Search (160 results, page 1 of 8)

  • × type_ss:"r"
  1. Matthews, J.R.; Parker, M.R.: Local Area Networks and Wide Area Networks for libraries (1995) 0.07 
    0.073677264 = product of:
  0.18419316 = sum of:
    0.14035659 = weight(_text_:wide in 2656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14035659 = score(doc=2656,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20479609 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046221454 = queryNorm
        0.685348 = fieldWeight in 2656, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2656)
    0.043836582 = product of:
      0.087673165 = sum of:
        0.087673165 = weight(_text_:22 in 2656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.087673165 = score(doc=2656,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16185966 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046221454 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = 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)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2656)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Date
    30.11.1995 20:53:22
  2. McCormick, A.; Sutton, A.: Open learning and the Internet in public libraries (1998) 0.04 
    0.043466296 = product of:
  0.108665735 = sum of:
    0.046151403 = weight(_text_:web in 3685) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.046151403 = score(doc=3685,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1508442 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046221454 = queryNorm
        0.3059541 = fieldWeight in 3685, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3685)
    0.06251433 = sum of:
      0.024940113 = weight(_text_:research in 3685) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.024940113 = score(doc=3685,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13186905 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046221454 = queryNorm
          0.18912788 = fieldWeight in 3685, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3685)
      0.037574213 = weight(_text_:22 in 3685) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.037574213 = score(doc=3685,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16185966 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046221454 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3685, 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=3685)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Presents the findings of the South Ayrshire Libraries OPen Learning and the Internet project, Sep 1997 to Oct 1998. The objective was to demonstrate how open learning materials available on the Internet could be integrated with the provision of local open learning resources to provide an enhanced learning environment in public libraries. The main areas of concentration within the project were information skills support to public library users and the provision of WWW based independent materials to learners. The organisation and retrieval of Web based resources for local use was a major issue throughout the project. Recommends the adoption of Dublin Core metadata standards, the connection of databases of resources with searchable wen pages, and the development of thesauri of terms used to index the Web based resources locally. Sstaff training, and the new skills which will need to be developed, were identified as issues. Cost was also identified as a related issue, extending to issues such as access to open learning material and the Internet
    Date
    22. 5.1999 18:55:19
    Series
    British Library research and innovation report; 135
  3. Hodge, G.: Systems of knowledge organization for digital libraries : beyond traditional authority files (2000) 0.04 
    0.037114717 = product of:
  0.09278679 = sum of:
    0.060152818 = weight(_text_:wide in 4723) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.060152818 = score(doc=4723,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20479609 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046221454 = queryNorm
        0.29372054 = fieldWeight in 4723, 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=4723)
    0.032633968 = weight(_text_:web in 4723) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032633968 = score(doc=4723,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1508442 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046221454 = queryNorm
        0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 4723, 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=4723)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Access of digital materials continues to be an issue of great significance in the development of digital libraries. The proliferation of information in the networked digital environment poses challenges as well as opportunities. The author reports on a wide array of activities in the field. While this publication is not intended to be exhaustive, the reader will find, in a single work, an overview of systems of knowledge organization and pertinent examples of their application to digital materials
    Content
    (1) Knowledge organization systems: an overview; (2) Linking digital library resources to related resources; (3) Making resources accessible to other communities; (4) Planning and implementing knowledge organization systems in digital libraries; (5) The future of knowledge organization systems on the Web
  4. Knowledge graphs : new directions for knowledge representation on the Semantic Web (2019) 0.04 
    0.036646046 = product of:
  0.09161511 = sum of:
    0.076919004 = weight(_text_:web in 51) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.076919004 = score(doc=51,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.1508442 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046221454 = queryNorm
        0.5099235 = fieldWeight in 51, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=51)
    0.014696103 = product of:
      0.029392205 = sum of:
        0.029392205 = weight(_text_:research in 51) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029392205 = score(doc=51,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13186905 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046221454 = queryNorm
            0.22288933 = fieldWeight in 51, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=51)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The increasingly pervasive nature of the Web, expanding to devices and things in everydaylife, along with new trends in Artificial Intelligence call for new paradigms and a new look onKnowledge Representation and Processing at scale for the Semantic Web. The emerging, but stillto be concretely shaped concept of "Knowledge Graphs" provides an excellent unifying metaphorfor this current status of Semantic Web research. More than two decades of Semantic Webresearch provides a solid basis and a promising technology and standards stack to interlink data,ontologies and knowledge on the Web. However, neither are applications for Knowledge Graphsas such limited to Linked Open Data, nor are instantiations of Knowledge Graphs in enterprises- while often inspired by - limited to the core Semantic Web stack. This report documents theprogram and the outcomes of Dagstuhl Seminar 18371 "Knowledge Graphs: New Directions forKnowledge Representation on the Semantic Web", where a group of experts from academia andindustry discussed fundamental questions around these topics for a week in early September 2018,including the following: what are knowledge graphs? Which applications do we see to emerge?Which open research questions still need be addressed and which technology gaps still need tobe closed?
