Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

Tudhope, D.; Hodge, G.: Terminology registries (2007) 0.02

0.01750997 = product of:
  0.03501994 = sum of:
    0.03501994 = product of:
      0.07003988 = sum of:
        0.07003988 = weight(_text_:22 in 539) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07003988 = score(doc=539,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18102784 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051695216 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 539, 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=539)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date: 26.12.2011 13:22:07

Boteram, F.: Semantische Relationen in Dokumentationssprachen : vom Thesaurus zum semantischen Netz (2010) 0.01

0.012256979 = product of:
  0.024513958 = sum of:
    0.024513958 = product of:
      0.049027916 = sum of:
        0.049027916 = weight(_text_:22 in 4792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049027916 = score(doc=4792,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18102784 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051695216 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4792, 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=4792)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

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

Müller, T.: Wissensrepräsentation mit semantischen Netzen im Bereich Luftfahrt (2006) 0.01

0.008754985 = product of:
  0.01750997 = sum of:
    0.01750997 = product of:
      0.03501994 = sum of:
        0.03501994 = weight(_text_:22 in 1670) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03501994 = score(doc=1670,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18102784 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051695216 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1670, 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=1670)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date: 26. 9.2006 21:00:22

Fischer, D.H.: Converting a thesaurus to OWL : Notes on the paper "The National Cancer Institute's Thesaurus and Ontology" (2004) 0.01
```
0.008207256 = product of:
  0.016414512 = sum of:
    0.016414512 = product of:
      0.032829024 = sum of:
        0.032829024 = weight(_text_:2000 in 2362) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032829024 = score(doc=2362,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20949209 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051695216 = queryNorm
            0.1567077 = fieldWeight in 2362, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2362)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
```
Abstract

The paper analysed here is a kind of position paper. In order to get a better under-standing of the reported work I used the retrieval interface of the thesaurus, the so-called NCI DTS Browser accessible via the Web3, and I perused the cited OWL file4 with numerous "Find" and "Find next" string searches. In addition the file was im-ported into Protégé 2000, Release 2.0, with OWL Plugin 1.0 and Racer Plugin 1.7.14. At the end of the paper's introduction the authors say: "In the following sections, this paper will describe the terminology development process at NCI, and the issues associated with converting a description logic based nomenclature to a semantically rich OWL ontology." While I will not deal with the first part, i.e. the terminology development process at NCI, I do not see the thesaurus as a description logic based nomenclature, or its cur-rent state and conversion already result in a "rich" OWL ontology. What does "rich" mean here? According to my view there is a great quantity of concepts and links but a very poor description logic structure which enables inferences. And what does the fol-lowing really mean, which is said a few lines previously: "Although editors have defined a number of named ontologic relations to support the description-logic based structure of the Thesaurus, additional relation-ships are considered for inclusion as required to support dependent applications."

Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

Authors

Years

Languages

Types