Search (298 results, page 1 of 15)

0.106666565 = product of:
  0.15999985 = sum of:
    0.13325372 = weight(_text_:query in 541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13325372 = score(doc=541,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22937049 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049352113 = queryNorm
        0.5809541 = fieldWeight in 541, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=541)
    0.026746122 = product of:
      0.053492244 = sum of:
        0.053492244 = weight(_text_:22 in 541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.053492244 = score(doc=541,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1728227 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049352113 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 541, 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=541)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

In this presentation, we therefore focus on a solution for providing uniform access to Digital Libraries and other online services. In order to enable uniform query access to heterogeneous sources, we must provide metadata interoperability in a way that a query language - in this case SPARQL - can cope with the incompatibility of the metadata in various sources without changing their already existing information models.

Date

26.12.2011 13:22:46

0.08387356 = product of:
  0.12581034 = sum of:
    0.08328357 = weight(_text_:query in 1252) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08328357 = score(doc=1252,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22937049 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049352113 = queryNorm
        0.3630963 = fieldWeight in 1252, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1252)
    0.04252677 = product of:
      0.08505354 = sum of:
        0.08505354 = weight(_text_:page in 1252) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08505354 = score(doc=1252,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.27565226 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.5854197 = idf(docFreq=450, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049352113 = queryNorm
            0.30855376 = fieldWeight in 1252, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.5854197 = idf(docFreq=450, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1252)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

A subject gateway, in the context of network-based resource access, can be defined as some facility that allows easier access to network-based resources in a defined subject area. The simplest types of subject gateways are sets of Web pages containing lists of links to resources. Some gateways index their lists of links and provide a simple search facility. More advanced gateways offer a much enhanced service via a system consisting of a resource database and various indexes, which can be searched and/or browsed through a Web-based interface. Each entry in the database contains information about a network-based resource, such as a Web page, Web site, mailing list or document. Entries are usually created by a cataloguer manually identifying a suitable resource, describing the resource using a template, and submitting the template to the database for indexing. Subject gateways are also known as subject-based information gateways (SBIGs), subject-based gateways, subject index gateways, virtual libraries, clearing houses, subject trees, pathfinders and other variations thereof. This paper describes the characteristics of some of the subject gateways currently accessible through the Web, and compares them to automatic "vacuum cleaner" type search engines, such as AltaVista. The application of WHOIS++, centroids, query routing, and forward knowledge to searching several of these subject gateways simultaneously is outlined. The paper concludes with looking at some of the issues facing subject gateway development in the near future. The paper touches on many of the issues mentioned in a previous paper in D-Lib Magazine, especially regarding resource-discovery related initiatives and services.

0.06348391 = product of:
  0.095225856 = sum of:
    0.047112305 = weight(_text_:query in 1206) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.047112305 = score(doc=1206,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22937049 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049352113 = queryNorm
        0.20539828 = fieldWeight in 1206, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1206)
    0.048113547 = product of:
      0.096227095 = sum of:
        0.096227095 = weight(_text_:page in 1206) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.096227095 = score(doc=1206,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.27565226 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.5854197 = idf(docFreq=450, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049352113 = queryNorm
            0.34908873 = fieldWeight in 1206, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.5854197 = idf(docFreq=450, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1206)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The Alexandria Digital Library Project announces the online publication of two protocols to support querying and response interactions using distributed services: one for gazetteers and one for thesauri. These protocols have been developed for our own purposes and also to support the general interoperability of gazetteers and thesauri on the web. See <http://www.alexandria.ucsb.edu/~gjanee/gazetteer/> and <http://www.alexandria.ucsb.edu/~gjanee/thesaurus/>. For the gazetteer protocol, we have provided a page of test forms that can be used to experiment with the operational functions of the protocol in accessing two gazetteers: the ADL Gazetteer and the ESRI Gazetteer (ESRI has participated in the development of the gazetteer protocol). We are in the process of developing a thesaurus server and a simple client to demonstrate the use of the thesaurus protocol. We are soliciting comments on both protocols. Please remember that we are seeking protocols that are essentially "simple" and easy to implement and that support basic operations - they should not duplicate all of the functions of specialized gazetteer and thesaurus interfaces. We continue to discuss ways of handling various issues and to further develop the protocols. For the thesaurus protocol, outstanding issues include the treatment of multilingual thesauri and the degree to which the language attribute should be supported; whether the Scope Note element should be changed to a repeatable Note element; the best way to handle the hierarchical report for multi-hierarchies where portions of the hierarchy are repeated; and whether support for searching by term identifiers is redundant and unnecessary given that the terms themselves are unique within a thesaurus. For the gazetteer protocol, we continue to work on validation of query and report XML documents and on implementing the part of the protocol designed to support the submission of new entries to a gazetteer. We would like to encourage open discussion of these protocols through the NKOS discussion list (see the NKOS webpage at <http://nkos.slis.kent.edu/>) and the CGGR-L discussion list that focuses on gazetteer development (see ADL Gazetteer Development page at <http://www.alexandria.ucsb.edu/gazetteer>).

