Search (43 results, page 1 of 3)

  • × theme_ss:"Automatisches Klassifizieren"
  1. Yoon, Y.; Lee, C.; Lee, G.G.: ¬An effective procedure for constructing a hierarchical text classification system (2006) 0.10 
    0.09939035 = product of:
  0.14908552 = sum of:
    0.12552495 = weight(_text_:systematic in 5273) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12552495 = score(doc=5273,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.28397155 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049684696 = queryNorm
        0.44203353 = fieldWeight in 5273, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5273)
    0.023560567 = product of:
      0.047121134 = sum of:
        0.047121134 = weight(_text_:22 in 5273) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047121134 = score(doc=5273,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5273, 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=5273)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    In text categorization tasks, classification on some class hierarchies has better results than in cases without the hierarchy. Currently, because a large number of documents are divided into several subgroups in a hierarchy, we can appropriately use a hierarchical classification method. However, we have no systematic method to build a hierarchical classification system that performs well with large collections of practical data. In this article, we introduce a new evaluation scheme for internal node classifiers, which can be used effectively to develop a hierarchical classification system. We also show that our method for constructing the hierarchical classification system is very effective, especially for the task of constructing classifiers applied to hierarchy tree with a lot of levels.
    Date
    22. 7.2006 16:24:52
  2. 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) 0.10 
    0.09524199 = product of:
  0.14286299 = sum of:
    0.08966068 = weight(_text_:systematic in 3311) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08966068 = score(doc=3311,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.28397155 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049684696 = queryNorm
        0.31573826 = fieldWeight in 3311, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3311)
    0.053202312 = product of:
      0.106404625 = sum of:
        0.106404625 = weight(_text_:indexing in 3311) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.106404625 = score(doc=3311,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.55947536 = fieldWeight in 3311, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3311)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Tools for automatic subject assignment help deal with scale and sustainability in creating and enriching metadata, establishing more connections across and between resources and enhancing consistency. Although some software vendors and experimental researchers claim the tools can replace manual subject indexing, hard scientific evidence of their performance in operating information environments is scarce. A major reason for this is that research is usually conducted in laboratory conditions, excluding the complexities of real-life systems and situations. The article reviews and discusses issues with existing evaluation approaches such as problems of aboutness and relevance assessments, implying the need to use more than a single "gold standard" method when evaluating indexing and retrieval, and proposes a comprehensive evaluation framework. The framework is informed by a systematic review of the literature on evaluation approaches: evaluating indexing quality directly through assessment by an evaluator or through comparison with a gold standard, evaluating the quality of computer-assisted indexing directly in the context of an indexing workflow, and evaluating indexing quality indirectly through analyzing retrieval performance.
  3. Koch, T.; Ardö, A.; Brümmer, A.: ¬The building and maintenance of robot based internet search services : A review of current indexing and data collection methods. Prepared to meet the requirements of Work Package 3 of EU Telematics for Research, project DESIRE. Version D3.11v0.3 (Draft version 3) (1996) 0.07 
    0.07179992 = product of:
  0.10769987 = sum of:
    0.07172854 = weight(_text_:systematic in 1669) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07172854 = score(doc=1669,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.28397155 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049684696 = queryNorm
        0.2525906 = fieldWeight in 1669, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1669)
    0.035971332 = product of:
      0.071942665 = sum of:
        0.071942665 = weight(_text_:indexing in 1669) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.071942665 = score(doc=1669,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.3782744 = fieldWeight in 1669, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1669)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    After a short outline of problems, possibilities and difficulties of systematic information retrieval on the Internet and a description of efforts for development in this area, a specification of the terminology for this report is required. Although the process of retrieval is generally seen as an iterative process of browsing and information retrieval and several important services on the net have taken this fact into consideration, the emphasis of this report lays on the general retrieval tools for the whole of Internet. In order to be able to evaluate the differences, possibilities and restrictions of the different services it is necessary to begin with organizing the existing varieties in a typological/ taxonomical survey. The possibilities and weaknesses will be briefly compared and described for the most important services in the categories robot-based WWW-catalogues of different types, list- or form-based catalogues and simultaneous or collected search services respectively. It will however for different reasons not be possible to rank them in order of "best" services. Still more important are the weaknesses and problems common for all attempts of indexing the Internet. The problems of the quality of the input, the technical performance and the general problem of indexing virtual hypertext are shown to be at least as difficult as the different aspects of harvesting, indexing and information retrieval. Some of the attempts made in the area of further development of retrieval services will be mentioned in relation to descriptions of the contents of documents and standardization efforts. Internet harvesting and indexing technology and retrieval software is thoroughly reviewed. Details about all services and software are listed in analytical forms in Annex 1-3.
