Search (63 results, page 1 of 4)

  • × theme_ss:"Wissensrepräsentation"
  1. Renear, A.H.; Wickett, K.M.; Urban, R.J.; Dubin, D.; Shreeves, S.L.: Collection/item metadata relationships (2008) 0.07
    0.069826655 = product of:
      0.13965331 = sum of:
        0.13965331 = sum of:
          0.098327816 = weight(_text_:ii in 2623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.098327816 = score(doc=2623,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.2745971 = queryWeight, product of:
                5.4016213 = idf(docFreq=541, maxDocs=44218)
                0.050836053 = queryNorm
              0.3580803 = fieldWeight in 2623, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                5.4016213 = idf(docFreq=541, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2623)
          0.0413255 = weight(_text_:22 in 2623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.0413255 = score(doc=2623,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1780192 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.050836053 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2623, 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=2623)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Contemporary retrieval systems, which search across collections, usually ignore collection-level metadata. Alternative approaches, exploiting collection-level information, will require an understanding of the various kinds of relationships that can obtain between collection-level and item-level metadata. This paper outlines the problem and describes a project that is developing a logic-based framework for classifying collection/item metadata relationships. This framework will support (i) metadata specification developers defining metadata elements, (ii) metadata creators describing objects, and (iii) system designers implementing systems that take advantage of collection-level metadata. We present three examples of collection/item metadata relationship categories, attribute/value-propagation, value-propagation, and value-constraint and show that even in these simple cases a precise formulation requires modal notions in addition to first-order logic. These formulations are related to recent work in information retrieval and ontology evaluation.
    Source
    Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
  2. Sánchez, M.F.: Semantically enhanced Information Retrieval : an ontology-based approach (2006) 0.04
    0.040969923 = product of:
      0.08193985 = sum of:
        0.08193985 = product of:
          0.1638797 = sum of:
            0.1638797 = weight(_text_:ii in 4327) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.1638797 = score(doc=4327,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.2745971 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.4016213 = idf(docFreq=541, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050836053 = queryNorm
                0.5968005 = fieldWeight in 4327, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.4016213 = idf(docFreq=541, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4327)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Content
    Part I. Analyzing the state of the art - What is semantic search? Part II. The proposal - An ontology-based IR model - Semantic retrieval on the Web Part III. Extensions - Semantic knowledge gateway - Coping with knowledge incompleteness
  3. Zeng, Q.; Yu, M.; Yu, W.; Xiong, J.; Shi, Y.; Jiang, M.: Faceted hierarchy : a new graph type to organize scientific concepts and a construction method (2019) 0.04
    0.04037056 = product of:
      0.08074112 = sum of:
        0.08074112 = product of:
          0.24222337 = sum of:
            0.24222337 = weight(_text_:3a in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.24222337 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.4309886 = queryWeight, product of:
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050836053 = queryNorm
                0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 400, 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=400)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Content
    Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Faclanthology.org%2FD19-5317.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0ZZFyq5wWTtNTvNkrvjlGA.
  4. Stojanovic, N.: Ontology-based Information Retrieval : methods and tools for cooperative query answering (2005) 0.03
    0.02691371 = product of:
      0.05382742 = sum of:
        0.05382742 = product of:
          0.16148226 = sum of:
            0.16148226 = weight(_text_:3a in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.16148226 = score(doc=701,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.4309886 = queryWeight, product of:
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050836053 = queryNorm
                0.3746787 = fieldWeight in 701, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=701)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Content
    Vgl.: http%3A%2F%2Fdigbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fvolltexte%2Fdocuments%2F1627&ei=tAtYUYrBNoHKtQb3l4GYBw&usg=AFQjCNHeaxKkKU3-u54LWxMNYGXaaDLCGw&sig2=8WykXWQoDKjDSdGtAakH2Q&bvm=bv.44442042,d.Yms.