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  5. Report on the future of bibliographic control : draft for public comment (2007) 0.03 
    0.032142293 = product of:
  0.080355726 = sum of:
    0.05209388 = weight(_text_:wide in 1271) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05209388 = score(doc=1271,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.20479609 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046221454 = queryNorm
        0.2543695 = fieldWeight in 1271, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1271)
    0.028261848 = weight(_text_:web in 1271) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028261848 = score(doc=1271,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1508442 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046221454 = queryNorm
        0.18735787 = fieldWeight in 1271, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1271)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The future of bibliographic control will be collaborative, decentralized, international in scope, and Web-based. Its realization will occur in cooperation with the private sector, and with the active collaboration of library users. Data will be gathered from multiple sources; change will happen quickly; and bibliographic control will be dynamic, not static. The underlying technology that makes this future possible and necessary-the World Wide Web-is now almost two decades old. Libraries must continue the transition to this future without delay in order to retain their relevance as information providers. The Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control encourages the library community to take a thoughtful and coordinated approach to effecting significant changes in bibliographic control. Such an approach will call for leadership that is neither unitary nor centralized. Nor will the responsibility to provide such leadership fall solely to the Library of Congress (LC). That said, the Working Group recognizes that LC plays a unique role in the library community of the United States, and the directions that LC takes have great impact on all libraries. We also recognize that there are many other institutions and organizations that have the expertise and the capacity to play significant roles in the bibliographic future. Wherever possible, those institutions must step forward and take responsibility for assisting with navigating the transition and for playing appropriate ongoing roles after that transition is complete. To achieve the goals set out in this document, we must look beyond individual libraries to a system wide deployment of resources. We must realize efficiencies in order to be able to reallocate resources from certain lower-value components of the bibliographic control ecosystem into other higher-value components of that same ecosystem. The recommendations in this report are directed at a number of parties, indicated either by their common initialism (e.g., "LC" for Library of Congress, "PCC" for Program for Cooperative Cataloging) or by their general category (e.g., "Publishers," "National Libraries"). When the recommendation is addressed to "All," it is intended for the library community as a whole and its close collaborators.
    The Library of Congress must begin by prioritizing the recommendations that are directed in whole or in part at LC. Some define tasks that can be achieved immediately and with moderate effort; others will require analysis and planning that will have to be coordinated broadly and carefully. The Working Group has consciously not associated time frames with any of its recommendations. The recommendations fall into five general areas: 1. Increase the efficiency of bibliographic production for all libraries through increased cooperation and increased sharing of bibliographic records, and by maximizing the use of data produced throughout the entire "supply chain" for information resources. 2. Transfer effort into higher-value activity. In particular, expand the possibilities for knowledge creation by "exposing" rare and unique materials held by libraries that are currently hidden from view and, thus, underused. 3. Position our technology for the future by recognizing that the World Wide Web is both our technology platform and the appropriate platform for the delivery of our standards. Recognize that people are not the only users of the data we produce in the name of bibliographic control, but so too are machine applications that interact with those data in a variety of ways. 4. Position our community for the future by facilitating the incorporation of evaluative and other user-supplied information into our resource descriptions. Work to realize the potential of the FRBR framework for revealing and capitalizing on the various relationships that exist among information resources. 5. Strengthen the library profession through education and the development of metrics that will inform decision-making now and in the future. The Working Group intends what follows to serve as a broad blueprint for the Library of Congress and its colleagues in the library and information technology communities for extending and promoting access to information resources.
