Search (78 results, page 1 of 4)

0.095362306 = product of:
  0.14304346 = sum of:
    0.052338045 = weight(_text_:reference in 168) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.052338045 = score(doc=168,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.205834 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050593734 = queryNorm
        0.2542731 = fieldWeight in 168, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=168)
    0.09070542 = sum of:
      0.06328641 = weight(_text_:database in 168) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06328641 = score(doc=168,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.20452234 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.042444 = idf(docFreq=2109, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050593734 = queryNorm
          0.3094352 = fieldWeight in 168, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            4.042444 = idf(docFreq=2109, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=168)
      0.02741901 = weight(_text_:22 in 168) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02741901 = score(doc=168,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17717063 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050593734 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 168, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=168)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Ontologies are viewed as the silver bullet for many applications, but in open or evolving systems, different parties can adopt different ontologies. This increases heterogeneity problems rather than reducing heterogeneity. This book proposes ontology matching as a solution to the problem of semantic heterogeneity, offering researchers and practitioners a uniform framework of reference to currently available work. The techniques presented apply to database schema matching, catalog integration, XML schema matching and more. Ontologies tend to be found everywhere. They are viewed as the silver bullet for many applications, such as database integration, peer-to-peer systems, e-commerce, semantic web services, or social networks. However, in open or evolving systems, such as the semantic web, different parties would, in general, adopt different ontologies. Thus, merely using ontologies, like using XML, does not reduce heterogeneity: it just raises heterogeneity problems to a higher level. Euzenat and Shvaiko's book is devoted to ontology matching as a solution to the semantic heterogeneity problem faced by computer systems. Ontology matching aims at finding correspondences between semantically related entities of different ontologies. These correspondences may stand for equivalence as well as other relations, such as consequence, subsumption, or disjointness, between ontology entities. Many different matching solutions have been proposed so far from various viewpoints, e.g., databases, information systems, artificial intelligence. With Ontology Matching, researchers and practitioners will find a reference book which presents currently available work in a uniform framework. In particular, the work and the techniques presented in this book can equally be applied to database schema matching, catalog integration, XML schema matching and other related problems. The objectives of the book include presenting (i) the state of the art and (ii) the latest research results in ontology matching by providing a detailed account of matching techniques and matching systems in a systematic way from theoretical, practical and application perspectives.

Date

20. 6.2012 19:08:22

0.031249661 = product of:
  0.09374898 = sum of:
    0.09374898 = product of:
      0.28124693 = sum of:
        0.28124693 = weight(_text_:3a in 306) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.28124693 = score(doc=306,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.42893425 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050593734 = queryNorm
            0.65568775 = fieldWeight in 306, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=306)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Content

Vgl.: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5386707&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D5386707.

0.024672393 = product of:
  0.074017175 = sum of:
    0.074017175 = weight(_text_:reference in 4780) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.074017175 = score(doc=4780,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.205834 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050593734 = queryNorm
        0.35959643 = fieldWeight in 4780, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4780)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Within the frame of the methodological support of the CrissCross project and the research conducted in the Reseda project, a tiered model of semantic interoperability was developed. This correlates methods of establishing semantic interoperability and types of intersystem relations to search functionalities in retrieval scenarios. In this article the model is outlined and exemplified with reference to respective selective alignment projects.

0.022321185 = product of:
  0.06696355 = sum of:
    0.06696355 = product of:
      0.20089066 = sum of:
        0.20089066 = weight(_text_:3a in 1000) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.20089066 = score(doc=1000,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.42893425 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050593734 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 1000, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1000)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Content

Master thesis Master of Science (Library and Information Studies) (MSc), Universität Wien. Advisor: Christoph Steiner. Vgl.: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/371680244_Vergabe_von_DDC-Sachgruppen_mittels_eines_Schlagwort-Thesaurus. DOI: 10.25365/thesis.70030. Vgl. dazu die Präsentation unter: https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=0CAIQw7AJahcKEwjwoZzzytz_AhUAAAAAHQAAAAAQAg&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwiki.dnb.de%2Fdownload%2Fattachments%2F252121510%2FDA3%2520Workshop-Gabler.pdf%3Fversion%3D1%26modificationDate%3D1671093170000%26api%3Dv2&psig=AOvVaw0szwENK1or3HevgvIDOfjx&ust=1687719410889597&opi=89978449.