  4. Hotho, A.; Bloehdorn, S.: Data Mining 2004 : Text classification by boosting weak learners based on terms and concepts (2004) 0.07 
    0.066071495 = product of:
  0.099107236 = sum of:
    0.07891247 = product of:
      0.2367374 = sum of:
        0.2367374 = weight(_text_:3a in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.2367374 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4212274 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.02019477 = product of:
      0.04038954 = sum of:
        0.04038954 = weight(_text_:22 in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04038954 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 562, 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=562)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Content
    Vgl.: http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CEAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fciteseerx.ist.psu.edu%2Fviewdoc%2Fdownload%3Fdoi%3D10.1.1.91.4940%26rep%3Drep1%26type%3Dpdf&ei=dOXrUMeIDYHDtQahsIGACg&usg=AFQjCNHFWVh6gNPvnOrOS9R3rkrXCNVD-A&sig2=5I2F5evRfMnsttSgFF9g7Q&bvm=bv.1357316858,d.Yms.
    Date
    8. 1.2013 10:22:32
  5. Zhu, W.Z.; Allen, R.B.: Document clustering using the LSI subspace signature model (2013) 0.04 
    0.041326456 = product of:
  0.12397936 = sum of:
    0.12397936 = sum of:
      0.083589815 = weight(_text_:indexing in 690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.083589815 = score(doc=690,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049684696 = queryNorm
          0.4395151 = fieldWeight in 690, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=690)
      0.04038954 = weight(_text_:22 in 690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04038954 = score(doc=690,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049684696 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 690, 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=690)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    We describe the latent semantic indexing subspace signature model (LSISSM) for semantic content representation of unstructured text. Grounded on singular value decomposition, the model represents terms and documents by the distribution signatures of their statistical contribution across the top-ranking latent concept dimensions. LSISSM matches term signatures with document signatures according to their mapping coherence between latent semantic indexing (LSI) term subspace and LSI document subspace. LSISSM does feature reduction and finds a low-rank approximation of scalable and sparse term-document matrices. Experiments demonstrate that this approach significantly improves the performance of major clustering algorithms such as standard K-means and self-organizing maps compared with the vector space model and the traditional LSI model. The unique contribution ranking mechanism in LSISSM also improves the initialization of standard K-means compared with random seeding procedure, which sometimes causes low efficiency and effectiveness of clustering. A two-stage initialization strategy based on LSISSM significantly reduces the running time of standard K-means procedures.
    Date
    23. 3.2013 13:22:36
    Object
    Latent semantic indexing
  6. Qu, B.; Cong, G.; Li, C.; Sun, A.; Chen, H.: ¬An evaluation of classification models for question topic categorization (2012) 0.03 
    0.029886894 = product of:
  0.08966068 = sum of:
    0.08966068 = weight(_text_:systematic in 237) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08966068 = score(doc=237,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.28397155 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049684696 = queryNorm
        0.31573826 = fieldWeight in 237, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=237)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    We study the problem of question topic classification using a very large real-world Community Question Answering (CQA) dataset from Yahoo! Answers. The dataset comprises 3.9 million questions and these questions are organized into more than 1,000 categories in a hierarchy. To the best knowledge, this is the first systematic evaluation of the performance of different classification methods on question topic classification as well as short texts. Specifically, we empirically evaluate the following in classifying questions into CQA categories: (a) the usefulness of n-gram features and bag-of-word features; (b) the performance of three standard classification algorithms (naive Bayes, maximum entropy, and support vector machines); (c) the performance of the state-of-the-art hierarchical classification algorithms; (d) the effect of training data size on performance; and (e) the effectiveness of the different components of CQA data, including subject, content, asker, and the best answer. The experimental results show what aspects are important for question topic classification in terms of both effectiveness and efficiency. We believe that the experimental findings from this study will be useful in real-world classification problems.