  6. Bredemeier, W.; Stock, M.; Stock, W.G.: ¬Die Branche elektronischer Geschäftsinformationen in Deutschland 2000/2001 (2001) 0.03 
    0.03092893 = product of:
  0.07732233 = sum of:
    0.05012735 = weight(_text_:wide in 621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05012735 = score(doc=621,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20479609 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046221454 = queryNorm
        0.24476713 = fieldWeight in 621, 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=621)
    0.027194975 = weight(_text_:web in 621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027194975 = score(doc=621,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1508442 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046221454 = queryNorm
        0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 621, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=621)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Content
    Der deutsche Markt für Elektronische Informationsdienste im Jahre 2000 - Ergebnisse einer Umsatzerhebung - Von Willi Bredemeier: - Abgesicherte Methodologie unter Berücksichtigung der Spezifika des EIS-Marktes und der aktuellen Entwicklung - teilweise Vergleichbarkeit der Daten ab 1989 - Weitgehende quantitative Markttransparenz, da der Leser die Aggregationen der Markt- und Teilmarktdaten aus einzelwirtschaftlichen Daten voll nachvollziehen kann - 93 zum Teil ausführliche Tabellen vorwiegend zu einzelnen Informationsanbietern unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Geschäftsjahre 2000 und 1999, unterteilt in die Bereiche Gesamtmarkt für Elektronische Informationsdienste, Datev, Realtime-Finanzinformationen, Nachrichtenagenturen, Kreditinformationen, Firmen- und Produktinformationen, weitere Wirtschaftsinformationen, Rechtsinformationen, Wissenschaftlich-technisch-medizinische Informationen - Intellectual Property, Konsumentendienste, Nachbarmärkte - Analyse aktueller Markttrends. Qualität professioneller Firmeninformationen im World Wide Web - Von Mechtild Stock und Wolfgang G. Stock: - Weiterführung der Qualitätsdiskussion und Entwicklung eines Systems von Qualitätskriterien für Informationsangebote, bezogen auf Firmeninformationen im Internet - "Qualitätspanel" für die Bereiche Bonitätsinformationen, Firmenkurzdossiers, Produktinformationen und Adressinformationen mit den Anbietern Bürgel, Creditreform, Dun & Bradstreet Deutschland, ABC online, ALLECO, Hoppenstedt Firmendatenbank, Who is Who in Multimedia, Kompass Deutschland, Sachon Industriedaten, Wer liefert was?, AZ Bertelsmann, Schober.com - Hochdifferenzierte Tests, die den Kunden Hilfen bei der Auswahl zwischen Angeboten und den Anbietern Hinweise auf Maßnahmen zu qualitativen Verbesserungen geben - Detaillierte Informationen über eingesetzte Systeme der Branchen- und Produktklassifikationen - Rankings der Firmeninformationsanbieter insgesamt sowie nach Datenbasen, Retrievalsystemen und Websites, Detailinformationen zu allen Qualitätsdimensionen
  7. Cleverdon, C.W.: ASLIB Cranfield Research Project : Report on the first stage of an investigation into the comparative efficiency of indexing systems (1960) 0.03 
    0.029137945 = product of:
  0.14568973 = sum of:
    0.14568973 = sum of:
      0.07054129 = weight(_text_:research in 6158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07054129 = score(doc=6158,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.13186905 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046221454 = queryNorm
          0.5349344 = fieldWeight in 6158, 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=6158)
      0.075148426 = weight(_text_:22 in 6158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.075148426 = score(doc=6158,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16185966 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046221454 = queryNorm
          0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6158, 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=6158)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Footnote
    Rez. in: College and research libraries 22(1961) no.3, S.228 (G. Jahoda)
  8. Harken, S.E.: Subject semantic interoperability. Report of the Subcommittee on Semantic Interoperability to the ALCTS Subject Analysis Committee : Final report (2006) 0.03 
    0.02592938 = product of:
  0.06482345 = sum of:
    0.05012735 = weight(_text_:wide in 906) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05012735 = score(doc=906,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20479609 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046221454 = queryNorm
        0.24476713 = fieldWeight in 906, 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=906)
    0.014696103 = product of:
      0.029392205 = sum of:
        0.029392205 = weight(_text_:research in 906) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029392205 = score(doc=906,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13186905 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046221454 = queryNorm
