Search (42 results, page 1 of 3)

  • × theme_ss:"Automatisches Indexieren"
  1. Greiner-Petter, A.; Schubotz, M.; Cohl, H.S.; Gipp, B.: Semantic preserving bijective mappings for expressions involving special functions between computer algebra systems and document preparation systems (2019) 0.02
    0.022609197 = product of:
      0.06782759 = sum of:
        0.06782759 = sum of:
          0.042278446 = weight(_text_:methodology in 5499) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.042278446 = score(doc=5499,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.21236731 = queryWeight, product of:
                4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
                0.047143444 = queryNorm
              0.1990817 = fieldWeight in 5499, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5499)
          0.025549144 = weight(_text_:22 in 5499) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.025549144 = score(doc=5499,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16508831 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.047143444 = queryNorm
              0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 5499, 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=5499)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose Modern mathematicians and scientists of math-related disciplines often use Document Preparation Systems (DPS) to write and Computer Algebra Systems (CAS) to calculate mathematical expressions. Usually, they translate the expressions manually between DPS and CAS. This process is time-consuming and error-prone. The purpose of this paper is to automate this translation. This paper uses Maple and Mathematica as the CAS, and LaTeX as the DPS. Design/methodology/approach Bruce Miller at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) developed a collection of special LaTeX macros that create links from mathematical symbols to their definitions in the NIST Digital Library of Mathematical Functions (DLMF). The authors are using these macros to perform rule-based translations between the formulae in the DLMF and CAS. Moreover, the authors develop software to ease the creation of new rules and to discover inconsistencies. Findings The authors created 396 mappings and translated 58.8 percent of DLMF formulae (2,405 expressions) successfully between Maple and DLMF. For a significant percentage, the special function definitions in Maple and the DLMF were different. An atomic symbol in one system maps to a composite expression in the other system. The translator was also successfully used for automatic verification of mathematical online compendia and CAS. The evaluation techniques discovered two errors in the DLMF and one defect in Maple. Originality/value This paper introduces the first translation tool for special functions between LaTeX and CAS. The approach improves error-prone manual translations and can be used to verify mathematical online compendia and CAS.
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
  2. Moulaison-Sandy, H.; Adkins, D.; Bossaller, J.; Cho, H.: ¬An automated approach to describing fiction : a methodology to use book reviews to identify affect (2021) 0.02
    0.021358293 = product of:
      0.064074874 = sum of:
        0.064074874 = product of:
          0.12814975 = sum of:
            0.12814975 = weight(_text_:methodology in 710) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.12814975 = score(doc=710,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.21236731 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047143444 = queryNorm
                0.60343444 = fieldWeight in 710, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=710)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Subject headings and genre terms are notoriously difficult to apply, yet are important for fiction. The current project functions as a proof of concept, using a text-mining methodology to identify affective information (emotion and tone) about fiction titles from professional book reviews as a potential first step in automating the subject analysis process. Findings are presented and discussed, comparing results to the range of aboutness and isness information in library cataloging records. The methodology is likewise presented, and how future work might expand on the current project to enhance catalog records through text-mining is explored.
  3. Souza, R.R.; Raghavan, K.S.: ¬A methodology for noun phrase-based automatic indexing (2006) 0.02
    0.018307107 = product of:
      0.054921318 = sum of:
        0.054921318 = product of:
          0.109842636 = sum of:
            0.109842636 = weight(_text_:methodology in 173) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.109842636 = score(doc=173,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.21236731 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047143444 = queryNorm
                0.5172295 = fieldWeight in 173, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=173)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The scholarly community is increasingly employing the Web both for publication of scholarly output and for locating and accessing relevant scholarly literature. Organization of this vast body of digital information assumes significance in this context. The sheer volume of digital information to be handled makes traditional indexing and knowledge representation strategies ineffective and impractical. It is, therefore, worth exploring new approaches. An approach being discussed considers the intrinsic semantics of texts of documents. Based on the hypothesis that noun phrases in a text are semantically rich in terms of their ability to represent the subject content of the document, this approach seeks to identify and extract noun phrases instead of single keywords, and use them as descriptors. This paper presents a methodology that has been developed for extracting noun phrases from Portuguese texts. The results of an experiment carried out to test the adequacy of the methodology are also presented.
