Search (16 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Automatisches Abstracting"
  1. Wu, Y.-f.B.; Li, Q.; Bot, R.S.; Chen, X.: Finding nuggets in documents : a machine learning approach (2006) 0.09
    0.09286608 = product of:
      0.13929911 = sum of:
        0.03354964 = weight(_text_:search in 5290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03354964 = score(doc=5290,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.19200584 = fieldWeight in 5290, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5290)
        0.10574947 = sum of:
          0.07169304 = weight(_text_:engines in 5290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.07169304 = score(doc=5290,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.25542772 = queryWeight, product of:
                5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
                0.05027291 = queryNorm
              0.2806784 = fieldWeight in 5290, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5290)
          0.03405643 = weight(_text_:22 in 5290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03405643 = score(doc=5290,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.05027291 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5290, 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=5290)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Document keyphrases provide a concise summary of a document's content, offering semantic metadata summarizing a document. They can be used in many applications related to knowledge management and text mining, such as automatic text summarization, development of search engines, document clustering, document classification, thesaurus construction, and browsing interfaces. Because only a small portion of documents have keyphrases assigned by authors, and it is time-consuming and costly to manually assign keyphrases to documents, it is necessary to develop an algorithm to automatically generate keyphrases for documents. This paper describes a Keyphrase Identification Program (KIP), which extracts document keyphrases by using prior positive samples of human identified phrases to assign weights to the candidate keyphrases. The logic of our algorithm is: The more keywords a candidate keyphrase contains and the more significant these keywords are, the more likely this candidate phrase is a keyphrase. KIP's learning function can enrich the glossary database by automatically adding new identified keyphrases to the database. KIP's personalization feature will let the user build a glossary database specifically suitable for the area of his/her interest. The evaluation results show that KIP's performance is better than the systems we compared to and that the learning function is effective.
    Date
    22. 7.2006 17:25:48
  2. Gomez, J.; Allen, K.; Matney, M.; Awopetu, T.; Shafer, S.: Experimenting with a machine generated annotations pipeline (2020) 0.02
    0.017893143 = product of:
      0.053679425 = sum of:
        0.053679425 = weight(_text_:search in 657) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.053679425 = score(doc=657,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.30720934 = fieldWeight in 657, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=657)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The UCLA Library reorganized its software developers into focused subteams with one, the Labs Team, dedicated to conducting experiments. In this article we describe our first attempt at conducting a software development experiment, in which we attempted to improve our digital library's search results with metadata from cloud-based image tagging services. We explore the findings and discuss the lessons learned from our first attempt at running an experiment.
  3. Moens, M.-F.; Uyttendaele, C.: Automatic text structuring and categorization as a first step in summarizing legal cases (1997) 0.01
    0.013419857 = product of:
      0.04025957 = sum of:
        0.04025957 = weight(_text_:search in 2256) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04025957 = score(doc=2256,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.230407 = fieldWeight in 2256, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2256)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The SALOMON system automatically summarizes Belgian criminal cases in order to improve access to the large number of existing and future court decisions. SALOMON extracts relevant text units from the case text to form a case summary. Such a case profile facilitates the rapid determination of the relevance of the case or may be employed in text search. In a first important abstracting step SALOMON performs an initial categorization of legal criminal cases and structures the case text into separate legally relevant and irrelevant components. A text grammar represented as a semantic network is used to automatically determine the category of the case and its components. Extracts from the case general data and identifies text portions relevant for further abstracting. Prior knowledge of the text structure and its indicative cues may support automatic abstracting. A text grammar is a promising form for representing the knowledge involved
  4. Moens, M.-F.; Uyttendaele, C.; Dumotier, J.: Abstracting of legal cases : the potential of clustering based on the selection of representative objects (1999) 0.01
    0.013419857 = product of:
      0.04025957 = sum of:
        0.04025957 = weight(_text_:search in 2944) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04025957 = score(doc=2944,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.230407 = fieldWeight in 2944, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2944)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The SALOMON project automatically summarizes Belgian criminal cases in order to improve access to the large number of existing and future court decisions. SALOMON extracts text units from the case text to form a case summary. Such a case summary facilitates the rapid determination of the relevance of the case or may be employed in text search. an important part of the research concerns the development of techniques for automatic recognition of representative text paragraphs (or sentences) in texts of unrestricted domains. these techniques are employed to eliminate redundant material in the case texts, and to identify informative text paragraphs which are relevant to include in the case summary. An evaluation of a test set of 700 criminal cases demonstrates that the algorithms have an application potential for automatic indexing, abstracting, and text linkage
  5. Hobson, S.P.; Dorr, B.J.; Monz, C.; Schwartz, R.: Task-based evaluation of text summarization using Relevance Prediction (2007) 0.01
    0.013419857 = product of:
      0.04025957 = sum of:
        0.04025957 = weight(_text_:search in 938) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04025957 = score(doc=938,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.230407 = fieldWeight in 938, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=938)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    This article introduces a new task-based evaluation measure called Relevance Prediction that is a more intuitive measure of an individual's performance on a real-world task than interannotator agreement. Relevance Prediction parallels what a user does in the real world task of browsing a set of documents using standard search tools, i.e., the user judges relevance based on a short summary and then that same user - not an independent user - decides whether to open (and judge) the corresponding document. This measure is shown to be a more reliable measure of task performance than LDC Agreement, a current gold-standard based measure used in the summarization evaluation community. Our goal is to provide a stable framework within which developers of new automatic measures may make stronger statistical statements about the effectiveness of their measures in predicting summary usefulness. We demonstrate - as a proof-of-concept methodology for automatic metric developers - that a current automatic evaluation measure has a better correlation with Relevance Prediction than with LDC Agreement and that the significance level for detected differences is higher for the former than for the latter.