            0.22288933 = fieldWeight in 906, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=906)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The need for improved semantic in teroperability between and among vocabularies and knowledge organization schemes is undeniable and growing in importance. There is an ever-increasing need to create an environment by which even multiple portals could be accessed via subject metadata using software that is neutral and available ubiquitously or directly to the user, that could be copied by libraries for use in their own environment. In order to develop or improve a knowledge organization system including emerging options in semantic interoperability, scholars and practitioners need to be able to evaluate a wide variety of projects and stay current with the professional literature. Based on its findings, the Subcommittee concludes that the development of a successful subject semantic interoperability project is a long and difficult process. It requires a substantial investment of financial, human and computer resources. The Subcommittee recommends using the information and tools in this report and its appendices to assist in developing a successful project incorporating subject semantic interoperability. Finally the Subcommittee concludes that since this field of endeavor is still relatively young and immature, it is too early to generate a set of Best Practices that could be used in developing a successful project. We are past the theoretical and basic research phase and into the development phase. Even though there are some successful projects in full production, more projects need to reach maturity and much more research needs to be done.
  9. Carey, K.; Stringer, R.: ¬The power of nine : a preliminary investigation into navigation strategies for the new library with special reference to disabled people (2000) 0.03 
    0.025005732 = product of:
  0.12502865 = sum of:
    0.12502865 = sum of:
      0.049880225 = weight(_text_:research in 234) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049880225 = score(doc=234,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13186905 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046221454 = queryNorm
          0.37825575 = fieldWeight in 234, 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=234)
      0.075148426 = weight(_text_:22 in 234) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.075148426 = score(doc=234,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16185966 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046221454 = queryNorm
          0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 234, 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=234)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Pages
    22 S
    Series
    British Library: Library and Information Commission research report; 74
  10. Intellectual property and the National Information Infrastructure : a preliminary draft of the report of the Working Group on Intellectual Property Rights (1994) 0.02 
    0.02083811 = product of:
  0.10419055 = sum of:
    0.10419055 = sum of:
      0.041566856 = weight(_text_:research in 7306) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041566856 = score(doc=7306,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13186905 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046221454 = queryNorm
          0.31521314 = fieldWeight in 7306, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=7306)
      0.062623695 = weight(_text_:22 in 7306) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.062623695 = score(doc=7306,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16185966 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046221454 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 7306, 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=7306)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Date
    22. 7.1996 19:53:48
    Footnote
    Publishing research quarterly 12(1996) no.1, S.95
  11. Dellschaft, K.; Hachenberg, C.: Repräsentation von Wissensorganisationssystemen im Semantic Web : ein Best Practice Guide (2011) 0.02 
    0.01865187 = product of:
  0.09325934 = sum of:
    0.09325934 = weight(_text_:web in 4782) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09325934 = score(doc=4782,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.1508442 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046221454 = queryNorm
        0.6182494 = fieldWeight in 4782, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4782)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    In diesem Dokument sollen Begriffe, Prinzipien und Methoden vorgestellt werden, die sich als hilfreich bei der Erstellung von Semantic Web konformen Repräsentationen von Wissensorganisationssystemen (KOS) erwiesen haben, wie z. B. Thesauri und Klassifikationssysteme. Das Dokument richtet sich an Organisationen wie z. B. Bibliotheken, die ihre traditionellen Wissensorganisationssysteme im Rahmen des Semantic Web veröffentlichen wollen. Die in diesem Dokument beschriebenen Vorgehensweisen und Prinzipien sind nicht als normativ anzusehen. Sie sollen nur dabei helfen, von bisher gemachten Erfahrungen zu profitieren und einen leichteren Einstieg in die wichtigsten Begriffichkeiten und Techniken des Semantic Web zu bekommen. An vielen Stellen wird zudem auf weiterführende Literatur zum Thema und auf relevante Standards und Spezifikationen aus dem Bereich des Semantic Web hingewiesen.
