Search (34 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × theme_ss:"Begriffstheorie"
  1. Axelos, C.; Flasch, K.; Schepers, H.; Kuhlen, R.; Romberg, R.; Zimmermann, R.: Allgemeines/Besonderes (1971-2007) 0.07
    0.072674096 = product of:
      0.36337048 = sum of:
        0.36337048 = weight(_text_:2f in 4031) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.36337048 = score(doc=4031,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.391866 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046221454 = queryNorm
            0.92728245 = fieldWeight in 4031, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4031)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Footnote
    DOI: 10.24894/HWPh.5033. Vgl. unter: https://www.schwabeonline.ch/schwabe-xaveropp/elibrary/start.xav#__elibrary__%2F%2F*%5B%40attr_id%3D%27verw.allgemeinesbesonderes%27%5D__1515856414979.
  2. Working with conceptual structures : contributions to ICCS 2000. 8th International Conference on Conceptual Structures: Logical, Linguistic, and Computational Issues. Darmstadt, August 14-18, 2000 (2000) 0.04
    0.03864774 = product of:
      0.0644129 = sum of:
        0.035089146 = weight(_text_:wide in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035089146 = score(doc=5089,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20479609 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046221454 = queryNorm
            0.171337 = fieldWeight in 5089, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5089)
        0.019036483 = weight(_text_:web in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019036483 = score(doc=5089,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1508442 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046221454 = queryNorm
            0.12619963 = fieldWeight in 5089, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5089)
        0.010287272 = product of:
          0.020574544 = sum of:
            0.020574544 = weight(_text_:research in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.020574544 = score(doc=5089,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.13186905 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046221454 = queryNorm
                0.15602253 = fieldWeight in 5089, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5089)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6 = coord(3/5)
    
    Abstract
    The 8th International Conference on Conceptual Structures - Logical, Linguistic, and Computational Issues (ICCS 2000) brings together a wide range of researchers and practitioners working with conceptual structures. During the last few years, the ICCS conference series has considerably widened its scope on different kinds of conceptual structures, stimulating research across domain boundaries. We hope that this stimulation is further enhanced by ICCS 2000 joining the long tradition of conferences in Darmstadt with extensive, lively discussions. This volume consists of contributions presented at ICCS 2000, complementing the volume "Conceptual Structures: Logical, Linguistic, and Computational Issues" (B. Ganter, G.W. Mineau (Eds.), LNAI 1867, Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg 2000). It contains submissions reviewed by the program committee, and position papers. We wish to express our appreciation to all the authors of submitted papers, to the general chair, the program chair, the editorial board, the program committee, and to the additional reviewers for making ICCS 2000 a valuable contribution in the knowledge processing research field. Special thanks go to the local organizers for making the conference an enjoyable and inspiring event. We are grateful to Darmstadt University of Technology, the Ernst Schröder Center for Conceptual Knowledge Processing, the Center for Interdisciplinary Studies in Technology, the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Land Hessen, and NaviCon GmbH for their generous support
    Content
    Concepts & Language: Knowledge organization by procedures of natural language processing. A case study using the method GABEK (J. Zelger, J. Gadner) - Computer aided narrative analysis using conceptual graphs (H. Schärfe, P. 0hrstrom) - Pragmatic representation of argumentative text: a challenge for the conceptual graph approach (H. Irandoust, B. Moulin) - Conceptual graphs as a knowledge representation core in a complex language learning environment (G. Angelova, A. Nenkova, S. Boycheva, T. Nikolov) - Conceptual Modeling and Ontologies: Relationships and actions in conceptual categories (Ch. Landauer, K.L. Bellman) - Concept approximations for formal concept analysis (J. Saquer, J.S. Deogun) - Faceted information representation (U. Priß) - Simple concept graphs with universal quantifiers (J. Tappe) - A framework for comparing methods for using or reusing multiple ontologies in an application (J. van ZyI, D. Corbett) - Designing task/method knowledge-based systems with conceptual graphs (M. Leclère, F.Trichet, Ch. Choquet) - A logical ontology (J. Farkas, J. Sarbo) - Algorithms and Tools: Fast concept analysis (Ch. Lindig) - A framework for conceptual graph unification (D. Corbett) - Visual CP representation of knowledge (H.D. Pfeiffer, R.T. Hartley) - Maximal isojoin for representing software textual specifications and detecting semantic anomalies (Th. Charnois) - Troika: using grids, lattices and graphs in knowledge acquisition (H.S. Delugach, B.E. Lampkin) - Open world theorem prover for conceptual graphs (J.E. Heaton, P. Kocura) - NetCare: a practical conceptual graphs software tool (S. Polovina, D. Strang) - CGWorld - a web based workbench for conceptual graphs management and applications (P. Dobrev, K. Toutanova) - Position papers: The edition project: Peirce's existential graphs (R. Mülller) - Mining association rules using formal concept analysis (N. Pasquier) - Contextual logic summary (R Wille) - Information channels and conceptual scaling (K.E. Wolff) - Spatial concepts - a rule exploration (S. Rudolph) - The TEXT-TO-ONTO learning environment (A. Mädche, St. Staab) - Controlling the semantics of metadata on audio-visual documents using ontologies (Th. Dechilly, B. Bachimont) - Building the ontological foundations of a terminology from natural language to conceptual graphs with Ribosome, a knowledge extraction system (Ch. Jacquelinet, A. Burgun) - CharGer: some lessons learned and new directions (H.S. Delugach) - Knowledge management using conceptual graphs (W.K. Pun)
  3. Khoo, C.; Chan, S.; Niu, Y.: ¬The many facets of the cause-effect relation (2002) 0.01
    0.012030563 = product of:
      0.060152818 = sum of:
        0.060152818 = weight(_text_:wide in 1192) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.060152818 = score(doc=1192,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20479609 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046221454 = queryNorm
            0.29372054 = fieldWeight in 1192, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1192)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    This chapter presents a broad survey of the cause-effect relation, with particular emphasis an how the relation is expressed in text. Philosophers have been grappling with the concept of causation for centuries. Researchers in social psychology have found that the human mind has a very complex mechanism for identifying and attributing the cause for an event. Inferring cause-effect relations between events and statements has also been found to be an important part of reading and text comprehension, especially for narrative text. Though many of the cause-effect relations in text are implied and have to be inferred by the reader, there is also a wide variety of linguistic expressions for explicitly indicating cause and effect. In addition, it has been found that certain words have "causal valence"-they bias the reader to attribute cause in certain ways. Cause-effect relations can also be divided into several different types.
  4. Olson, H.A.: How we construct subjects : a feminist analysis (2007) 0.01
    0.010419055 = product of:
      0.052095275 = sum of:
        0.052095275 = sum of:
          0.020783428 = weight(_text_:research in 5588) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.020783428 = score(doc=5588,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.13186905 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046221454 = queryNorm
              0.15760657 = fieldWeight in 5588, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5588)
          0.031311847 = weight(_text_:22 in 5588) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.031311847 = score(doc=5588,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16185966 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046221454 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5588, 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=5588)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    To organize information, librarians create structures. These structures grow from a logic that goes back at least as far as Aristotle. It is the basis of classification as we practice it, and thesauri and subject headings have developed from it. Feminist critiques of logic suggest that logic is gendered in nature. This article will explore how these critiques play out in contemporary standards for the organization of information. Our widely used classification schemes embody principles such as hierarchical force that conform to traditional/Aristotelian logic. Our subject heading strings follow a linear path of subdivision. Our thesauri break down subjects into discrete concepts. In thesauri and subject heading lists we privilege hierarchical relationships, reflected in the syndetic structure of broader and narrower terms, over all other relationships. Are our classificatory and syndetic structures gendered? Are there other options? Carol Gilligan's In a Different Voice (1982), Women's Ways of Knowing (Belenky, Clinchy, Goldberger, & Tarule, 1986), and more recent related research suggest a different type of structure for women's knowledge grounded in "connected knowing." This article explores current and potential elements of connected knowing in subject access with a focus on the relationships, both paradigmatic and syntagmatic, between concepts.