  5. Xiong, C.: Knowledge based text representations for information retrieval (2016) 0.03
    0.02691371 = product of:
      0.05382742 = sum of:
        0.05382742 = product of:
          0.16148226 = sum of:
            0.16148226 = weight(_text_:3a in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.16148226 = score(doc=5820,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.4309886 = queryWeight, product of:
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050836053 = queryNorm
                0.3746787 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Content
    Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Language and Information Technologies. Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cs.cmu.edu%2F~cx%2Fpapers%2Fknowledge_based_text_representation.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0SaTSvhWLTh__Uz_HtOtl3.
  6. Mohr, J.W.; Bogdanov, P.: Topic models : what they are and why they matter (2013) 0.02
    0.024581954 = product of:
      0.049163908 = sum of:
        0.049163908 = product of:
          0.098327816 = sum of:
            0.098327816 = weight(_text_:ii in 1142) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.098327816 = score(doc=1142,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.2745971 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.4016213 = idf(docFreq=541, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050836053 = queryNorm
                0.3580803 = fieldWeight in 1142, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.4016213 = idf(docFreq=541, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1142)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    We provide a brief, non-technical introduction to the text mining methodology known as "topic modeling." We summarize the theory and background of the method and discuss what kinds of things are found by topic models. Using a text corpus comprised of the eight articles from the special issue of Poetics on the subject of topic models, we run a topic model on these articles, both as a way to introduce the methodology and also to help summarize some of the ways in which social and cultural scientists are using topic models. We review some of the critiques and debates over the use of the method and finally, we link these developments back to some of the original innovations in the field of content analysis that were pioneered by Harold D. Lasswell and colleagues during and just after World War II.
  7. Arp, R.; Smith, B.; Spear, A.D.: Building ontologies with basic formal ontology (2015) 0.02
    0.023176087 = product of:
      0.046352174 = sum of:
        0.046352174 = product of:
          0.09270435 = sum of:
            0.09270435 = weight(_text_:ii in 3444) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09270435 = score(doc=3444,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.2745971 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.4016213 = idf(docFreq=541, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050836053 = queryNorm
                0.33760133 = fieldWeight in 3444, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  5.4016213 = idf(docFreq=541, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3444)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Content
    What Is an Ontology? - Kinds of Ontologies and the Role of Taxonomies - Principles of Best Practice 1: Domain Ontology Design - Principles of Best Practice II: Terms, Definitions, and Classification - Introduction to Basic Formal Ontology I: Continuants - Introduction to Basic Formal Ontology II: Occurrents - The Ontology of Relations - Basic Formal Ontology at Work - Appendix on Implementation: Languages, Editors, Reasoners, Browsers, Tools for Reuse - Glossary - Web Links Mentioned in the Text Including Ontologies, Research Groups, Software, and Reasoning Tools
  8. Gil-Berrozpe, J.C.: Description, categorization, and representation of hyponymy in environmental terminology (2022) 0.02
    0.023176087 = product of:
      0.046352174 = sum of:
        0.046352174 = product of:
          0.09270435 = sum of:
            0.09270435 = weight(_text_:ii in 1004) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09270435 = score(doc=1004,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.2745971 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.4016213 = idf(docFreq=541, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050836053 = queryNorm
                0.33760133 = fieldWeight in 1004, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  5.4016213 = idf(docFreq=541, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1004)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Terminology has evolved from static and prescriptive theories to dynamic and cognitive approaches. Thanks to these approaches, there have been significant advances in the design and elaboration of terminological resources. This has resulted in the creation of tools such as terminological knowledge bases, which are able to show how concepts are interrelated through different semantic or conceptual relations. Of these relations, hyponymy is the most relevant to terminology work because it deals with concept categorization and term hierarchies. This doctoral thesis presents an enhancement of the semantic structure of EcoLexicon, a terminological knowledge base on environmental science. The aim of this research was to improve the description, categorization, and representation of hyponymy in environmental terminology. Therefore, we created HypoLexicon, a new stand-alone module for EcoLexicon in the form of a hyponymy-based terminological resource. This resource contains twelve terminological entries from four specialized domains (Biology, Chemistry, Civil Engineering, and Geology), which consist of 309 concepts and 465 terms associated with those concepts. This research was mainly based on the theoretical premises of Frame-based Terminology. This