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  12. Deokattey, S.; Sharma, S.B.K.; Kumar, G.R.; Bhanumurthy, K.: Knowledge organization research : an overview (2015) 0.02 
    0.016997134 = product of:
  0.08498567 = sum of:
    0.08498567 = sum of:
      0.041149087 = weight(_text_:research in 2092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041149087 = score(doc=2092,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.13186905 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046221454 = queryNorm
          0.31204507 = fieldWeight in 2092, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2092)
      0.043836582 = weight(_text_:22 in 2092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.043836582 = score(doc=2092,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16185966 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046221454 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2092, 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=2092)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Date
    22. 6.2015 16:13:38
    Imprint
    Mumbai : Bhabha Atomic Research Centre
  13. Calhoun, K.: ¬The changing nature of the catalog and its integration with other discovery tools : Prepared for the Library of Congress (2006) 0.02 
    0.016138097 = product of:
  0.040345244 = sum of:
    0.02175598 = weight(_text_:web in 5013) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02175598 = score(doc=5013,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1508442 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046221454 = queryNorm
        0.14422815 = fieldWeight in 5013, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5013)
    0.018589262 = product of:
      0.037178524 = sum of:
        0.037178524 = weight(_text_:research in 5013) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037178524 = score(doc=5013,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.13186905 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046221454 = queryNorm
            0.2819352 = fieldWeight in 5013, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5013)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The destabilizing influences of the Web, widespread ownership of personal computers, and rising computer literacy have created an era of discontinuous change in research libraries a time when the cumulated assets of the past do not guarantee future success. The library catalog is such an asset. Today, a large and growing number of students and scholars routinely bypass library catalogs in favor of other discovery tools, and the catalog represents a shrinking proportion of the universe of scholarly information. The catalog is in decline, its processes and structures are unsustainable, and change needs to be swift. At the same time, books and serials are not dead, and they are not yet digital. Notwithstanding widespread expansion of digitization projects, ubiquitous e-journals, and a market that seems poised to move to e-books, the role of catalog records in discovery and retrieval of the world's library collections seems likely to continue for at least a couple of decades and probably longer. This report, commissioned by the Library of Congress (LC), offers an analysis of the current situation, options for revitalizing research library catalogs, a feasibility assessment, a vision for change, and a blueprint for action. Library decision makers are the primary audience for this report, whose aim is to elicit support, dialogue, collaboration, and movement toward solutions. Readers from the business community, particularly those that directly serve libraries, may find the report helpful for defining research and development efforts. The same is true for readers from membership organizations such as OCLC Online Computer Library Center, the Research Libraries Group, the Association for Research Libraries, the Council on Library and Information Resources, the Coalition for Networked Information, and the Digital Library Federation. Library managers and practitioners from all functional groups are likely to take an interest in the interview findings and in specific actions laid out in the blueprint.
  14. Multilingual information management : current levels and future abilities. A report Commissioned by the US National Science Foundation and also delivered to the European Commission's Language Engineering Office and the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, April 1999 (1999) 0.01 
    0.014462064 = product of:
  0.03615516 = sum of:
    0.02175598 = weight(_text_:web in 6068) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02175598 = score(doc=6068,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1508442 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046221454 = queryNorm
        0.14422815 = fieldWeight in 6068, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=6068)
    0.014399181 = product of:
      0.028798362 = sum of:
        0.028798362 = weight(_text_:research in 6068) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028798362 = score(doc=6068,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.13186905 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046221454 = queryNorm
            0.21838607 = fieldWeight in 6068, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=6068)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Over the past 50 years, a variety of language-related capabilities has been developed in machine translation, information retrieval, speech recognition, text summarization, and so on. These applications rest upon a set of core techniques such as language modeling, information extraction, parsing, generation, and multimedia planning and integration; and they involve methods using statistics, rules, grammars, lexicons, ontologies, training techniques, and so on. It is a puzzling fact that although all of this work deals with language in some form or other, the major applications have each developed a separate research field. For example, there is no reason why speech recognition techniques involving n-grams and hidden Markov models could not have been used in machine translation 15 years earlier than they were, or why some of the lexical and semantic insights from the subarea called Computational Linguistics are still not used in information retrieval.