  7. Huang, Y.-L.: ¬A theoretic and empirical research of cluster indexing for Mandarine Chinese full text document (1998) 0.02 
    0.020983277 = product of:
  0.06294983 = sum of:
    0.06294983 = product of:
      0.12589966 = sum of:
        0.12589966 = weight(_text_:indexing in 513) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12589966 = score(doc=513,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.6619802 = fieldWeight in 513, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=513)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Since most popular commercialized systems for full text retrieval are designed with full text scaning and Boolean logic query mode, these systems use an oversimplified relationship between the indexing form and the content of document. Reports the use of Singular Value Decomposition (SVD) to develop a Cluster Indexing Model (CIM) based on a Vector Space Model (VSM) in orer to explore the index theory of cluster indexing for chinese full text documents. From a series of experiments, it was found that the indexing performance of CIM is better than traditional VSM, and has almost equivalent effectiveness of the authority control of index terms
  8. Kwok, K.L.: ¬The use of titles and cited titles as document representations for automatic classification (1975) 0.02 
    0.018768014 = product of:
  0.05630404 = sum of:
    0.05630404 = product of:
      0.11260808 = sum of:
        0.11260808 = weight(_text_:indexing in 4347) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11260808 = score(doc=4347,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.5920931 = fieldWeight in 4347, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4347)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Theme
    Citation indexing
  9. Fong, A.C.M.: Mining a Web citation database for document clustering (2002) 0.02 
    0.018768014 = product of:
  0.05630404 = sum of:
    0.05630404 = product of:
      0.11260808 = sum of:
        0.11260808 = weight(_text_:indexing in 3940) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11260808 = score(doc=3940,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.5920931 = fieldWeight in 3940, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3940)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Theme
    Citation indexing
  10. Subramanian, S.; Shafer, K.E.: Clustering (2001) 0.01 
    0.0134631805 = product of:
  0.04038954 = sum of:
    0.04038954 = product of:
      0.08077908 = sum of:
        0.08077908 = weight(_text_:22 in 1046) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08077908 = score(doc=1046,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 1046, 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=1046)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Date
    5. 5.2003 14:17:22
  11. Subramanian, S.; Shafer, K.E.: Clustering (1998) 0.01 
    0.0134057235 = product of:
  0.04021717 = sum of:
    0.04021717 = product of:
      0.08043434 = sum of:
        0.08043434 = weight(_text_:indexing in 1103) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08043434 = score(doc=1103,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.42292362 = fieldWeight in 1103, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1103)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    This article presents our exploration of computer science clustering algorithms as they relate to the Scorpion system. Scorpion is a research project at OCLC that explores the indexing and cataloging of electronic resources. For a more complete description of the Scorpion, please visit the Scorpion Web site at <http://purl.oclc.org/scorpion>
  12. Shafer, K.E.: Evaluating Scorpion Results (2001) 0.01 
    0.0134057235 = product of:
  0.04021717 = sum of:
    0.04021717 = product of:
      0.08043434 = sum of:
        0.08043434 = weight(_text_:indexing in 4085) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08043434 = score(doc=4085,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.42292362 = fieldWeight in 4085, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4085)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Using DDC for automatic indexing and classifying of Internet resources
  13. Humphrey, S.M.; Névéol, A.; Browne, A.; Gobeil, J.; Ruch, P.; Darmoni, S.J.: Comparing a rule-based versus statistical system for automatic categorization of MEDLINE documents according to biomedical specialty (2009) 0.01 
    0.0134057235 = product of:
  0.04021717 = sum of:
    0.04021717 = product of:
      0.08043434 = sum of:
        0.08043434 = weight(_text_:indexing in 3300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08043434 = score(doc=3300,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.42292362 = fieldWeight in 3300, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3300)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Automatic document categorization is an important research problem in Information Science and Natural Language Processing. Many applications, including, Word Sense Disambiguation and Information Retrieval in large collections, can benefit from such categorization. This paper focuses on automatic categorization of documents from the biomedical literature into broad discipline-based categories. Two different systems are described and contrasted: CISMeF, which uses rules based on human indexing of the documents by the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) controlled vocabulary in order to assign metaterms (MTs), and Journal Descriptor Indexing (JDI), based on human categorization of about 4,000 journals and statistical associations between journal descriptors (JDs) and textwords in the documents. We evaluate and compare the performance of these systems against a gold standard of humanly assigned categories for 100 MEDLINE documents, using six measures selected from trec_eval. The results show that for five of the measures performance is comparable, and for one measure JDI is superior. We conclude that these results favor JDI, given the significantly greater intellectual overhead involved in human indexing and maintaining a rule base for mapping MeSH terms to MTs. We also note a JDI method that associates JDs with MeSH indexing rather than textwords, and it may be worthwhile to investigate whether this JDI method (statistical) and CISMeF (rule-based) might be combined and then evaluated showing they are complementary to one another.
  14. Ahmed, M.; Mukhopadhyay, M.; Mukhopadhyay, P.: Automated knowledge organization : AI ML based subject indexing system for libraries (2023) 0.01 
    0.0134057235 = product of:
  0.04021717 = sum of:
    0.04021717 = product of:
      0.08043434 = sum of:
        0.08043434 = weight(_text_:indexing in 977) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08043434 = score(doc=977,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.42292362 = fieldWeight in 977, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=977)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    The research study as reported here is an attempt to explore the possibilities of an AI/ML-based semi-automated indexing system in a library setup to handle large volumes of documents. It uses the Python virtual environment to install and configure an open source AI environment (named Annif) to feed the LOD (Linked Open Data) dataset of Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) as a standard KOS (Knowledge Organisation System). The framework deployed the Turtle format of LCSH after cleaning the file with Skosify, applied an array of backend algorithms (namely TF-IDF, Omikuji, and NN-Ensemble) to measure relative performance, and selected Snowball as an analyser. The training of Annif was conducted with a large set of bibliographic records populated with subject descriptors (MARC tag 650$a) and indexed by trained LIS professionals. The training dataset is first treated with MarcEdit to export it in a format suitable for OpenRefine, and then in OpenRefine it undergoes many steps to produce a bibliographic record set suitable to train Annif. The framework, after training, has been tested with a bibliographic dataset to measure indexing efficiencies, and finally, the automated indexing framework is integrated with data wrangling software (OpenRefine) to produce suggested headings on a mass scale. The entire framework is based on open-source software, open datasets, and open standards.
  15. Koch, T.: Experiments with automatic classification of WAIS databases and indexing of WWW : some results from the Nordic WAIS/WWW project (1994) 0.01 
    0.013270989 = product of:
  0.039812967 = sum of:
    0.039812967 = product of:
      0.079625934 = sum of:
        0.079625934 = weight(_text_:indexing in 7209) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.079625934 = score(doc=7209,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.41867304 = fieldWeight in 7209, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7209)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    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
  16. Ruiz, M.E.; Srinivasan, P.: Combining machine learning and hierarchical indexing structures for text categorization (2001) 0.01 
    0.013270989 = product of:
  0.039812967 = sum of:
    0.039812967 = product of:
      0.079625934 = sum of:
        0.079625934 = weight(_text_:indexing in 1595) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.079625934 = score(doc=1595,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.41867304 = fieldWeight in 1595, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1595)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    This paper presents a method that exploits the hierarchical structure of an indexing vocabulary to guide the development and training of machine learning methods for automatic text categorization. We present the design of a hierarchical classifier based an the divide-and-conquer principle. The method is evaluated using backpropagation neural networks, such as the machine learning algorithm, that leam to assign MeSH categories to a subset of MEDLINE records. Comparisons with traditional Rocchio's algorithm adapted for text categorization, as well as flat neural network classifiers, are provided. The results indicate that the use of hierarchical structures improves Performance significantly.