  6. Jones, S.; Paynter, G.W.: Automatic extractionof document keyphrases for use in digital libraries : evaluations and applications (2002) 0.01
    0.011948841 = product of:
      0.03584652 = sum of:
        0.03584652 = product of:
          0.07169304 = sum of:
            0.07169304 = weight(_text_:engines in 601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07169304 = score(doc=601,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.25542772 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05027291 = queryNorm
                0.2806784 = fieldWeight in 601, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, 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.
  7. Ou, S.; Khoo, C.S.G.; Goh, D.H.: Multi-document summarization of news articles using an event-based framework (2006) 0.01
    0.011183213 = product of:
      0.03354964 = sum of:
        0.03354964 = weight(_text_:search in 657) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03354964 = score(doc=657,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.19200584 = fieldWeight in 657, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=657)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this research is to develop a method for automatic construction of multi-document summaries of sets of news articles that might be retrieved by a web search engine in response to a user query. Design/methodology/approach - Based on the cross-document discourse analysis, an event-based framework is proposed for integrating and organizing information extracted from different news articles. It has a hierarchical structure in which the summarized information is presented at the top level and more detailed information given at the lower levels. A tree-view interface was implemented for displaying a multi-document summary based on the framework. A preliminary user evaluation was performed by comparing the framework-based summaries against the sentence-based summaries. Findings - In a small evaluation, all the human subjects preferred the framework-based summaries to the sentence-based summaries. It indicates that the event-based framework is an effective way to summarize a set of news articles reporting an event or a series of relevant events. Research limitations/implications - Limited to event-based news articles only, not applicable to news critiques and other kinds of news articles. A summarization system based on the event-based framework is being implemented. Practical implications - Multi-document summarization of news articles can adopt the proposed event-based framework. Originality/value - An event-based framework for summarizing sets of news articles was developed and evaluated using a tree-view interface for displaying such summaries.
  8. Ou, S.; Khoo, S.G.; Goh, D.H.: Automatic multidocument summarization of research abstracts : design and user evaluation (2007) 0.01
    0.011183213 = product of:
      0.03354964 = sum of:
        0.03354964 = weight(_text_:search in 522) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03354964 = score(doc=522,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.19200584 = fieldWeight in 522, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=522)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The purpose of this study was to develop a method for automatic construction of multidocument summaries of sets of research abstracts that may be retrieved by a digital library or search engine in response to a user query. Sociology dissertation abstracts were selected as the sample domain in this study. A variable-based framework was proposed for integrating and organizing research concepts and relationships as well as research methods and contextual relations extracted from different dissertation abstracts. Based on the framework, a new summarization method was developed, which parses the discourse structure of abstracts, extracts research concepts and relationships, integrates the information across different abstracts, and organizes and presents them in a Web-based interface. The focus of this article is on the user evaluation that was performed to assess the overall quality and usefulness of the summaries. Two types of variable-based summaries generated using the summarization method-with or without the use of a taxonomy-were compared against a sentence-based summary that lists only the research-objective sentences extracted from each abstract and another sentence-based summary generated using the MEAD system that extracts important sentences. The evaluation results indicate that the majority of sociological researchers (70%) and general users (64%) preferred the variable-based summaries generated with the use of the taxonomy.
  9. Dunlavy, D.M.; O'Leary, D.P.; Conroy, J.M.; Schlesinger, J.D.: QCS: A system for querying, clustering and summarizing documents (2007) 0.01
    0.009559073 = product of:
      0.028677218 = sum of:
        0.028677218 = product of:
          0.057354435 = sum of:
            0.057354435 = weight(_text_:engines in 947) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.057354435 = score(doc=947,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.25542772 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05027291 = queryNorm
                0.22454272 = fieldWeight in 947, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=947)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Information retrieval systems consist of many complicated components. Research and development of such systems is often hampered by the difficulty in evaluating how each particular component would behave across multiple systems. We present a novel integrated information retrieval system-the Query, Cluster, Summarize (QCS) system-which is portable, modular, and permits experimentation with different instantiations of each of the constituent text analysis components. Most importantly, the combination of the three types of methods in the QCS design improves retrievals by providing users more focused information organized by topic. We demonstrate the improved performance by a series of experiments using standard test sets from the Document Understanding Conferences (DUC) as measured by the best known automatic metric for summarization system evaluation, ROUGE. Although the DUC data and evaluations were originally designed to test multidocument summarization, we developed a framework to extend it to the task of evaluation for each of the three components: query, clustering, and summarization. Under this framework, we then demonstrate that the QCS system (end-to-end) achieves performance as good as or better than the best summarization engines. Given a query, QCS retrieves relevant documents, separates the retrieved documents into topic clusters, and creates a single summary for each cluster. In the current implementation, Latent Semantic Indexing is used for retrieval, generalized spherical k-means is used for the document clustering, and a method coupling sentence "trimming" and a hidden Markov model, followed by a pivoted QR decomposition, is used to create a single extract summary for each cluster. The user interface is designed to provide access to detailed information in a compact and useful format. Our system demonstrates the feasibility of assembling an effective IR system from existing software libraries, the usefulness of the modularity of the design, and the value of this particular combination of modules.