0.06281641 = product of:
  0.18844922 = sum of:
    0.18844922 = weight(_text_:query in 792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18844922 = score(doc=792,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.22937049 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049352113 = queryNorm
        0.8215931 = fieldWeight in 792, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=792)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Based on an in-depth analysis of existing approaches in building ontology-based query systems we discuss and compare the methods, approaches to be used in current query systems using Ontology or the Semantic Web techniques. This paper identifies various relevant research directions in ontology-based querying research. Based on the results of our investigation we summarise the state of the art ontology-based query/search and name areas of further research activities.

0.06048537 = product of:
  0.09072805 = sum of:
    0.07066846 = weight(_text_:query in 1289) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07066846 = score(doc=1289,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22937049 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049352113 = queryNorm
        0.30809742 = fieldWeight in 1289, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1289)
    0.020059591 = product of:
      0.040119182 = sum of:
        0.040119182 = weight(_text_:22 in 1289) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040119182 = score(doc=1289,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1728227 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049352113 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1289, 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=1289)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

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".

0.06048537 = product of:
  0.09072805 = sum of:
    0.07066846 = weight(_text_:query in 3449) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07066846 = score(doc=3449,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22937049 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049352113 = queryNorm
        0.30809742 = fieldWeight in 3449, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3449)
    0.020059591 = product of:
      0.040119182 = sum of:
        0.040119182 = weight(_text_:22 in 3449) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040119182 = score(doc=3449,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1728227 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049352113 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3449, 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=3449)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Two new methods for retrieving mathematical expressions using conventional keyword search and expression images are presented. An expression-level TF-IDF (term frequency-inverse document frequency) approach is used for keyword search, where queries and indexed expressions are represented by keywords taken from LATEX strings. TF-IDF is computed at the level of individual expressions rather than documents to increase the precision of matching. The second retrieval technique is a form of Content-Base Image Retrieval (CBIR). Expressions are segmented into connected components, and then components in the query expression and each expression in the collection are matched using contour and density features, aspect ratios, and relative positions. In an experiment using ten randomly sampled queries from a corpus of over 22,000 expressions, precision-at-k (k= 20) for the keyword-based approach was higher (keyword: µ= 84.0,s= 19.0, image-based:µ= 32.0,s= 30.7), but for a few of the queries better results were obtained using a combination of the two techniques.