    Date
    11.12.2019 19:00:22
  5. Barsalou, L.W.: Frames, concepts, and conceptual fields (1992) 0.01
    0.0100254705 = product of:
      0.05012735 = sum of:
        0.05012735 = weight(_text_:wide in 3217) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05012735 = score(doc=3217,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20479609 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046221454 = queryNorm
            0.24476713 = fieldWeight in 3217, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3217)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    In this chapter I propose that frames provide the fundamental representation of knowledge in human cognition. In the first section, I raise problems with the feature list representations often found in theories of knowledge, and I sketch the solutions that frames provide to them. In the second section, I examine the three fundamental concepts of frames: attribute-value sets, structural invariants, and constraints. Because frames also represents the attributes, values, structural invariants, and constraints within a frame, the mechanism that constructs frames builds them recursively. The frame theory I propose borrows heavily from previous frame theories, although its collection of representational components is somewhat unique. Furthermore, frame theorists generally assume that frames are rigid configurations of independent attributes, whereas I propose that frames are dynamic relational structures whose form is flexible and context dependent. In the third section, I illustrate how frames support a wide variety of representational tasks central to conceptual processing in natural and artificial intelligence. Frames can represent exemplars and propositions, prototypes and membership, subordinates and taxonomies. Frames can also represent conceptual combinations, event sequences, rules, and plans. In the fourth section, I show how frames define the extent of conceptual fields and how they provide a powerful productive mechanism for generating specific concepts within a field.
  6. Dahlberg, I.: ¬Die gegenstandsbezogene, analytische Begriffstheorie und ihre Definitionsarten (1987) 0.01
    0.008767317 = product of:
      0.043836582 = sum of:
        0.043836582 = product of:
          0.087673165 = sum of:
            0.087673165 = weight(_text_:22 in 880) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.087673165 = score(doc=880,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16185966 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046221454 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 880, 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=880)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Pages
    S.9-22
  7. Wüster, E.: Begriffs- und Themaklassifikation : Unterschiede in ihrem Wesen und in ihrer Anwendung (1971) 0.01
    0.007514843 = product of:
      0.037574213 = sum of:
        0.037574213 = product of:
          0.075148426 = sum of:
            0.075148426 = weight(_text_:22 in 3904) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.075148426 = score(doc=3904,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16185966 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046221454 = queryNorm
                0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3904, 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=3904)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Source
    Nachrichten für Dokumentation. 22(1971) H.3, S.98-104 (T.1); H.4, S.143-150 (T.2)
  8. Bivins, K.T.: Concept formation : the evidence from experimental psychology and linguistics and its relationship to information science (1980) 0.01
    0.007054129 = product of:
      0.035270646 = sum of:
        0.035270646 = product of:
          0.07054129 = sum of:
            0.07054129 = weight(_text_:research in 1319) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07054129 = score(doc=1319,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.13186905 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046221454 = queryNorm
                0.5349344 = fieldWeight in 1319, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1319)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Source
    Theory and application of information research. Proc. of the 2nd Int. Research Forum on Information Science, 3.-6.8.1977, Copenhagen. Ed.: O. Harbo u. L. Kajberg
  9. Stock, W.: Begriffe und semantische Relationen in der Wissensrepräsentation (2009) 0.01
    0.006526794 = product of:
      0.032633968 = sum of:
        0.032633968 = weight(_text_:web in 3218) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032633968 = score(doc=3218,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1508442 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046221454 = queryNorm
            0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 3218, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3218)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    Begriffsorientiertes Information Retrieval bedarf einer informationswissenschaftlichen Theorie der Begriffe sowie der semantischen Relationen. Ein Begriff wird durch seine Intension und Extension sowie durch Definitionen bestimmt. Dem Problem der Vagheit begegnen wir durch die Einführung von Prototypen. Wichtige Definitionsarten sind die Begriffserklärung (nach Aristoteles) und die Definition über Familienähnlichkeiten (im Sinne Wittgensteins). Wir modellieren Begriffe als Frames (in der Version von Barsalou). Die zentrale paradigmatische Relation in Wissensordnungen ist die Hierarchie, die in verschiedene Arten zu gliedern ist: Hyponymie zerfällt in die Taxonomie und die einfache Hyponymie, Meronymie in eine ganze Reihe unterschiedlicher Teil-Ganzes-Beziehungen. Wichtig für praktische Anwendungen ist die Transitivität der jeweiligen Relation. Eine unspezifische Assoziationsrelation ist bei den angepeilten Anwendungen wenig hilfreich und wird durch ein Bündel von generalisierbaren und fachspezifischen Relationen ersetzt. Unser Ansatz fundiert neue Optionen der Anwendung von Wissensordnungen in der Informationspraxis neben ihrem "klassischen" Einsatz beim Information Retrieval: Erweiterung von Suchanfragen (Anwendung der semantischen Nähe), automatisches Schlussfolgern (Anwendung der terminologischen Logik in Vorbereitung eines semantischen Web) und automatische Berechnungen (bei Funktionalbegriffen mit numerischen Wertangaben).