0.02180752 = product of:
  0.06542256 = sum of:
    0.06542256 = weight(_text_:reference in 2205) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06542256 = score(doc=2205,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.205834 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050593734 = queryNorm
        0.31784135 = fieldWeight in 2205, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2205)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The concept of Linked Data has been an emerging theme within the computing and digital heritage areas in recent years. The growth and scale of Linked Data has underlined the need for greater commonality in concept referencing, to avoid local redefinition and duplication of reference resources. Achieving domain-wide agreement on common vocabularies would be an unreasonable expectation; however, datasets often already have local vocabulary resources defined, and so the prospects for large-scale interoperability can be substantially improved by creating alignment links from these local vocabularies out to common external reference resources. The ARIADNE project is undertaking large-scale integration of archaeology dataset metadata records, to create a cross-searchable research repository resource. Key to enabling this cross search will be the 'subject' metadata originating from multiple data providers, containing terms from multiple multilingual controlled vocabularies. This paper discusses various aspects of vocabulary mapping. Experience from the previous SENESCHAL project in the publication of controlled vocabularies as Linked Open Data is discussed, emphasizing the importance of unique URI identifiers for vocabulary concepts. There is a need to align legacy indexing data to the uniquely defined concepts and examples are discussed of SENESCHAL data alignment work. A case study for the ARIADNE project presents work on mapping between vocabularies, based on the Getty Art and Architecture Thesaurus as a central hub and employing an interactive vocabulary mapping tool developed for the project, which generates SKOS mapping relationships in JSON and other formats. The potential use of such vocabulary mappings to assist cross search over archaeological datasets from different countries is illustrated in a pilot experiment. The results demonstrate the enhanced opportunities for interoperability and cross searching that the approach offers.

0.02158834 = product of:
  0.06476502 = sum of:
    0.06476502 = weight(_text_:reference in 604) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06476502 = score(doc=604,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.205834 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050593734 = queryNorm
        0.31464687 = fieldWeight in 604, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=604)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

iQvoc is a new open source SKOS-XL vocabulary management tool developed by the Federal Environment Agency, Germany, and innoQ Deutschland GmbH. Its immediate purpose is maintaining and publishing reference vocabularies in the upcoming Linked Data cloud of environmental information, but it may be easily adapted to host any SKOS- XL compliant vocabulary. iQvoc is implemented as a Ruby on Rails application running on top of JRuby - the Java implementation of the Ruby Programming Language. To increase the user experience when editing content, iQvoc uses heavily the JavaScript library jQuery.

0.02158834 = product of:
  0.06476502 = sum of:
    0.06476502 = weight(_text_:reference in 689) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06476502 = score(doc=689,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.205834 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050593734 = queryNorm
        0.31464687 = fieldWeight in 689, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=689)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Information exchange among many sources in Internet is more autonomous, dynamic and free. The situation drive difference view of concepts among sources. For example, word 'bank' has meaning as economic institution for economy domain, but for ecology domain it will be defined as slope of river or lake. In this paper, we will evaluate latent semantic and WordNet approach to calculate semantic similarity. The evaluation will be run for some concepts from different domain with reference by expert or human. Result of the evaluation can provide a contribution for mapping of concept, query rewriting, interoperability, etc.