theory was combined with Cognitive Linguistics, for conceptual description and representation; Corpus Linguistics, for the extraction and processing of linguistic and terminological information; and Ontology, related to hyponymy and relevant for concept categorization. HypoLexicon was constructed from the following materials: (i) the EcoLexicon English Corpus; (ii) other specialized terminological resources, including EcoLexicon; (iii) Sketch Engine; and (iv) Lexonomy. This thesis explains the methodologies applied for corpus extraction and compilation, corpus analysis, the creation of conceptual hierarchies, and the design of the terminological template. The results of the creation of HypoLexicon are discussed by highlighting the information in the hyponymy-based terminological entries: (i) parent concept (hypernym); (ii) child concepts (hyponyms, with various hyponymy levels); (iii) terminological definitions; (iv) conceptual categories; (v) hyponymy subtypes; and (vi) hyponymic contexts. Furthermore, the features and the navigation within HypoLexicon are described from the user interface and the admin interface. In conclusion, this doctoral thesis lays the groundwork for developing a terminological resource that includes definitional, relational, ontological and contextual information about specialized hypernyms and hyponyms. All of this information on specialized knowledge is simple to follow thanks to the hierarchical structure of the terminological template used in HypoLexicon. Therefore, not only does it enhance knowledge representation, but it also facilitates its acquisition.
  9. ¬The Semantic Web - ISWC 2010 : 9th International Semantic Web Conference, ISWC 2010, Shanghai, China, November 7-11, 2010, Revised Selected Papers, Part 2. (2010) 0.02
    0.020484962 = product of:
      0.040969923 = sum of:
        0.040969923 = product of:
          0.08193985 = sum of:
            0.08193985 = weight(_text_:ii in 4706) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08193985 = score(doc=4706,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.2745971 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.4016213 = idf(docFreq=541, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050836053 = queryNorm
                0.29840025 = fieldWeight in 4706, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.4016213 = idf(docFreq=541, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4706)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The two-volume set LNCS 6496 and 6497 constitutes the refereed proceedings of the 9th International Semantic Web Conference, ISWC 2010, held in Shanghai, China, during November 7-11, 2010. Part I contains 51 papers out of 578 submissions to the research track. Part II contains 18 papers out of 66 submissions to the semantic Web in-use track, 6 papers out of 26 submissions to the doctoral consortium track, and also 4 invited talks. Each submitted paper were carefully reviewed. The International Semantic Web Conferences (ISWC) constitute the major international venue where the latest research results and technical innovations on all aspects of the Semantic Web are presented. ISWC brings together researchers, practitioners, and users from the areas of artificial intelligence, databases, social networks, distributed computing, Web engineering, information systems, natural language processing, soft computing, and human computer interaction to discuss the major challenges and proposed solutions, the success stories and failures, as well the visions that can advance research and drive innovation in the Semantic Web.
  10. Baofu, P.: ¬The future of information architecture : conceiving a better way to understand taxonomy, network, and intelligence (2008) 0.02
    0.020484962 = product of:
      0.040969923 = sum of:
        0.040969923 = product of:
          0.08193985 = sum of:
            0.08193985 = weight(_text_:ii in 2257) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08193985 = score(doc=2257,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.2745971 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.4016213 = idf(docFreq=541, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050836053 = queryNorm
                0.29840025 = fieldWeight in 2257, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.4016213 = idf(docFreq=541, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2257)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The Future of Information Architecture examines issues surrounding why information is processed, stored and applied in the way that it has, since time immemorial. Contrary to the conventional wisdom held by many scholars in human history, the recurrent debate on the explanation of the most basic categories of information (eg space, time causation, quality, quantity) has been misconstrued, to the effect that there exists some deeper categories and principles behind these categories of information - with enormous implications for our understanding of reality in general. To understand this, the book is organised in to four main parts: Part I begins with the vital question concerning the role of information within the context of the larger theoretical debate in the literature. Part II provides a critical examination of the nature of data taxonomy from the main perspectives of culture, society, nature and the mind. Part III constructively invesitgates the world of information network from the main perspectives of culture, society, nature and the mind. Part IV proposes six main theses in the authors synthetic theory of information architecture, namely, (a) the first thesis on the simpleness-complicatedness principle, (b) the second thesis on the exactness-vagueness principle (c) the third thesis on the slowness-quickness principle (d) the fourth thesis on the order-chaos principle, (e) the fifth thesis on the symmetry-asymmetry principle, and (f) the sixth thesis on the post-human stage.