  10. Alexander, P.A.; Schallert, D.L.; Hare, V.C.: Coming to terms : how researchers in learning and literacy talk about knowledge (1991) 0.01
    0.0058193593 = product of:
      0.029096797 = sum of:
        0.029096797 = product of:
          0.058193594 = sum of:
            0.058193594 = weight(_text_:research in 5673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.058193594 = score(doc=5673,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13186905 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046221454 = queryNorm
                0.44129837 = fieldWeight in 5673, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5673)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Source
    Review of educational research. 61(1991) no.3, S.315-343
  11. Sager, J.C.; Ndi-Kimbi, A.: ¬The conceptual structure of terminological definitions and their realisations : a report on research in progress (1995) 0.01
    0.0058193593 = product of:
      0.029096797 = sum of:
        0.029096797 = product of:
          0.058193594 = sum of:
            0.058193594 = weight(_text_:research in 7579) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.058193594 = score(doc=7579,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13186905 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046221454 = queryNorm
                0.44129837 = fieldWeight in 7579, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=7579)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
  12. Dahlberg, I.: Begriffsarbeit in der Wissensorganisation (2010) 0.01
    0.005009895 = product of:
      0.025049476 = sum of:
        0.025049476 = product of:
          0.050098952 = sum of:
            0.050098952 = weight(_text_:22 in 3726) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.050098952 = score(doc=3726,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16185966 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046221454 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3726, 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=3726)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Source
    Wissensspeicher in digitalen Räumen: Nachhaltigkeit - Verfügbarkeit - semantische Interoperabilität. Proceedings der 11. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation, Konstanz, 20. bis 22. Februar 2008. Hrsg.: J. Sieglerschmidt u. H.P.Ohly
  13. Dahlberg, I.: On the theory of the concept (1979) 0.00
    0.0049880226 = product of:
      0.024940113 = sum of:
        0.024940113 = product of:
          0.049880225 = sum of:
            0.049880225 = weight(_text_:research in 1615) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.049880225 = score(doc=1615,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13186905 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046221454 = queryNorm
                0.37825575 = fieldWeight in 1615, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1615)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Source
    Ordering systems for global information networks. Proc. of the 3rd Int. Study Conf. on Classification Research, Bombay 1975
  14. Svenonius, E.: Indexical contents (1982) 0.00
    0.0049880226 = product of:
      0.024940113 = sum of:
        0.024940113 = product of:
          0.049880225 = sum of:
            0.049880225 = weight(_text_:research in 27) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.049880225 = score(doc=27,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13186905 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046221454 = queryNorm
                0.37825575 = fieldWeight in 27, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=27)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Source
    Universal classification I: subject analysis and ordering systems. Proc. of the 4th Int. Study Conf. on Classification research, Augsburg, 28.6.-2.7.1982. Ed.: I. Dahlberg
  15. Storms, G.; VanMechelen, I.; DeBoeck, P.: Structural-analysis of the intension and extension of semantic concepts (1994) 0.00
    0.0043836585 = product of:
      0.021918291 = sum of:
        0.021918291 = product of:
          0.043836582 = sum of:
            0.043836582 = weight(_text_:22 in 2574) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.043836582 = score(doc=2574,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16185966 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046221454 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2574, 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=2574)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Date
    22. 7.2000 19:17:40
  16. Bauer, G.: ¬Die vielseitigen Anwendungsmöglichkeiten des Kategorienprinzips bei der Wissensorganisation (2006) 0.00
    0.0043836585 = product of:
      0.021918291 = sum of:
        0.021918291 = product of:
          0.043836582 = sum of:
            0.043836582 = weight(_text_:22 in 5710) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.043836582 = score(doc=5710,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16185966 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046221454 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5710, 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=5710)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Pages
    S.22-33