0.018504292 = product of:
  0.055512875 = sum of:
    0.055512875 = weight(_text_:reference in 2224) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.055512875 = score(doc=2224,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.205834 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050593734 = queryNorm
        0.2696973 = fieldWeight in 2224, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2224)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This report analyzes the methodologies used in establishing interoperability among knowledge organization systems (KOS) such as controlled vocabularies and classification schemes that present the organized interpretation of knowledge structures. The development and trends of KOS are discussed with reference to the online era and the Internet era. Selected current projects and activities addressing KOS interoperability issues are reviewed in terms of the languages and structures involved. The methodological analysis encompasses both conventional and new methods that have proven to be widely accepted, including derivation/modeling, translation/adaptation, satellite and leaf node linking, direct mapping, co-occurrence mapping, switching, linking through a temporary union list, and linking through a thesaurus server protocol. Methods used in link storage and management, as weIl as common issues regarding mapping and methodological options, are also presented. It is concluded that interoperability of KOS is an unavoidable issue and process in today's networked environment. There have been and will be many multilingual products and services, with many involving various structured systems. Results from recent efforts are encouraging.

0.018504292 = product of:
  0.055512875 = sum of:
    0.055512875 = weight(_text_:reference in 4645) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.055512875 = score(doc=4645,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.205834 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050593734 = queryNorm
        0.2696973 = fieldWeight in 4645, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4645)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Evaluation of ontology alignments is in practice done in two ways: (1) assessing individual correspondences and (2) comparing the alignment to a reference alignment. However, this type of evaluation does not guarantee that an application which uses the alignment will perform well. In this paper, we contribute to the current ontology alignment evaluation practices by proposing two alternative evaluation methods that take into account some characteristics of a usage scenario without doing a full-fledged end-to-end evaluation. We compare different evaluation approaches in three case studies, focussing on methodological issues. Each case study considers an alignment between a different pair of ontologies, ranging from rich and well-structured to small and poorly structured. This enables us to conclude on the use of different evaluation approaches in different settings.

0.015994422 = product of:
  0.047983266 = sum of:
    0.047983266 = product of:
      0.09596653 = sum of:
        0.09596653 = weight(_text_:22 in 8365) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09596653 = score(doc=8365,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17717063 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050593734 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 8365, 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=8365)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 6.2015 16:08:38

0.015420245 = product of:
  0.046260733 = sum of:
    0.046260733 = weight(_text_:reference in 1171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.046260733 = score(doc=1171,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.205834 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050593734 = queryNorm
        0.22474778 = fieldWeight in 1171, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1171)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Amid the debates about whether folksonomies will supplant controlled vocabularies and whether the Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) and Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) system have outlived their usefulness, libraries, museums and other organizations continue to require efficient, effective access to controlled vocabularies for creating consistent metadata for their collections . In this article, we present an approach for using Web services to interact with controlled vocabularies. Services are implemented within a service-oriented architecture (SOA) framework. SOA is an approach to distributed computing where services are loosely coupled and discoverable on the network. A set of experimental services for controlled vocabularies is provided through the Microsoft Office (MS) Research task pane (a small window or sidebar that opens up next to Internet Explorer (IE) and other Microsoft Office applications). The research task pane is a built-in feature of IE when MS Office 2003 is loaded. The research pane enables a user to take advantage of a number of research and reference services accessible over the Internet. Web browsers, such as Mozilla Firefox and Opera, also provide sidebars which could be used to deliver similar, loosely-coupled Web services.

0.015420245 = product of:
  0.046260733 = sum of:
    0.046260733 = weight(_text_:reference in 4801) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.046260733 = score(doc=4801,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.205834 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050593734 = queryNorm
        0.22474778 = fieldWeight in 4801, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4801)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Ontology development is considered to be a useful approach to the design and implementation of interoperable systems. This literature review and commentary examines the current state of knowledge in this field with particular reference to processes involved in assuring epistemological adequacy. It takes the perspective of the information systems practitioner keen to adopt a systematic approach to in-house ontology design, taking into consideration previously published work. The study arises from author involvement in an integration/interoperability project on systems that support Scottish Common Housing Registers in which, ultimately, ontological modelling was not deployed. Issues concerning the agreement of meaning, and the implications for the creation of interoperable systems, are discussed. The extent to which those theories, methods and frameworks provide practitioners with a usable set of tools is explored, and examples of practical applications of ontological modelling are noted. The findings from the review of the literature demonstrate a number of difficulties faced by information systems practitioners keen to develop and deploy domain ontologies. A major problem is deciding which broad approach to take: to rely on automatic ontology construction techniques, or to rely on key words and domain experts to develop ontologies.

