be stored and traversed anywhere. Central to our strategy is to move from appearances in a text to naming authorities to the the construction of links for searching or querying trusted resources. Using identifiers from naming authorities, rather than literal values (as in the DCMI Kernel) or keys from a proprietary database, makes it more likely that links constructed using our system will continue to be useful in the future. WorldCat Identities URIs (http://worldcat.org/identities/) linked to Library of Congress and Deutsche Nationalbibliothek authority files for persons and organizations and Geonames (http://geonames.org/) URIs for places are stable identifiers attached to a wealth of useful metadata. Yet no naming authority can be totally comprehensive, so our system can be extended to use new sources of identifiers as needed. For example, we are experimenting with using Freebase (http://freebase.com/) URIs to identify historical events, for which no established naming authority currently exists. Stable identifiers (URIs), standardized hyperlinked data formats (XML), and uniform publishing protocols (HTTP) are key ingredients of the web's open architecture. Our system provides an example of how this open architecture can be exploited to build flexible and useful tools for connecting resources via shared references to topics, places, events, and people.

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

0.039468158 = product of:
  0.078936316 = sum of:
    0.05696889 = weight(_text_:social in 2640) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05696889 = score(doc=2640,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.30839854 = fieldWeight in 2640, 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=2640)
    0.021967428 = product of:
      0.043934856 = sum of:
        0.043934856 = weight(_text_:22 in 2640) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043934856 = score(doc=2640,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2640, 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=2640)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

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

0.03488618 = product of:
  0.13954473 = sum of:
    0.13954473 = weight(_text_:social in 2884) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13954473 = score(doc=2884,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.75541914 = fieldWeight in 2884, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2884)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Social Tagging als freie Verschlagwortung durch Nutzer im Web wird immer häufiger mit der Idee des Semantic Web in Zusammenhang gebracht. Wie beide Konzepte in der Praxis konkret zusammenkommen sollen, bleibt jedoch meist unklar. Dieser Artikel soll hier Aufklärung leisten, indem die Kombination von Social Tagging und Semantic Web in Form von Semantic Tagging mit dem Simple Knowledge Organisation System dargestellt und auf die konkreten Möglichkeiten, Vorteile und offenen Fragen der Semantischen Indexierung eingegangen wird.

Footnote

Beitrag der Tagung "Social Tagging in der Wissensorganisation" am 21.-22.02.2008 am Institut für Wissensmedien (IWM) in Tübingen.

Source

Good tags - bad tags: Social Tagging in der Wissensorganisation. Hrsg.: B. Gaiser, u.a

Theme

Social tagging

0.03189509 = product of:
  0.06379018 = sum of:
    0.04603782 = weight(_text_:social in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04603782 = score(doc=2654,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.24922368 = fieldWeight in 2654, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2654)
    0.017752362 = product of:
      0.035504725 = sum of:
        0.035504725 = weight(_text_:22 in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035504725 = score(doc=2654,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.21886435 = fieldWeight in 2654, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2654)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

In order to transfer the Chinese Classified Thesaurus (CCT) into a machine-processable format and provide CCT-based Web services, a pilot study has been conducted in which a variety of selected CCT classes and mapped thesaurus entries are encoded with SKOS. OWL and RDFS are also used to encode the same contents for the purposes of feasibility and cost-benefit comparison. CCT is a collected effort led by the National Library of China. It is an integration of the national standards Chinese Library Classification (CLC) 4th edition and Chinese Thesaurus (CT). As a manually created mapping product, CCT provides for each of the classes the corresponding thesaurus terms, and vice versa. The coverage of CCT includes four major clusters: philosophy, social sciences and humanities, natural sciences and technologies, and general works. There are 22 main-classes, 52,992 sub-classes and divisions, 110,837 preferred thesaurus terms, 35,690 entry terms (non-preferred terms), and 59,738 pre-coordinated headings (Chinese Classified Thesaurus, 2005) Major challenges of encoding this large vocabulary comes from its integrated structure. CCT is a result of the combination of two structures (illustrated in Figure 1): a thesaurus that uses ISO-2788 standardized structure and a classification scheme that is basically enumerative, but provides some flexibility for several kinds of synthetic mechanisms Other challenges include the complex relationships caused by differences of granularities of two original schemes and their presentation with various levels of SKOS elements; as well as the diverse coordination of entries due to the use of auxiliary tables and pre-coordinated headings derived from combining classes, subdivisions, and thesaurus terms, which do not correspond to existing unique identifiers. The poster reports the progress, shares the sample SKOS entries, and summarizes problems identified during the SKOS encoding process. Although OWL Lite and OWL Full provide richer expressiveness, the cost-benefit issues and the final purposes of encoding CCT raise questions of using such approaches.