Date

22. 2.2017 12:53:49

0.057700556 = product of:
  0.17310166 = sum of:
    0.17310166 = weight(_text_:query in 1215) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17310166 = score(doc=1215,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.22937049 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049352113 = queryNorm
        0.75468147 = fieldWeight in 1215, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1215)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Directed Query Engines, an emerging class of search engine specifically designed to access distributed resources on the deep web, offer the opportunity to create inexpensive digital libraries. Already, one such engine, Distributed Explorer, has been used to select and assemble high quality information resources and incorporate them into publicly available systems for the physical sciences. By nesting Directed Query Engines so that one query launches several other engines in a cascading fashion, enormous virtual collections may soon be assembled to form a comprehensive information infrastructure for the physical sciences. Once a Directed Query Engine has been configured for a set of information resources, distributed alerts tools can provide patrons with personalized, profile-based notices of recent additions to any of the selected resources. Due to the potentially enormous size and scope of Directed Query Engine applications, consideration must be given to issues surrounding the representation of large quantities of information from multiple, heterogeneous sources.

0.05529356 = product of:
  0.16588068 = sum of:
    0.16588068 = sum of:
      0.11907496 = weight(_text_:page in 3677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.11907496 = score(doc=3677,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.27565226 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.5854197 = idf(docFreq=450, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049352113 = queryNorm
          0.43197528 = fieldWeight in 3677, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.5854197 = idf(docFreq=450, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3677)
      0.046805713 = weight(_text_:22 in 3677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.046805713 = score(doc=3677,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1728227 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049352113 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3677, 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=3677)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 6.2017 18:04:28

Source

Open Password. Nr.214 vom 21.06.2017 [http://www.password-online.de/?wysija-page=1&controller=email&action=view&email_id=276&wysijap=subscriptions&user_id=1045]

0.05408915 = product of:
  0.08113372 = sum of:
    0.047112305 = weight(_text_:query in 4709) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.047112305 = score(doc=4709,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22937049 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049352113 = queryNorm
        0.20539828 = fieldWeight in 4709, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4709)
    0.03402142 = product of:
      0.06804284 = sum of:
        0.06804284 = weight(_text_:page in 4709) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06804284 = score(doc=4709,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.27565226 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.5854197 = idf(docFreq=450, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049352113 = queryNorm
            0.24684301 = fieldWeight in 4709, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.5854197 = idf(docFreq=450, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4709)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Content

"Swoogle, the Semantic web search engine, is a research project carried out by the ebiquity research group in the Computer Science and Electrical Engineering Department at the University of Maryland. It's an engine tailored towards finding documents on the semantic web. The whole research paper is available here. Semantic web is touted as the next generation of online content representation where the web documents are represented in a language that is not only easy for humans but is machine readable (easing the integration of data as never thought possible) as well. And the main elements of the semantic web include data model description formats such as Resource Description Framework (RDF), a variety of data interchange formats (e.g. RDF/XML, Turtle, N-Triples), and notations such as RDF Schema (RDFS), the Web Ontology Language (OWL), all of which are intended to provide a formal description of concepts, terms, and relationships within a given knowledge domain (Wikipedia). And Swoogle is an attempt to mine and index this new set of web documents. The engine performs crawling of semantic documents like most web search engines and the search is available as web service too. The engine is primarily written in Java with the PHP used for the front-end and MySQL for database. Swoogle is capable of searching over 10,000 ontologies and indexes more that 1.3 million web documents. It also computes the importance of a Semantic Web document. The techniques used for indexing are the more google-type page ranking and also mining the documents for inter-relationships that are the basis for the semantic web. For more information on how the RDF framework can be used to relate documents, read the link here. Being a research project, and with a non-commercial motive, there is not much hype around Swoogle. However, the approach to indexing of Semantic web documents is an approach that most engines will have to take at some point of time. When the Internet debuted, there were no specific engines available for indexing or searching. The Search domain only picked up as more and more content became available. One fundamental question that I've always wondered about it is - provided that the search engines return very relevant results for a query - how to ascertain that the documents are indeed the most relevant ones available. There is always an inherent delay in indexing of document. Its here that the new semantic documents search engines can close delay. Experimenting with the concept of Search in the semantic web can only bore well for the future of search technology."