0.015420245 = product of:
  0.046260733 = sum of:
    0.046260733 = weight(_text_:reference in 125) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.046260733 = score(doc=125,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.205834 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050593734 = queryNorm
        0.22474778 = fieldWeight in 125, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=125)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This paper gives a comprehensive overview over the problem of Semantic Interoperability in the Cultural Heritage domain, with a particular focus on solutions centered around extensional, i.e., instance-based, ontology matching methods. It presents three typical scenarios requiring interoperability, one with homogenous collections, one with heterogeneous collections, and one with multi-lingual collection. It discusses two different ways to evaluate potential alignments, one based on the application of re-indexing, one using a reference alignment. To these scenarios we apply extensional matching with different similarity measures which gives interesting insights. Finally, we firmly position our work in the Cultural Heritage context through an extensive discussion of the relevance for, and issues related to this specific field. The findings are as unspectacular as expected but nevertheless important: the provided methods can really improve interoperability in a number of important cases, but they are not universal solutions to all related problems. This paper will provide a solid foundation for any future work on Semantic Interoperability in the Cultural Heritage domain, in particular for anybody intending to apply extensional methods.

0.015420245 = product of:
  0.046260733 = sum of:
    0.046260733 = weight(_text_:reference in 651) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.046260733 = score(doc=651,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.205834 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050593734 = queryNorm
        0.22474778 = fieldWeight in 651, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=651)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This paper describes recent work on registering Resource Description Framework (RDF) versions of the entities and relationships from the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) and Functional Requirements for Authority Data (FRAD) models developed by the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA). FRBR was developed several years before FRAD, and is under-developed in areas which FRAD was expected to cover; FRAD therefore makes significance reference to FRBR. Similarly, FRAD leaves a full treatment of subject authority data to the ongoing development of Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD) which was finalised during 2010. Although the FRBR Review Group is charged with consolidating all three models in due course, the RDF versions of FRBR, FRAD, and FRSAD are being created in separate namespaces, with a separate Web Ontology Language (OWL) ontology to connect the three models. The paper discusses interoperability issues arising from this work. Such issues include class definitions and sub-classes, reciprocal properties, and disjoint classes and properties. The paper discusses similar work on the International Standard Bibliographic Description (ISBD), also maintained by IFLA, and related issues arising from the RDF representation of the metadata element set of RDA: resource description and access, which is based on the FRBR and FRAD models. The work is ongoing, and the paper updates the original conference presentation to the end of October 2010.

0.015420245 = product of:
  0.046260733 = sum of:
    0.046260733 = weight(_text_:reference in 1371) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.046260733 = score(doc=1371,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.205834 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050593734 = queryNorm
        0.22474778 = fieldWeight in 1371, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1371)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Crosswalks between different vocabularies are an indispensable prerequisite for integrated, high-quality search scenarios in distributed data environments where more than one controlled vocabulary is in use. Offered through the web and linked with each other they act as a central link so that users can move back and forth between different online data sources. In the past, crosswalks between different thesauri have usually been developed manually. In the long run the intellectual updating of such crosswalks is expensive. An obvious solution would be to apply automatic matching procedures, such as the so-called ontology matching tools. On the basis of computer-generated correspondences between the Thesaurus for the Social Sciences (TSS) and the Thesaurus for Economics (STW), our contribution explores the trade-off between IT-assisted tools and procedures on the one hand and external quality evaluation by domain experts on the other hand. This paper presents techniques for semi-automatic development and maintenance of vocabulary crosswalks. The performance of multiple matching tools was first evaluated against a reference set of correct mappings, then the tools were used to generate new mappings. It was concluded that the ontology matching tools can be used effectively to speed up the work of domain experts. By optimizing the workflow, the method promises to facilitate sustained updating of high-quality vocabulary crosswalks.