    This picture will rapidly change. The twin challenges of massive information overload via the web and ubiquitous computers present us with an unavoidable task: developing techniques to handle multilingual and multi-modal information robustly and efficiently, with as high quality performance as possible. The most effective way for us to address such a mammoth task, and to ensure that our various techniques and applications fit together, is to start talking across the artificial research boundaries. Extending the current technologies will require integrating the various capabilities into multi-functional and multi-lingual natural language systems. However, at this time there is no clear vision of how these technologies could or should be assembled into a coherent framework. What would be involved in connecting a speech recognition system to an information retrieval engine, and then using machine translation and summarization software to process the retrieved text? How can traditional parsing and generation be enhanced with statistical techniques? What would be the effect of carefully crafted lexicons on traditional information retrieval? At which points should machine translation be interleaved within information retrieval systems to enable multilingual processing?
  15. Riva, P.; Boeuf, P. le; Zumer, M.: IFLA Library Reference Model : a conceptual model for bibliographic information (2017) 0.01 
    0.014035659 = product of:
  0.07017829 = sum of:
    0.07017829 = weight(_text_:wide in 5179) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07017829 = score(doc=5179,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20479609 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046221454 = queryNorm
        0.342674 = fieldWeight in 5179, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5179)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Issue
    Revised after world-wide review. Endorsed by the IFLA Professional Committe.
  16. Hildebrand, M.; Ossenbruggen, J. van; Hardman, L.: ¬An analysis of search-based user interaction on the Semantic Web (2007) 0.01 
    0.013188863 = product of:
  0.065944314 = sum of:
    0.065944314 = weight(_text_:web in 59) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.065944314 = score(doc=59,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1508442 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046221454 = queryNorm
        0.43716836 = fieldWeight in 59, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=59)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Many Semantic Web applications provide access to their resources through text-based search queries, using explicit semantics to improve the search results. This paper provides an analysis of the current state of the art in semantic search, based on 35 existing systems. We identify different types of semantic search features that are used during query construction, the core search process, the presentation of the search results and user feedback on query and results. For each of these, we consider the functionality that the system provides and how this is made available through the user interface.
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  17. ELINOR : Electronic Library Project (1998) 0.01 
    0.012502866 = product of:
  0.06251433 = sum of:
    0.06251433 = sum of:
      0.024940113 = weight(_text_:research in 1404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.024940113 = score(doc=1404,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13186905 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046221454 = queryNorm
          0.18912788 = fieldWeight in 1404, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1404)
      0.037574213 = weight(_text_:22 in 1404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.037574213 = score(doc=1404,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16185966 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046221454 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1404, 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=1404)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Series
    British Library Research and Innovation Centre (BLRIC) report; 22
  18. Haffner, A.: Internationalisierung der GND durch das Semantic Web (2012) 0.01 
    0.012039729 = product of:
  0.060198646 = sum of:
    0.060198646 = weight(_text_:web in 318) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.060198646 = score(doc=318,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.1508442 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046221454 = queryNorm
        0.39907828 = fieldWeight in 318, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=318)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Seit Bestehen der Menschheit sammelt der Mensch Informationen, seit Bestehen des Internets stellt der Mensch Informationen ins Web, seit Bestehen des Semantic Webs sollen auch Maschinen in die Lage versetzt werden mit diesen Informationen umzugehen. Das Bibliothekswesen ist einer der Sammler. Seit Jahrhunderten werden Kataloge und Bibliografien sowie Inventarnachweise geführt. Mit der Aufgabe des Zettelkatalogs hin zum Onlinekatalog wurde es Benutzern plötzlich möglich in Beständen komfortabel zu suchen. Durch die Bereitstellung von Daten aus dem Bibliothekswesen im Semantic Web sollen nicht nur die eigenen Katalogsysteme Zugriff auf diese Informationen erhalten, sondern jede beliebige Anwendung, die auf das Web zugreifen kann. Darüber hinaus ist die Vorstellung, dass sich die im Web befindenden Daten - in sofern möglich - miteinander verlinken und zu einem gigantischen semantischen Netz werden, das als ein großer Datenpool verwendet werden kann. Die Voraussetzung hierfür ist wie beim Übergang zum Onlinekatalog die Aufbereitung der Daten in einem passenden Format. Normdaten dienen im Bibliothekswesen bereits dazu eine Vernetzung der unterschiedlichen Bestände zu erlauben. Bei der Erschließung eines Buches wird nicht bloß gesagt, dass jemand, der Thomas Mann heißt, der Autor ist - es wird eine Verknüpfung vom Katalogisat zu dem Thomas Mann erzeugt, der am 6. Juni 1875 in Lübeck geboren und am 12. August 1955 in Zürich verstorben ist. Der Vorteil von Normdateneintragungen ist, dass sie zum eindeutigen Nachweis der Verfasserschaft oder Mitwirkung an einem Werk beitragen. Auch stehen Normdateneintragungen bereits allen Bibliotheken für die Nachnutzung bereit - der Schritt ins Semantic Web wäre somit die Öffnung der Normdaten für alle denkbaren Nutzergruppen.
    Die Gemeinsame Normdatei (GND) ist seit April 2012 die Datei, die die im deutschsprachigen Bibliothekswesen verwendeten Normdaten enthält. Folglich muss auf Basis dieser Daten eine Repräsentation für die Darstellung als Linked Data im Semantic Web etabliert werden. Neben der eigentlichen Bereitstellung von GND-Daten im Semantic Web sollen die Daten mit bereits als Linked Data vorhandenen Datenbeständen (DBpedia, VIAF etc.) verknüpft und nach Möglichkeit kompatibel sein, wodurch die GND einem internationalen und spartenübergreifenden Publikum zugänglich gemacht wird. Dieses Dokument dient vor allem zur Beschreibung, wie die GND-Linked-Data-Repräsentation entstand und dem Weg zur Spezifikation einer eignen Ontologie. Hierfür werden nach einer kurzen Einführung in die GND die Grundprinzipien und wichtigsten Standards für die Veröffentlichung von Linked Data im Semantic Web vorgestellt, um darauf aufbauend existierende Vokabulare und Ontologien des Bibliothekswesens betrachten zu können. Anschließend folgt ein Exkurs in das generelle Vorgehen für die Bereitstellung von Linked Data, wobei die so oft zitierte Open World Assumption kritisch hinterfragt und damit verbundene Probleme insbesondere in Hinsicht Interoperabilität und Nachnutzbarkeit aufgedeckt werden. Um Probleme der Interoperabilität zu vermeiden, wird den Empfehlungen der Library Linked Data Incubator Group [LLD11] gefolgt.
    Im Kapitel Anwendungsprofile als Basis für die Ontologieentwicklung wird die Spezifikation von Dublin Core Anwendungsprofilen kritisch betrachtet, um auszumachen wann und in welcher Form sich ihre Verwendung bei dem Vorhaben Bereitstellung von Linked Data anbietet. In den nachfolgenden Abschnitten wird die GND-Ontologie, welche als Standard für die Serialisierung von GND-Daten im Semantic Web dient, samt Modellierungsentscheidungen näher vorgestellt. Dabei wird insbesondere der Technik des Vocabulary Alignment eine prominente Position eingeräumt, da darin ein entscheidender Mechanismus zur Steigerung der Interoperabilität und Nachnutzbarkeit gesehen wird. Auch wird sich mit der Verlinkung zu externen Datensets intensiv beschäftigt. Hierfür wurden ausgewählte Datenbestände hinsichtlich ihrer Qualität und Aktualität untersucht und Empfehlungen für die Implementierung innerhalb des GND-Datenbestandes gegeben. Abschließend werden eine Zusammenfassung und ein Ausblick auf weitere Schritte gegeben.