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

0.029295318 = product of:
  0.058590636 = sum of:
    0.04603782 = weight(_text_:social in 2661) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04603782 = score(doc=2661,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.24922368 = fieldWeight in 2661, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2661)
    0.012552816 = product of:
      0.025105633 = sum of:
        0.025105633 = weight(_text_:22 in 2661) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025105633 = score(doc=2661,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2661, 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=2661)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The basic goal of education within a discipline is to transform a novice into an expert. This entails moving the novice toward the "semantic space" that the expert inhabits-the space of concepts, meanings, vocabularies, and other intellectual constructs that comprise the discipline. Metadata is significant to this goal in digitally mediated education environments. Encoding the experts' semantic space not only enables the sharing of semantics among discipline scientists, but also creates an environment that bridges the semantic gap between the common vocabulary of the novice and the granular descriptive language of the seasoned scientist (Greenberg, et al, 2005). Developments underlying the Semantic Web, where vocabularies are formalized in the Web Ontology Language (OWL), and Web 2.0 approaches of user-generated folksonomies provide an infrastructure for linking vocabulary systems and promoting group learning via metadata literacy. Group learning is a pedagogical approach to teaching that harnesses the phenomenon of "collective intelligence" to increase learning by means of collaboration. Learning a new semantic system can be daunting for a novice, and yet it is integral to advance one's knowledge in a discipline and retain interest. These ideas are key to the "BOT 2.0: Botany through Web 2.0, the Memex and Social Learning" project (Bot 2.0).72 Bot 2.0 is a collaboration involving the North Carolina Botanical Garden, the UNC SILS Metadata Research center, and the Renaissance Computing Institute (RENCI). Bot 2.0 presents a curriculum utilizing a memex as a way for students to link and share digital information, working asynchronously in an environment beyond the traditional classroom. Our conception of a memex is not a centralized black box but rather a flexible, distributed framework that uses the most salient and easiest-to-use collaborative platforms (e.g., Facebook, Flickr, wiki and blog technology) for personal information management. By meeting students "where they live" digitally, we hope to attract students to the study of botanical science. A key aspect is to teach students scientific terminology and about the value of metadata, an inherent function in several of the technologies and in the instructional approach we are utilizing. This poster will report on a study examining the value of both folksonomies and taxonomies for post-secondary college students learning plant identification. Our data is drawn from a curriculum involving a virtual independent learning portion and a "BotCamp" weekend at UNC, where students work with digital plan specimens that they have captured. Results provide some insight into the importance of collaboration and shared vocabulary for gaining confidence and for student progression from novice to expert in botany.

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

0.028773637 = product of:
  0.11509455 = sum of:
    0.11509455 = weight(_text_:social in 4857) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11509455 = score(doc=4857,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.6230592 = fieldWeight in 4857, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4857)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Der Artikel beschäftigt sich zunächst mit dem derzeitigen und zukünftigen Einsatz von Social Software in Unternehmen. Nach dem großen Erfolg von Social Software im Web beginnen viele Unternehmen eigene Social Software-Initiativen zu entwickeln. Der Artikel zeigt die derzeit wahrgenommenen Einsatzmöglichkeiten von Social Software im Unternehmen auf, erörtert Erfolgsfaktoren für die Einführung und präsentiert mögliche Wege für die Zukunft. Nach der Diskussion des Spezialfalles Social Software in Unternehmen werden anschließend die globalen Trends und Zukunftsperspektiven des Web 2.0 in ihren technischen, wirtschaftlichen und sozialen Dimensionen dargestellt. Wie aus den besprochenen Haupttrends hervorgeht, wird die Masse an digital im Web verfügbaren Informationen stetig weiterwachsen. So stellt sich die Frage, wie es in Zukunft möglich sein wird, die Qualität der Informationssuche und der Wissensgenerierung zu verbessern. Mit dem Einsatz von semantischen Technologien im Web wird hier eine revolutionäre Möglichkeit geboten, Informationen zu filtern und intelligente, gewissermaßen "verstehende" Anwendungen zu entwerfen. Auf dem Weg zu einem intelligenten Web werden sich das Semantic Web und Social Software annähern: Anwendungen wie Semantic Wikis, Semantic Weblogs, lightweight Semantic Web-Sprachen wie Microformats oder auch kommerzielle Angebote wie Freebase von Metaweb werden die ersten Vorzeichen einer dritten Generation des Webs sein.