  10. Goh, A.; Hui, S.C.: TES: a text extraction system (1996) 0.01
    0.009081715 = product of:
      0.027245143 = sum of:
        0.027245143 = product of:
          0.054490287 = sum of:
            0.054490287 = weight(_text_:22 in 6599) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.054490287 = score(doc=6599,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05027291 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 6599, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6599)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    26. 2.1997 10:22:43
  11. Robin, J.; McKeown, K.: Empirically designing and evaluating a new revision-based model for summary generation (1996) 0.01
    0.009081715 = product of:
      0.027245143 = sum of:
        0.027245143 = product of:
          0.054490287 = sum of:
            0.054490287 = weight(_text_:22 in 6751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.054490287 = score(doc=6751,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05027291 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 6751, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6751)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    6. 3.1997 16:22:15
  12. Jones, P.A.; Bradbeer, P.V.G.: Discovery of optimal weights in a concept selection system (1996) 0.01
    0.009081715 = product of:
      0.027245143 = sum of:
        0.027245143 = product of:
          0.054490287 = sum of:
            0.054490287 = weight(_text_:22 in 6974) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.054490287 = score(doc=6974,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05027291 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 6974, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6974)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Information retrieval: new systems and current research. Proceedings of the 16th Research Colloquium of the British Computer Society Information Retrieval Specialist Group, Drymen, Scotland, 22-23 Mar 94. Ed.: R. Leon
  13. Vanderwende, L.; Suzuki, H.; Brockett, J.M.; Nenkova, A.: Beyond SumBasic : task-focused summarization with sentence simplification and lexical expansion (2007) 0.01
    0.0068112854 = product of:
      0.020433856 = sum of:
        0.020433856 = product of:
          0.040867712 = sum of:
            0.040867712 = weight(_text_:22 in 948) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.040867712 = score(doc=948,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05027291 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 948, 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=948)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    In recent years, there has been increased interest in topic-focused multi-document summarization. In this task, automatic summaries are produced in response to a specific information request, or topic, stated by the user. The system we have designed to accomplish this task comprises four main components: a generic extractive summarization system, a topic-focusing component, sentence simplification, and lexical expansion of topic words. This paper details each of these components, together with experiments designed to quantify their individual contributions. We include an analysis of our results on two large datasets commonly used to evaluate task-focused summarization, the DUC2005 and DUC2006 datasets, using automatic metrics. Additionally, we include an analysis of our results on the DUC2006 task according to human evaluation metrics. In the human evaluation of system summaries compared to human summaries, i.e., the Pyramid method, our system ranked first out of 22 systems in terms of overall mean Pyramid score; and in the human evaluation of summary responsiveness to the topic, our system ranked third out of 35 systems.
  14. Kim, H.H.; Kim, Y.H.: Generic speech summarization of transcribed lecture videos : using tags and their semantic relations (2016) 0.01
    0.0056760716 = product of:
      0.017028214 = sum of:
        0.017028214 = product of:
          0.03405643 = sum of:
            0.03405643 = weight(_text_:22 in 2640) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03405643 = score(doc=2640,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05027291 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = 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)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2640)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    22. 1.2016 12:29:41
  15. Oh, H.; Nam, S.; Zhu, Y.: Structured abstract summarization of scientific articles : summarization using full-text section information (2023) 0.01
    0.0056760716 = product of:
      0.017028214 = sum of:
        0.017028214 = product of:
          0.03405643 = sum of:
            0.03405643 = weight(_text_:22 in 889) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03405643 = score(doc=889,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05027291 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 889, 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=889)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    22. 1.2023 18:57:12
  16. Jiang, Y.; Meng, R.; Huang, Y.; Lu, W.; Liu, J.: Generating keyphrases for readers : a controllable keyphrase generation framework (2023) 0.01
    0.0056760716 = product of:
      0.017028214 = sum of:
        0.017028214 = product of:
          0.03405643 = sum of:
            0.03405643 = weight(_text_:22 in 1012) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03405643 = score(doc=1012,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05027291 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1012, 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=1012)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    22. 6.2023 14:55:20