0.052673157 = product of:
  0.15801947 = sum of:
    0.15801947 = weight(_text_:query in 2676) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.15801947 = score(doc=2676,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.22937049 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049352113 = queryNorm
        0.68892676 = fieldWeight in 2676, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2676)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Finding information located somewhere on the WWW is an error-prone and frustrating task. The WebQuey system offers a powerful new method for searching the Web based on connectivity and content. We do this by examining links among the nodes returned in a keyword-based query. We then rank the nodes, giving the highest rank to the most highly connected nodes. By doing so, we are finding 'hot spots' on the Web that contain onformation germane to a user's query. WebQuery not only ranks and filters the results of a Web query, it also extends the result set beyond what the search engine retrieves, by finding 'interesting' sites that are hoghly connected to those sites returned by the original query. Even with WebQuery filtering and ranking query results, the result sets can be enourmous. So, wen need to visualize the returned information. We explore several techniques for visualizing this information - including cone trees, 2D graphs, 3D graphy, lists, and bullseyes - and discuss the criteria for using each of the techniques

0.051238842 = product of:
  0.15371652 = sum of:
    0.15371652 = sum of:
      0.120283864 = weight(_text_:page in 2565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.120283864 = score(doc=2565,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.27565226 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.5854197 = idf(docFreq=450, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049352113 = queryNorm
          0.4363609 = fieldWeight in 2565, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            5.5854197 = idf(docFreq=450, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2565)
      0.03343265 = weight(_text_:22 in 2565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03343265 = score(doc=2565,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1728227 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049352113 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2565, 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=2565)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This paper introduces a family of link-based ranking algorithms that propagate page importance through links. In these algorithms there is a damping function that decreases with distance, so a direct link implies more endorsement than a link through a long path. PageRank is the most widely known ranking function of this family. The main objective of this paper is to determine whether this family of ranking techniques has some interest per se, and how different choices for the damping function impact on rank quality and on convergence speed. Even though our results suggest that PageRank can be approximated with other simpler forms of rankings that may be computed more efficiently, our focus is of more speculative nature, in that it aims at separating the kernel of PageRank, that is, link-based importance propagation, from the way propagation decays over paths. We focus on three damping functions, having linear, exponential, and hyperbolic decay on the lengths of the paths. The exponential decay corresponds to PageRank, and the other functions are new. Our presentation includes algorithms, analysis, comparisons and experiments that study their behavior under different parameters in real Web graph data. Among other results, we show how to calculate a linear approximation that induces a page ordering that is almost identical to PageRank's using a fixed small number of iterations; comparisons were performed using Kendall's tau on large domain datasets.

Date

16. 1.2016 10:22:28

0.048083793 = product of:
  0.14425138 = sum of:
    0.14425138 = weight(_text_:query in 231) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14425138 = score(doc=231,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.22937049 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049352113 = queryNorm
        0.6289012 = fieldWeight in 231, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=231)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

As an extension to the current Web, Semantic Web will not only contain structured data with machine understandable semantics but also textual information. While structured queries can be used to find information more precisely on the Semantic Web, keyword searches are still needed to help exploit textual information. It thus becomes very important that we can combine precise structured queries with imprecise keyword searches to have a hybrid query capability. In addition, due to the huge volume of information on the Semantic Web, the hybrid query must be processed in a very scalable way. In this paper, we define such a hybrid query capability that combines unary tree-shaped structured queries with keyword searches. We show how existing information retrieval (IR) index structures and functions can be reused to index semantic web data and its textual information, and how the hybrid query is evaluated on the index structure using IR engines in an efficient and scalable manner. We implemented this IR approach in an engine called Semplore. Comprehensive experiments on its performance show that it is a promising approach. It leads us to believe that it may be possible to evolve current web search engines to query and search the Semantic Web. Finally, we briefy describe how Semplore is used for searching Wikipedia and an IBM customer's product information.