  4. Voorhees, E.M.: Implementing agglomerative hierarchic clustering algorithms for use in document retrieval (1986) 0.02
    0.017032763 = product of:
      0.051098287 = sum of:
        0.051098287 = product of:
          0.102196574 = sum of:
            0.102196574 = weight(_text_:22 in 402) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.102196574 = score(doc=402,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16508831 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047143444 = queryNorm
                0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 402, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=402)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Information processing and management. 22(1986) no.6, S.465-476
  5. Tsai, C.-F.; McGarry, K.; Tait, J.: Qualitative evaluation of automatic assignment of keywords to images (2006) 0.02
    0.015255922 = product of:
      0.045767765 = sum of:
        0.045767765 = product of:
          0.09153553 = sum of:
            0.09153553 = weight(_text_:methodology in 963) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09153553 = score(doc=963,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.21236731 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047143444 = queryNorm
                0.43102458 = fieldWeight in 963, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=963)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    In image retrieval, most systems lack user-centred evaluation since they are assessed by some chosen ground truth dataset. The results reported through precision and recall assessed against the ground truth are thought of as being an acceptable surrogate for the judgment of real users. Much current research focuses on automatically assigning keywords to images for enhancing retrieval effectiveness. However, evaluation methods are usually based on system-level assessment, e.g. classification accuracy based on some chosen ground truth dataset. In this paper, we present a qualitative evaluation methodology for automatic image indexing systems. The automatic indexing task is formulated as one of image annotation, or automatic metadata generation for images. The evaluation is composed of two individual methods. First, the automatic indexing annotation results are assessed by human subjects. Second, the subjects are asked to annotate some chosen images as the test set whose annotations are used as ground truth. Then, the system is tested by the test set whose annotation results are judged against the ground truth. Only one of these methods is reported for most systems on which user-centred evaluation are conducted. We believe that both methods need to be considered for full evaluation. We also provide an example evaluation of our system based on this methodology. According to this study, our proposed evaluation methodology is able to provide deeper understanding of the system's performance.
  6. Fuhr, N.; Niewelt, B.: ¬Ein Retrievaltest mit automatisch indexierten Dokumenten (1984) 0.01
    0.014903667 = product of:
      0.044711 = sum of:
        0.044711 = product of:
          0.089422 = sum of:
            0.089422 = weight(_text_:22 in 262) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.089422 = score(doc=262,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16508831 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047143444 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 262, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=262)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    20.10.2000 12:22:23
  7. Hlava, M.M.K.: Automatic indexing : comparing rule-based and statistics-based indexing systems (2005) 0.01
    0.014903667 = product of:
      0.044711 = sum of:
        0.044711 = product of:
          0.089422 = sum of:
            0.089422 = weight(_text_:22 in 6265) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.089422 = score(doc=6265,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16508831 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047143444 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6265, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6265)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Information outlook. 9(2005) no.8, S.22-23
  8. Fuhr, N.: Ranking-Experimente mit gewichteter Indexierung (1986) 0.01
    0.012774572 = product of:
      0.038323715 = sum of:
        0.038323715 = product of:
          0.07664743 = sum of:
            0.07664743 = weight(_text_:22 in 58) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07664743 = score(doc=58,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16508831 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047143444 = queryNorm
                0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 58, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=58)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    14. 6.2015 22:12:44
  9. Hauer, M.: Automatische Indexierung (2000) 0.01
    0.012774572 = product of:
      0.038323715 = sum of:
        0.038323715 = product of:
          0.07664743 = sum of:
            0.07664743 = weight(_text_:22 in 5887) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07664743 = score(doc=5887,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16508831 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047143444 = queryNorm
                0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 5887, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5887)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Wissen in Aktion: Wege des Knowledge Managements. 22. Online-Tagung der DGI, Frankfurt am Main, 2.-4.5.2000. Proceedings. Hrsg.: R. Schmidt
  10. Fuhr, N.: Rankingexperimente mit gewichteter Indexierung (1986) 0.01
    0.012774572 = product of:
      0.038323715 = sum of:
        0.038323715 = product of:
          0.07664743 = sum of:
            0.07664743 = weight(_text_:22 in 2051) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07664743 = score(doc=2051,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16508831 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047143444 = queryNorm
                0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 2051, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2051)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    14. 6.2015 22:12:56
  11. Hauer, M.: Tiefenindexierung im Bibliothekskatalog : 17 Jahre intelligentCAPTURE (2019) 0.01
    0.012774572 = product of:
      0.038323715 = sum of:
        0.038323715 = product of:
          0.07664743 = sum of:
            0.07664743 = weight(_text_:22 in 5629) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07664743 = score(doc=5629,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16508831 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047143444 = queryNorm