  17. Treude, L.: ¬Das Problem der Konzeptdefinition in der Wissensorganisation : über einen missglückten Versuch der Klärung (2013) 0.00
    0.0037574214 = product of:
      0.018787106 = sum of:
        0.018787106 = product of:
          0.037574213 = sum of:
            0.037574213 = weight(_text_:22 in 3060) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.037574213 = score(doc=3060,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16185966 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046221454 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3060, 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=3060)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Source
    LIBREAS: Library ideas. no.22, 2013, S.xx-xx
  18. Garcia Marco, F.J.; Esteban Navarro, M.A.: On some contributions of the cognitive sciences and epistemology to a theory of classification (1993) 0.00
    0.0035270646 = product of:
      0.017635323 = sum of:
        0.017635323 = product of:
          0.035270646 = sum of:
            0.035270646 = weight(_text_:research in 5876) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.035270646 = score(doc=5876,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.13186905 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046221454 = queryNorm
                0.2674672 = fieldWeight in 5876, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5876)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    Intended is first of all a preliminary review of the implications that the new approaches to the theory of classification, mainly from cognitive psychology and epistemology may have for information work and research. As a secondary topic the scientific relations existing among information science, epistemology and the cognitive sciences are discussed. Classification is seen as a central activity in all daily and scientific activities, and, of course, of knowledge organization in information services. There is a mutual implication between classification and conceptualization, as the former moves in a natural way to the latter and the best result elaborated for classification is the concept. Research in concept theory is a need for a theory of classification. In this direction it is of outstanding importance to integrate the achievements of 'natural concept formation theory' (NCFT) as an alternative approach to conceptualization different from the traditional one of logicians and problem solving researchers. In conclusion both approaches are seen as being complementary: the NCFT approach being closer to the user and the logical one being more suitable for experts, including 'expert systems'
  19. McCray, A.T.; Bodenreider, O.: ¬A conceptual framework for the biomedical domain (2002) 0.00
    0.0035270646 = product of:
      0.017635323 = sum of:
        0.017635323 = product of:
          0.035270646 = sum of:
            0.035270646 = weight(_text_:research in 1207) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.035270646 = score(doc=1207,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.13186905 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046221454 = queryNorm
                0.2674672 = fieldWeight in 1207, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1207)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    Specialized domains often come with an extensive terminology, suitable for storing and exchanging information, but not necessarily for knowledge processing. Knowledge structures such as semantic networks, or ontologies, are required to explore the semantics of a domain. The UMLS project at the National Library of Medicine is a research effort to develop knowledge-based resources for the biomedical domain. The Metathesaurus is a large body of knowledge that defines and inter-relates 730,000 biomedical concepts, and the Semantic Network defines the semantic principles that apply to this domain. This chapter presents these two knowledge sources and illustrates through a research study how they can collaborate to further structure the domain. The limits of the approach are discussed.
  20. Kageura, K.: Terminological semantics : an examination of 'concept' and 'meaning' in the study of terms (1995) 0.00
    0.0033253485 = product of:
      0.016626742 = sum of:
        0.016626742 = product of:
          0.033253483 = sum of:
            0.033253483 = weight(_text_:research in 4561) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.033253483 = score(doc=4561,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13186905 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046221454 = queryNorm
                0.2521705 = fieldWeight in 4561, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4561)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    The importance of 'concept' in the study of terms is recognized by most researchers in the field of terminological research. However, the theoretical status of 'concept' in the study of terms has not been clarified so far. Against this background, the status of 'concept' in the study of terms is theoretically examined in comparison with the status of 'meaning' in the semantic study of general languages. Sketches a possible scheme by which 'concept' and 'meaning' are properly plyced in the theoretical study of terms