  11. Kohne, J.: Ontology, its origins and its meaning in information icience (2014) 0.02
    0.020484962 = product of:
      0.040969923 = sum of:
        0.040969923 = product of:
          0.08193985 = sum of:
            0.08193985 = weight(_text_:ii in 3401) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08193985 = score(doc=3401,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.2745971 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.4016213 = idf(docFreq=541, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050836053 = queryNorm
                0.29840025 = fieldWeight in 3401, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.4016213 = idf(docFreq=541, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3401)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Ontology - in Aristotelian terms the science of being qua being - as a classical branch of philosophy describes the foundations of being in general. In this context, ontology is general metaphysics: the science of everything. Pursuing ontology means establishing some systematic order among the being, i.e. dividing things into categories or conceptual frameworks. Explaining the reasons why there are things or even anything, however, is part of what is called special metaphysics (theology, cosmology and psychology). If putting things into categories is the key issue of ontology, then general structures are its main level of analysis. To categorize things is to put them into a structural order. Such categorization of things enables one to understand what reality is about. If this is true, and characterizing the general structures of being is a reasonable access for us to reality, then two kinds of analysis of those structures are available: (i) realism and (ii) nominalism. In a realist (Aristotelian) ontology the general structures of being are understood as a kind of mirror reflecting things in their natural order. Those categories, as they are called in realism, then represent or show the structure of being. Ontological realism understands the relation between categories and being as a kind of correspondence or mapping which gives access to reality itself.
  12. Sinha, P.K.; Dutta, B.: ¬A systematic analysis of flood ontologies : a parametric approach (2020) 0.02
    0.020484962 = product of:
      0.040969923 = sum of:
        0.040969923 = product of:
          0.08193985 = sum of:
            0.08193985 = weight(_text_:ii in 5758) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08193985 = score(doc=5758,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.2745971 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.4016213 = idf(docFreq=541, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050836053 = queryNorm
                0.29840025 = fieldWeight in 5758, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.4016213 = idf(docFreq=541, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5758)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The article identifies the core literature available on flood ontologies and presents a review on these ontologies from various perspectives like its purpose, type, design methodologies, ontologies (re)used, and also their focus on specific flood disaster phases. The study was conducted in two stages: i) literature identification, where the systematic literature review methodology was employed; and, ii) ontological review, where the parametric approach was applied. The study resulted in a set of fourteen papers discussing the flood ontology (FO). The ontological review revealed that most of the flood ontologies were task ontologies, formal, modular, and used web ontology language (OWL) for their representation. The most (re)used ontologies were SWEET, SSN, Time, and Space. METHONTOLOGY was the preferred design methodology, and for evaluation, application-based or data-based approaches were preferred. The majority of the ontologies were built around the response phase of the disaster. The unavailability of the full ontologies somewhat restricted the current study as the structural ontology metrics are missing. But the scientific community, the developers, of flood disaster management systems can refer to this work for their research to see what is available in the literature on flood ontology and the other major domains essential in building the FO.