Source

Social Semantic Web: Web 2.0, was nun? Hrsg.: A. Blumauer u. T. Pellegrini

0.028484445 = product of:
  0.11393778 = sum of:
    0.11393778 = weight(_text_:social in 4061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11393778 = score(doc=4061,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.6167971 = fieldWeight in 4061, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4061)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Dieser Artikel gibt einen Einblick in die aktuelle Verschmelzung von Web 2.0-und Semantic Web-Ansätzen, die als Social Semantic Web beschrieben werden kann. Die Grundidee des Social Semantic Web wird beschrieben und einzelne erste Anwendungsbeispiele vorgestellt. Ein wesentlicher Schwerpunkt dieser Entwicklung besteht in der Umsetzung neuer Methoden und Herangehensweisen im Bereich der Wissensrepräsentation. Dieser Artikel stellt vier Schwerpunkte vor, in denen sich die Wissensrepräsentationsmethoden im Social Semantic Web weiterentwickeln müssen und geht dabei jeweils auf den aktuellen Stand ein.

0.028484445 = product of:
  0.11393778 = sum of:
    0.11393778 = weight(_text_:social in 4877) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11393778 = score(doc=4877,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.6167971 = fieldWeight in 4877, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4877)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Zwei Trends prägen derzeit die Gestalt des Internets: Auf der einen Seite finden sich Entwicklungen rund um das "Web 2.0" oder "Social Web", die dem einzelnen Nutzer neue Möglichkeiten des onlinegestützten Identitäts-, Beziehungs- und Informationsmanagements eröffnen. Auf der anderen Seite stehen die Innovationen des Semantic Web, die Relationen zwischen Datenbeständen strukturieren helfen, um so zu verbesserten maschinellen Repräsentationen von Wissen zu gelangen. Dieser Beitrag skizziert die Idee eines "Social Semantic Web", in dem beide Entwicklungen zusammenfließen. Als Scharnier dient dabei der Begriff der Prodnutzung, der die aktive Rolle des Nutzers bei der Erstellung, Verbreitung und Weiterentwicklung von Inhalten wie von strukturiertem Wissen betont.

Source

Social Semantic Web: Web 2.0, was nun? Hrsg.: A. Blumauer u. T. Pellegrini

0.024668258 = product of:
  0.09867303 = sum of:
    0.09867303 = weight(_text_:social in 250) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09867303 = score(doc=250,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.53416204 = fieldWeight in 250, 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=250)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This paper presents a personal perspective on libraries and the Semantic Web. The paper discusses computing power, increased availability of processable text, social software developments and the ideas underlying Web 2.0 and the impact of these developments in the context of libraries and information. The article concludes with a discussion of social bibliography and the declining hegemony of catalog records, and emphasizes the strengths of librarianship and the profession's ability to contribute to Semantic Web development.

0.022553235 = product of:
  0.04510647 = sum of:
    0.032553654 = weight(_text_:social in 2656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032553654 = score(doc=2656,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.17622775 = fieldWeight in 2656, 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=2656)
    0.012552816 = product of:
      0.025105633 = sum of:
        0.025105633 = weight(_text_:22 in 2656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025105633 = score(doc=2656,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2656, 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=2656)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

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

0.020141546 = product of:
  0.08056618 = sum of:
    0.08056618 = weight(_text_:social in 4876) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08056618 = score(doc=4876,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.43614143 = fieldWeight in 4876, 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=4876)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Social Semantic Web: Web 2.0, was nun? Hrsg.: A. Blumauer u. T. Pellegrini