0.015420245 = product of:
  0.046260733 = sum of:
    0.046260733 = weight(_text_:reference in 2895) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.046260733 = score(doc=2895,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.205834 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050593734 = queryNorm
        0.22474778 = fieldWeight in 2895, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2895)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The article presents a method for automatic semantic indexing of archaeological grey-literature reports using empirical (rule-based) Information Extraction techniques in combination with domain-specific knowledge organization systems. The semantic annotation system (OPTIMA) performs the tasks of Named Entity Recognition, Relation Extraction, Negation Detection, and Word-Sense Disambiguation using hand-crafted rules and terminological resources for associating contextual abstractions with classes of the standard ontology CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model (CRM) for cultural heritage and its archaeological extension, CRM-EH. Relation Extraction (RE) performance benefits from a syntactic-based definition of RE patterns derived from domain oriented corpus analysis. The evaluation also shows clear benefit in the use of assistive natural language processing (NLP) modules relating to Word-Sense Disambiguation, Negation Detection, and Noun Phrase Validation, together with controlled thesaurus expansion. The semantic indexing results demonstrate the capacity of rule-based Information Extraction techniques to deliver interoperable semantic abstractions (semantic annotations) with respect to the CIDOC CRM and archaeological thesauri. Major contributions include recognition of relevant entities using shallow parsing NLP techniques driven by a complimentary use of ontological and terminological domain resources and empirical derivation of context-driven RE rules for the recognition of semantic relationships from phrases of unstructured text.

0.0150713315 = product of:
  0.045213994 = sum of:
    0.045213994 = product of:
      0.09042799 = sum of:
        0.09042799 = weight(_text_:database in 1734) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09042799 = score(doc=1734,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.20452234 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.042444 = idf(docFreq=2109, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050593734 = queryNorm
            0.44214234 = fieldWeight in 1734, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.042444 = idf(docFreq=2109, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1734)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

BARTOC, http://bartoc.org, is a bibliographic database that provides metadata of as many Knowledge Organization Systems (KOS) as possible and offers a faceted, responsive web design search interface in 20 languages. With more than 1100 interdisciplinary items (Thesauri, Ontologies, Classifications, Glossaries, Controlled Vocabularies, Taxonomies) in 70 languages, BARTOC is the largest database of its kind, multilingual both by content and features, and will still be growing. Metadata are being enriched with DDC-numbers down to the third level, and subject headings from EuroVoc, the EU's multilingual thesaurus. BARTOC has been developed by the University Library of Basel, Switzerland, and continues in the tradition of library and information science to collect bibliographic records of controlled and structured vocabularies.

0.013709504 = product of:
  0.041128512 = sum of:
    0.041128512 = product of:
      0.082257025 = sum of:
        0.082257025 = weight(_text_:22 in 126) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.082257025 = score(doc=126,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17717063 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050593734 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 126, 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=126)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Content

Vortrag anlässlich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".

0.013709504 = product of:
  0.041128512 = sum of:
    0.041128512 = product of:
      0.082257025 = sum of:
        0.082257025 = weight(_text_:22 in 4786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.082257025 = score(doc=4786,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17717063 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050593734 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 4786, 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=4786)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 9.2008 19:30:41

0.0131846685 = product of:
  0.039554004 = sum of:
    0.039554004 = product of:
      0.07910801 = sum of:
        0.07910801 = weight(_text_:database in 3934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07910801 = score(doc=3934,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.20452234 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.042444 = idf(docFreq=2109, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050593734 = queryNorm
            0.38679397 = fieldWeight in 3934, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.042444 = idf(docFreq=2109, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3934)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This volume contains the lecture notes of the 13th Reasoning Web Summer School, RW 2017, held in London, UK, in July 2017. In 2017, the theme of the school was "Semantic Interoperability on the Web", which encompasses subjects such as data integration, open data management, reasoning over linked data, database to ontology mapping, query answering over ontologies, hybrid reasoning with rules and ontologies, and ontology-based dynamic systems. The papers of this volume focus on these topics and also address foundational reasoning techniques used in answer set programming and ontologies.

LCSH

Database management

Subject

Database management