  13. Schmitz-Esser, W.: Language of general communication and concept compatibility (1996) 0.02
    0.017218959 = product of:
      0.034437917 = sum of:
        0.034437917 = product of:
          0.068875834 = sum of:
            0.068875834 = weight(_text_:22 in 6089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.068875834 = score(doc=6089,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1780192 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050836053 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 6089, 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=6089)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Pages
    S.11-22
  14. Drewer, P.; Massion, F; Pulitano, D: Was haben Wissensmodellierung, Wissensstrukturierung, künstliche Intelligenz und Terminologie miteinander zu tun? (2017) 0.02
    0.017218959 = product of:
      0.034437917 = sum of:
        0.034437917 = product of:
          0.068875834 = sum of:
            0.068875834 = weight(_text_:22 in 5576) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.068875834 = score(doc=5576,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1780192 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050836053 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5576, 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=5576)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    13.12.2017 14:17:22
  15. Tudhope, D.; Hodge, G.: Terminology registries (2007) 0.02
    0.017218959 = product of:
      0.034437917 = sum of:
        0.034437917 = product of:
          0.068875834 = sum of:
            0.068875834 = weight(_text_:22 in 539) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.068875834 = score(doc=539,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1780192 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050836053 = 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
  16. Haller, S.H.M.: Mappingverfahren zur Wissensorganisation (2002) 0.02
    0.017218959 = product of:
      0.034437917 = sum of:
        0.034437917 = product of:
          0.068875834 = sum of:
            0.068875834 = weight(_text_:22 in 3406) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.068875834 = score(doc=3406,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1780192 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050836053 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3406, 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=3406)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    30. 5.2010 16:22:35
  17. Nielsen, M.: Neuronale Netze : Alpha Go - Computer lernen Intuition (2018) 0.02
    0.017218959 = product of:
      0.034437917 = sum of:
        0.034437917 = product of:
          0.068875834 = sum of:
            0.068875834 = weight(_text_:22 in 4523) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.068875834 = score(doc=4523,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1780192 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050836053 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4523, 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=4523)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Spektrum der Wissenschaft. 2018, H.1, S.22-27
  18. ¬The Semantic Web - ISWC 2010 : 9th International Semantic Web Conference, ISWC 2010, Shanghai, China, November 7-11, 2010, Revised Selected Papers, Part I. (2010) 0.02
    0.01638797 = product of:
      0.03277594 = sum of:
        0.03277594 = product of:
          0.06555188 = sum of:
            0.06555188 = weight(_text_:ii in 4707) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06555188 = score(doc=4707,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.2745971 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.4016213 = idf(docFreq=541, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050836053 = queryNorm
                0.2387202 = fieldWeight in 4707, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.4016213 = idf(docFreq=541, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4707)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The two-volume set LNCS 6496 and 6497 constitutes the refereed proceedings of the 9th International Semantic Web Conference, ISWC 2010, held in Shanghai, China, during November 7-11, 2010. Part I contains 51 papers out of 578 submissions to the research track. Part II contains 18 papers out of 66 submissions to the semantic Web in-use track, 6 papers out of 26 submissions to the doctoral consortium track, and also 4 invited talks. Each submitted paper were carefully reviewed. The International Semantic Web Conferences (ISWC) constitute the major international venue where the latest research results and technical innovations on all aspects of the Semantic Web are presented. ISWC brings together researchers, practitioners, and users from the areas of artificial intelligence, databases, social networks, distributed computing, Web engineering, information systems, natural language processing, soft computing, and human computer interaction to discuss the major challenges and proposed solutions, the success stories and failures, as well the visions that can advance research and drive innovation in the Semantic Web.
  19. Börner, K.: Atlas of knowledge : anyone can map (2015) 0.01
    0.014610772 = product of:
      0.029221544 = sum of:
        0.029221544 = product of:
          0.058443088 = sum of:
            0.058443088 = weight(_text_:22 in 3355) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.058443088 = score(doc=3355,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.1780192 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050836053 = queryNorm
                0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 3355, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3355)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 1.2017 16:54:03
    22. 1.2017 17:10:56
  20. Synak, M.; Dabrowski, M.; Kruk, S.R.: Semantic Web and ontologies (2009) 0.01
    0.013775167 = product of:
      0.027550334 = sum of:
        0.027550334 = product of:
          0.05510067 = sum of:
            0.05510067 = weight(_text_:22 in 3376) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05510067 = score(doc=3376,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1780192 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050836053 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3376, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3376)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    31. 7.2010 16:58:22

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 52
  • d 11

Types

  • a 44
  • el 16
  • m 6
  • x 5
  • s 2
  • n 1
  • r 1
  • More… Less…