0.016732581 = product of:
  0.066930324 = sum of:
    0.066930324 = sum of:
      0.041824687 = weight(_text_:aspects in 1634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041824687 = score(doc=1634,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20938325 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046325076 = queryNorm
          0.19975184 = fieldWeight in 1634, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1634)
      0.025105633 = weight(_text_:22 in 1634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.025105633 = score(doc=1634,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046325076 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1634, 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=1634)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Purpose - Ontologies are prone to wide semantic variability due to subjective points of view of their composers. The purpose of this paper is to propose a new approach for maximal unification of diverse ontologies for controversial domains by their relations. Design/methodology/approach - Effective matching or unification of multiple ontologies for a specific domain is crucial for the success of many semantic web applications, such as semantic information retrieval and organization, document tagging, summarization and search. To this end, numerous automatic and semi-automatic techniques were proposed in the past decade that attempt to identify similar entities, mostly classes, in diverse ontologies for similar domains. Apparently, matching individual entities cannot result in full integration of ontologies' semantics without matching their inter-relations with all other-related classes (and instances). However, semantic matching of ontological relations still constitutes a major research challenge. Therefore, in this paper the authors propose a new paradigm for assessment of maximal possible matching and unification of ontological relations. To this end, several unification rules for ontological relations were devised based on ontological reference rules, and lexical and textual entailment. These rules were semi-automatically implemented to extend a given ontology with semantically matching relations from another ontology for a similar domain. Then, the ontologies were unified through these similar pairs of relations. The authors observe that these rules can be also facilitated to reveal the contradictory relations in different ontologies. Findings - To assess the feasibility of the approach two experiments were conducted with different sets of multiple personal ontologies on controversial domains constructed by trained subjects. The results for about 50 distinct ontology pairs demonstrate a good potential of the methodology for increasing inter-ontology agreement. Furthermore, the authors show that the presented methodology can lead to a complete unification of multiple semantically heterogeneous ontologies. Research limitations/implications - This is a conceptual study that presents a new approach for semantic unification of ontologies by a devised set of rules along with the initial experimental evidence of its feasibility and effectiveness. However, this methodology has to be fully automatically implemented and tested on a larger dataset in future research. Practical implications - This result has implication for semantic search, since a richer ontology, comprised of multiple aspects and viewpoints of the domain of knowledge, enhances discoverability and improves search results. Originality/value - To the best of the knowledge, this is the first study to examine and assess the maximal level of semantic relation-based ontology unification.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

0.016276827 = product of:
  0.06510731 = sum of:
    0.06510731 = weight(_text_:social in 4856) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06510731 = score(doc=4856,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.3524555 = fieldWeight in 4856, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4856)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Social Semantic Web: Web 2.0, was nun? Hrsg.: A. Blumauer u. T. Pellegrini

0.016276827 = product of:
  0.06510731 = sum of:
    0.06510731 = weight(_text_:social in 4862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06510731 = score(doc=4862,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.3524555 = fieldWeight in 4862, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4862)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Social Semantic Web: Web 2.0, was nun? Hrsg.: A. Blumauer u. T. Pellegrini

0.016276827 = product of:
  0.06510731 = sum of:
    0.06510731 = weight(_text_:social in 4867) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06510731 = score(doc=4867,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.3524555 = fieldWeight in 4867, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4867)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Social Semantic Web: Web 2.0, was nun? Hrsg.: A. Blumauer u. T. Pellegrini

0.0142422225 = product of:
  0.05696889 = sum of:
    0.05696889 = weight(_text_:social in 2913) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05696889 = score(doc=2913,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.30839854 = fieldWeight in 2913, 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=2913)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Wikis haben sich als Instrument des Wissensmanagements sowohl im Unternehmensumfeld als auch im wissenschaftlichen Bereich inzwischen etabliert. Inhalte lassen sich in Form von Wikiartikeln gut von verschieden großen Communities erstellen, bearbeiten und nutzen. Auch die formalisierte Repräsentation von Wissen mit Hilfe von Semantic- Web-Technologien gewinnt an Fahrt. Eine Möglichkeit, diese beiden Ansätze in einem Social- Semantic-Web zusammenzuführen, bieten so genannte Semantische Wikis. Sie ermöglichen es, kollaborativ Artikel zu erstellen, wie in einem herkömmlichen Wiki und darüber hinaus recherchierbare Fakten zu den Artikeln in einer formalen Sprache zu erfassen. Dieser Artikel gibt einen Überblick über aktuell verfügbare Systeme und einige Anwendungsmöglichkeiten.

0.0142422225 = product of:
  0.05696889 = sum of:
    0.05696889 = weight(_text_:social in 4868) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05696889 = score(doc=4868,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.30839854 = fieldWeight in 4868, 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=4868)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Social Semantic Web: Web 2.0, was nun? Hrsg.: A. Blumauer u. T. Pellegrini