                0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 5629, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5629)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    B.I.T.online. 22(2019) H.2, S.163-166
  12. Biebricher, N.; Fuhr, N.; Lustig, G.; Schwantner, M.; Knorz, G.: ¬The automatic indexing system AIR/PHYS : from research to application (1988) 0.01
    0.010645477 = product of:
      0.03193643 = sum of:
        0.03193643 = product of:
          0.06387286 = sum of:
            0.06387286 = weight(_text_:22 in 1952) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06387286 = score(doc=1952,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16508831 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047143444 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 1952, 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=1952)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    16. 8.1998 12:51:22
  13. Kutschekmanesch, S.; Lutes, B.; Moelle, K.; Thiel, U.; Tzeras, K.: Automated multilingual indexing : a synthesis of rule-based and thesaurus-based methods (1998) 0.01
    0.010645477 = product of:
      0.03193643 = sum of:
        0.03193643 = product of:
          0.06387286 = sum of:
            0.06387286 = weight(_text_:22 in 4157) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06387286 = score(doc=4157,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16508831 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047143444 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4157, 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=4157)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Information und Märkte: 50. Deutscher Dokumentartag 1998, Kongreß der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Dokumentation e.V. (DGD), Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn, 22.-24. September 1998. Hrsg. von Marlies Ockenfeld u. Gerhard J. Mantwill
  14. Tsareva, P.V.: Algoritmy dlya raspoznavaniya pozitivnykh i negativnykh vkhozdenii deskriptorov v tekst i protsedura avtomaticheskoi klassifikatsii tekstov (1999) 0.01
    0.010645477 = product of:
      0.03193643 = sum of:
        0.03193643 = product of:
          0.06387286 = sum of:
            0.06387286 = weight(_text_:22 in 374) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06387286 = score(doc=374,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16508831 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047143444 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 374, 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=374)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    1. 4.2002 10:22:41
  15. Stankovic, R. et al.: Indexing of textual databases based on lexical resources : a case study for Serbian (2016) 0.01
    0.010645477 = product of:
      0.03193643 = sum of:
        0.03193643 = product of:
          0.06387286 = sum of:
            0.06387286 = weight(_text_:22 in 2759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06387286 = score(doc=2759,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16508831 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047143444 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2759, 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=2759)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    1. 2.2016 18:25:22
  16. Galvez, C.; Moya-Anegón, F. de: ¬An evaluation of conflation accuracy using finite-state transducers (2006) 0.01
    0.010569612 = product of:
      0.031708833 = sum of:
        0.031708833 = product of:
          0.063417666 = sum of:
            0.063417666 = weight(_text_:methodology in 5599) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.063417666 = score(doc=5599,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.21236731 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047143444 = queryNorm
                0.29862255 = fieldWeight in 5599, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5599)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - To evaluate the accuracy of conflation methods based on finite-state transducers (FSTs). Design/methodology/approach - Incorrectly lemmatized and stemmed forms may lead to the retrieval of inappropriate documents. Experimental studies to date have focused on retrieval performance, but very few on conflation performance. The process of normalization we used involved a linguistic toolbox that allowed us to construct, through graphic interfaces, electronic dictionaries represented internally by FSTs. The lexical resources developed were applied to a Spanish test corpus for merging term variants in canonical lemmatized forms. Conflation performance was evaluated in terms of an adaptation of recall and precision measures, based on accuracy and coverage, not actual retrieval. The results were compared with those obtained using a Spanish version of the Porter algorithm. Findings - The conclusion is that the main strength of lemmatization is its accuracy, whereas its main limitation is the underanalysis of variant forms. Originality/value - The report outlines the potential of transducers in their application to normalization processes.
  17. Benson, A.C.: Image descriptions and their relational expressions : a review of the literature and the issues (2015) 0.01
    0.010569612 = product of:
      0.031708833 = sum of:
        0.031708833 = product of:
          0.063417666 = sum of:
            0.063417666 = weight(_text_:methodology in 1867) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.063417666 = score(doc=1867,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.21236731 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047143444 = queryNorm
                0.29862255 = fieldWeight in 1867, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1867)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to survey the treatment of relationships, relationship expressions and the ways in which they manifest themselves in image descriptions. Design/methodology/approach - The term "relationship" is construed in the broadest possible way to include spatial relationships ("to the right of"), temporal ("in 1936," "at noon"), meronymic ("part of"), and attributive ("has color," "has dimension"). The intentions of these vaguely delimited categories with image information, image creation, and description in libraries and archives is complex and in need of explanation. Findings - The review brings into question many generally held beliefs about the relationship problem such as the belief that the semantics of relationships are somehow embedded in the relationship term itself and that image search and retrieval solutions can be found through refinement of word-matching systems. Originality/value - This review has no hope of systematically examining all evidence in all disciplines pertaining to this topic. It instead focusses on a general description of a theoretical treatment in Library and Information Science.