  19. Euzenat, J.; Bach, T.Le; Barrasa, J.; Bouquet, P.; Bo, J.De; Dieng, R.; Ehrig, M.; Hauswirth, M.; Jarrar, M.; Lara, R.; Maynard, D.; Napoli, A.; Stamou, G.; Stuckenschmidt, H.; Shvaiko, P.; Tessaris, S.; Acker, S. Van; Zaihrayeu, I.: State of the art on ontology alignment (2004) 0.01 
    0.0120277405 = product of:
  0.030069351 = sum of:
    0.02175598 = weight(_text_:web in 172) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02175598 = score(doc=172,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1508442 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046221454 = queryNorm
        0.14422815 = fieldWeight in 172, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=172)
    0.008313371 = product of:
      0.016626742 = sum of:
        0.016626742 = weight(_text_:research in 172) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016626742 = score(doc=172,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13186905 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046221454 = queryNorm
            0.12608525 = fieldWeight in 172, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=172)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    In this document we provide an overall view of the state of the art in ontology alignment. It is organised as a description of the need for ontology alignment, a presentation of the techniques currently in use for ontology alignment and a presentation of existing systems. The state of the art is not restricted to any discipline and consider as some form of ontology alignment the work made on schema matching within the database area for instance. Heterogeneity problems on the semantic web can be solved, for some of them, by aligning heterogeneous ontologies. This is illustrated through a number of use cases of ontology alignment. Aligning ontologies consists of providing the corresponding entities in these ontologies. This process is precisely defined in deliverable D2.2.1. The current deliverable presents the many techniques currently used for implementing this process. These techniques are classified along the many features that can be found in ontologies (labels, structures, instances, semantics). They resort to many different disciplines such as statistics, machine learning or data analysis. The alignment itself is obtained by combining these techniques towards a particular goal (obtaining an alignment with particular features, optimising some criterion). Several combination techniques are also presented. Finally, these techniques have been experimented in various systems for ontology alignment or schema matching. Several such systems are presented briefly in the last section and characterized by the above techniques they rely on. The conclusion is that many techniques are available for achieving ontology alignment and many systems have been developed based on these techniques. However, few comparisons and few integration is actually provided by these implementations. This deliverable serves as a basis for considering further action along these two lines. It provide a first inventory of what should be evaluated and suggests what evaluation criterion can be used.
    Content
    This document is part of a research project funded by the IST Programme of the Commission of the European Communities as project number IST-2004-507482.
  20. Babeu, A.: Building a "FRBR-inspired" catalog : the Perseus digital library experience (2008) 0.01 
    0.0120277405 = product of:
  0.030069351 = sum of:
    0.02175598 = weight(_text_:web in 2429) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02175598 = score(doc=2429,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1508442 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046221454 = queryNorm
        0.14422815 = fieldWeight in 2429, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2429)
    0.008313371 = product of:
      0.016626742 = sum of:
        0.016626742 = weight(_text_:research in 2429) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016626742 = score(doc=2429,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13186905 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046221454 = queryNorm
            0.12608525 = fieldWeight in 2429, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2429)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Our catalog should not be called a FRBR catalog perhaps, but instead a "FRBR Inspired catalog." As such our main goal has been "practical findability," we are seeking to support the four identified user tasks of the FRBR model, or to "Search, Identify, Select, and Obtain," rather than to create a FRBR catalog, per se. By encoding as much information as possible in the MODS and MADS records we have created, we believe that useful searching will be supported, that by using unique identifiers for works and authors users will be able to identify that the entity they have located is the desired one, that by encoding expression level information (such as the language of the work, the translator, etc) users will be able to select which expression of a work they are interested in, and that by supplying links to different online manifestations that users will be able to obtain access to a digital copy of a work. This white paper will discuss previous and current efforts by the Perseus Project in creating a FRBRized catalog, including the cataloging workflow, lessons learned during the process and will also seek to place this work in the larger context of research regarding FRBR, cataloging, Library 2.0 and the Semantic Web, and the growing importance of the FRBR model in the face of growing million book digital libraries.

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 138
  • d 18
  • nl 1
  • More… Less…

Types

Themes

Subjects

Classifications