-
McKiernan, G.: Automated categorisation of Web resources : a profile of selected projects, research, products, and services (1996)
0.01
0.014605265 = product of:
0.02921053 = sum of:
0.02921053 = product of:
0.05842106 = sum of:
0.05842106 = weight(_text_:classification in 2533) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05842106 = score(doc=2533,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.05213454 = queryNorm
0.35186368 = fieldWeight in 2533, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2533)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Profiles several representative current efforts that apply established as well as more innovative methods of automated classification, organization or other method of categorisation of WWW resources
-
Smiraglia, R.P.; Cai, X.: Tracking the evolution of clustering, machine learning, automatic indexing and automatic classification in knowledge organization (2017)
0.01
0.014605265 = product of:
0.02921053 = sum of:
0.02921053 = product of:
0.05842106 = sum of:
0.05842106 = weight(_text_:classification in 3627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05842106 = score(doc=3627,freq=8.0), product of:
0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.05213454 = queryNorm
0.35186368 = fieldWeight in 3627, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3627)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- A very important extension of the traditional domain of knowledge organization (KO) arises from attempts to incorporate techniques devised in the computer science domain for automatic concept extraction and for grouping, categorizing, clustering and otherwise organizing knowledge using mechanical means. Four specific terms have emerged to identify the most prevalent techniques: machine learning, clustering, automatic indexing, and automatic classification. Our study presents three domain analytical case analyses in search of answers. The first case relies on citations located using the ISKO-supported "Knowledge Organization Bibliography." The second case relies on works in both Web of Science and SCOPUS. Case three applies co-word analysis and citation analysis to the contents of the papers in the present special issue. We observe scholars involved in "clustering" and "automatic classification" who share common thematic emphases. But we have found no coherence, no common activity and no social semantics. We have not found a research front, or a common teleology within the KO domain. We also have found a lively group of authors who have succeeded in submitting papers to this special issue, and their work quite interestingly aligns with the case studies we report. There is an emphasis on KO for information retrieval; there is much work on clustering (which involves conceptual points within texts) and automatic classification (which involves semantic groupings at the meta-document level).
-
Koch, T.: Experiments with automatic classification of WAIS databases and indexing of WWW : some results from the Nordic WAIS/WWW project (1994)
0.01
0.014458476 = product of:
0.028916951 = sum of:
0.028916951 = product of:
0.057833903 = sum of:
0.057833903 = weight(_text_:classification in 7209) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.057833903 = score(doc=7209,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.05213454 = queryNorm
0.34832728 = fieldWeight in 7209, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7209)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The Nordic WAIS/WWW project sponsored by NORDINFO is a joint project between Lund University Library and the National Technological Library of Denmark. It aims to improve the existing networked information discovery and retrieval tools Wide Area Information System (WAIS) and World Wide Web (WWW), and to move towards unifying WWW and WAIS. Details current results focusing on the WAIS side of the project. Describes research into automatic indexing and classification of WAIS sources, development of an orientation tool for WAIS, and development of a WAIS index of WWW resources
-
Vilares, D.; Alonso, M.A.; Gómez-Rodríguez, C.: On the usefulness of lexical and syntactic processing in polarity classification of Twitter messages (2015)
0.01
0.012648531 = product of:
0.025297062 = sum of:
0.025297062 = product of:
0.050594125 = sum of:
0.050594125 = weight(_text_:classification in 2161) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050594125 = score(doc=2161,freq=6.0), product of:
0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.05213454 = queryNorm
0.3047229 = fieldWeight in 2161, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2161)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Millions of micro texts are published every day on Twitter. Identifying the sentiment present in them can be helpful for measuring the frame of mind of the public, their satisfaction with respect to a product, or their support of a social event. In this context, polarity classification is a subfield of sentiment analysis focused on determining whether the content of a text is objective or subjective, and in the latter case, if it conveys a positive or a negative opinion. Most polarity detection techniques tend to take into account individual terms in the text and even some degree of linguistic knowledge, but they do not usually consider syntactic relations between words. This article explores how relating lexical, syntactic, and psychometric information can be helpful to perform polarity classification on Spanish tweets. We provide an evaluation for both shallow and deep linguistic perspectives. Empirical results show an improved performance of syntactic approaches over pure lexical models when using large training sets to create a classifier, but this tendency is reversed when small training collections are used.
-
Kasprzik, A.: Automatisierte und semiautomatisierte Klassifizierung : eine Analyse aktueller Projekte (2014)
0.01
0.00876316 = product of:
0.01752632 = sum of:
0.01752632 = product of:
0.03505264 = sum of:
0.03505264 = weight(_text_:classification in 2470) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03505264 = score(doc=2470,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.05213454 = queryNorm
0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 2470, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2470)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Das sprunghafte Anwachsen der Menge digital verfügbarer Dokumente gepaart mit dem Zeit- und Personalmangel an wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken legt den Einsatz von halb- oder vollautomatischen Verfahren für die verbale und klassifikatorische Inhaltserschließung nahe. Nach einer kurzen allgemeinen Einführung in die gängige Methodik beleuchtet dieser Artikel eine Reihe von Projekten zur automatisierten Klassifizierung aus dem Zeitraum 2007-2012 und aus dem deutschsprachigen Raum. Ein Großteil der vorgestellten Projekte verwendet Methoden des Maschinellen Lernens aus der Künstlichen Intelligenz, arbeitet meist mit angepassten Versionen einer kommerziellen Software und bezieht sich in der Regel auf die Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC). Als Datengrundlage dienen Metadatensätze, Abstracs, Inhaltsverzeichnisse und Volltexte in diversen Datenformaten. Die abschließende Analyse enthält eine Anordnung der Projekte nach einer Reihe von verschiedenen Kriterien und eine Zusammenfassung der aktuellen Lage und der größten Herausfordungen für automatisierte Klassifizierungsverfahren.
-
Golub, K.; Soergel, D.; Buchanan, G.; Tudhope, D.; Lykke, M.; Hiom, D.: ¬A framework for evaluating automatic indexing or classification in the context of retrieval (2016)
0.01
0.0073026326 = product of:
0.014605265 = sum of:
0.014605265 = product of:
0.02921053 = sum of:
0.02921053 = weight(_text_:classification in 3311) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02921053 = score(doc=3311,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.05213454 = queryNorm
0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 3311, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3311)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