  18. Jones, S.; Paynter, G.W.: Automatic extractionof document keyphrases for use in digital libraries : evaluations and applications (2002) 0.01
    0.00880801 = product of:
      0.02642403 = sum of:
        0.02642403 = product of:
          0.05284806 = sum of:
            0.05284806 = weight(_text_:methodology in 601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05284806 = score(doc=601,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.21236731 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047143444 = queryNorm
                0.24885213 = fieldWeight in 601, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=601)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    This article describes an evaluation of the Kea automatic keyphrase extraction algorithm. Document keyphrases are conventionally used as concise descriptors of document content, and are increasingly used in novel ways, including document clustering, searching and browsing interfaces, and retrieval engines. However, it is costly and time consuming to manually assign keyphrases to documents, motivating the development of tools that automatically perform this function. Previous studies have evaluated Kea's performance by measuring its ability to identify author keywords and keyphrases, but this methodology has a number of well-known limitations. The results presented in this article are based on evaluations by human assessors of the quality and appropriateness of Kea keyphrases. The results indicate that, in general, Kea produces keyphrases that are rated positively by human assessors. However, typical Kea settings can degrade performance, particularly those relating to keyphrase length and domain specificity. We found that for some settings, Kea's performance is better than that of similar systems, and that Kea's ranking of extracted keyphrases is effective. We also determined that author-specified keyphrases appear to exhibit an inherent ranking, and that they are rated highly and therefore suitable for use in training and evaluation of automatic keyphrasing systems.
  19. Golub, K.; Lykke, M.; Tudhope, D.: Enhancing social tagging with automated keywords from the Dewey Decimal Classification (2014) 0.01
    0.00880801 = product of:
      0.02642403 = sum of:
        0.02642403 = product of:
          0.05284806 = sum of:
            0.05284806 = weight(_text_:methodology in 2918) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05284806 = score(doc=2918,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.21236731 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047143444 = queryNorm
                0.24885213 = fieldWeight in 2918, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2918)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to explore the potential of applying the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) as an established knowledge organization system (KOS) for enhancing social tagging, with the ultimate purpose of improving subject indexing and information retrieval. Design/methodology/approach - Over 11.000 Intute metadata records in politics were used. Totally, 28 politics students were each given four tasks, in which a total of 60 resources were tagged in two different configurations, one with uncontrolled social tags only and another with uncontrolled social tags as well as suggestions from a controlled vocabulary. The controlled vocabulary was DDC comprising also mappings from the Library of Congress Subject Headings. Findings - The results demonstrate the importance of controlled vocabulary suggestions for indexing and retrieval: to help produce ideas of which tags to use, to make it easier to find focus for the tagging, to ensure consistency and to increase the number of access points in retrieval. The value and usefulness of the suggestions proved to be dependent on the quality of the suggestions, both as to conceptual relevance to the user and as to appropriateness of the terminology. Originality/value - No research has investigated the enhancement of social tagging with suggestions from the DDC, an established KOS, in a user trial, comparing social tagging only and social tagging enhanced with the suggestions. This paper is a final reflection on all aspects of the study.
  20. Villaespesa, E.; Crider, S.: ¬A critical comparison analysis between human and machine-generated tags for the Metropolitan Museum of Art's collection (2021) 0.01
    0.00880801 = product of:
      0.02642403 = sum of:
        0.02642403 = product of:
          0.05284806 = sum of:
            0.05284806 = weight(_text_:methodology in 341) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05284806 = score(doc=341,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.21236731 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047143444 = queryNorm
                0.24885213 = fieldWeight in 341, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=341)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose Based on the highlights of The Metropolitan Museum of Art's collection, the purpose of this paper is to examine the similarities and differences between the subject keywords tags assigned by the museum and those produced by three computer vision systems. Design/methodology/approach This paper uses computer vision tools to generate the data and the Getty Research Institute's Art and Architecture Thesaurus (AAT) to compare the subject keyword tags. Findings This paper finds that there are clear opportunities to use computer vision technologies to automatically generate tags that expand the terms used by the museum. This brings a new perspective to the collection that is different from the traditional art historical one. However, the study also surfaces challenges about the accuracy and lack of context within the computer vision results. Practical implications This finding has important implications on how these machine-generated tags complement the current taxonomies and vocabularies inputted in the collection database. In consequence, the museum needs to consider the selection process for choosing which computer vision system to apply to their collection. Furthermore, they also need to think critically about the kind of tags they wish to use, such as colors, materials or objects. Originality/value The study results add to the rapidly evolving field of computer vision within the art information context and provide recommendations of aspects to consider before selecting and implementing these technologies.

Years

Languages

  • e 26
  • d 15
  • ru 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 39
  • x 2
  • el 1
  • m 1
  • More… Less…