  17. Sojka, P.; Lee, M.; Rehurek, R.; Hatlapatka, R.; Kucbel, M.; Bouche, T.; Goutorbe, C.; Anghelache, R.; Wojciechowski, K.: Toolset for entity and semantic associations : Final Release (2013) 0.01 
    0.011375135 = product of:
  0.034125403 = sum of:
    0.034125403 = product of:
      0.068250805 = sum of:
        0.068250805 = weight(_text_:indexing in 1057) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.068250805 = score(doc=1057,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.3588626 = fieldWeight in 1057, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1057)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    In this document we describe the final release of the toolset for entity and semantic associations, integrating two versions (language dependent and language independent) of Unsupervised Document Similarity implemented by MU (using gensim tool) and Citation Indexing, Resolution and Matching (UJF/CMD). We give a brief description of tools, the rationale behind decisions made, and provide elementary evaluation. Tools are integrated in the main project result, EuDML website, and they deliver the needed functionality for exploratory searching and browsing the collected documents. EuDML users and content providers thus benefit from millions of algorithmically generated similarity and citation links, developed using state of the art machine learning and matching methods.
    Object
    Latent Semantic Indexing
  18. Reiner, U.: Automatische DDC-Klassifizierung von bibliografischen Titeldatensätzen (2009) 0.01 
    0.011219318 = product of:
  0.033657953 = sum of:
    0.033657953 = product of:
      0.06731591 = sum of:
        0.06731591 = weight(_text_:22 in 611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06731591 = score(doc=611,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 611, 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=611)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Date
    22. 8.2009 12:54:24
  19. HaCohen-Kerner, Y. et al.: Classification using various machine learning methods and combinations of key-phrases and visual features (2016) 0.01 
    0.011219318 = product of:
  0.033657953 = sum of:
    0.033657953 = product of:
      0.06731591 = sum of:
        0.06731591 = weight(_text_:22 in 2748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06731591 = score(doc=2748,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2748, 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=2748)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Date
    1. 2.2016 18:25:22
  20. Golub, K.; Hansson, J.; Soergel, D.; Tudhope, D.: Managing classification in libraries : a methodological outline for evaluating automatic subject indexing and classification in Swedish library catalogues (2015) 0.01 
    0.009479279 = product of:
  0.028437834 = sum of:
    0.028437834 = product of:
      0.05687567 = sum of:
        0.05687567 = weight(_text_:indexing in 2300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05687567 = score(doc=2300,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.29905218 = fieldWeight in 2300, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2300)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Subject terms play a crucial role in resource discovery but require substantial effort to produce. Automatic subject classification and indexing address problems of scale and sustainability and can be used to enrich existing bibliographic records, establish more connections across and between resources and enhance consistency of bibliographic data. The paper aims to put forward a complex methodological framework to evaluate automatic classification tools of Swedish textual documents based on the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) recently introduced to Swedish libraries. Three major complementary approaches are suggested: a quality-built gold standard, retrieval effects, domain analysis. The gold standard is built based on input from at least two catalogue librarians, end-users expert in the subject, end users inexperienced in the subject and automated tools. Retrieval effects are studied through a combination of assigned and free tasks, including factual and comprehensive types. The study also takes into consideration the different role and character of subject terms in various knowledge domains, such as scientific disciplines. As a theoretical framework, domain analysis is used and applied in relation to the implementation of DDC in Swedish libraries and chosen domains of knowledge within the DDC itself.

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 37
  • d 5
  • chi 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 35
  • el 9
  • r 2
  • More… Less…

Themes