0.04760053 = product of:
  0.14280158 = sum of:
    0.14280158 = weight(_text_:query in 1150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14280158 = score(doc=1150,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.22937049 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049352113 = queryNorm
        0.62258047 = fieldWeight in 1150, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1150)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Voice search is becoming a popular mode for interacting with search engines. As a result, research has gone into building better voice transcription engines, interfaces, and search engines that better handle inherent verbosity of queries. However, when one considers its use by non- native speakers of English, another aspect that becomes important is the formulation of the query by users. In this paper, we present the results of a preliminary study that we conducted with non-native English speakers who formulate queries for given retrieval tasks. Our results show that the current search engines are sensitive in their rankings to the query formulation, and thus highlights the need for developing more robust ranking methods.

0.04472363 = product of:
  0.13417089 = sum of:
    0.13417089 = sum of:
      0.1141113 = weight(_text_:page in 3035) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.1141113 = score(doc=3035,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.27565226 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.5854197 = idf(docFreq=450, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049352113 = queryNorm
          0.4139683 = fieldWeight in 3035, product of:
            3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
              10.0 = termFreq=10.0
            5.5854197 = idf(docFreq=450, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3035)
      0.020059591 = weight(_text_:22 in 3035) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.020059591 = score(doc=3035,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1728227 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049352113 = queryNorm
          0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 3035, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3035)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Content

As the team describe in a paper posted (http://arxiv.org/abs/1605.04951) on arXiv, they found that figures did indeed matter-but not all in the same way. An average paper in PubMed Central has about one diagram for every three pages and gets 1.67 citations. Papers with more diagrams per page and, to a lesser extent, plots per page tended to be more influential (on average, a paper accrued two more citations for every extra diagram per page, and one more for every extra plot per page). By contrast, including photographs and equations seemed to decrease the chances of a paper being cited by others. That agrees with a study from 2012, whose authors counted (by hand) the number of mathematical expressions in over 600 biology papers and found that each additional equation per page reduced the number of citations a paper received by 22%. This does not mean that researchers should rush to include more diagrams in their next paper. Dr Howe has not shown what is behind the effect, which may merely be one of correlation, rather than causation. It could, for example, be that papers with lots of diagrams tend to be those that illustrate new concepts, and thus start a whole new field of inquiry. Such papers will certainly be cited a lot. On the other hand, the presence of equations really might reduce citations. Biologists (as are most of those who write and read the papers in PubMed Central) are notoriously mathsaverse. If that is the case, looking in a physics archive would probably produce a different result.

0.04441791 = product of:
  0.13325372 = sum of:
    0.13325372 = weight(_text_:query in 3979) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13325372 = score(doc=3979,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22937049 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049352113 = queryNorm
        0.5809541 = fieldWeight in 3979, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3979)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The retrieval problem is one of the main reasoning tasks for knowledge base systems. Given a knowledge base K and a concept C, the retrieval problem consists of finding all individuals a for which K logically entails C(a). We present an approach to answer retrieval queries over (a restriction of) OWL ontologies. Our solution is based on reducing the retrieval problem to a problem of evaluating an SQL query over a database constructed from the original knowledge base. We provide complete answers to retrieval problems. Still, our system performs very well as is shown by a standard benchmark.

0.0438943 = product of:
  0.13168289 = sum of:
    0.13168289 = weight(_text_:query in 4296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13168289 = score(doc=4296,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.22937049 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049352113 = queryNorm
        0.5741056 = fieldWeight in 4296, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4296)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Daffodil is a front-end to federated, heterogeneous digital libraries targeting at strategic support of users during the information seeking process. This is done by offering a variety of functions for searching, exploring and managing digital library objects. However, the distributed search increases response time and the conceptual model of the underlying search processes is inherently weaker. This makes query formulation harder and the resulting waiting times can be frustrating. In this paper, we investigate the concept of proactive support during the user's query formulation. For improving user efficiency and satisfaction, we implemented annotations, proactive support and error markers on the query form itself. These functions decrease the probability for syntactical or semantical errors in queries. Furthermore, the user is able to make better tactical decisions and feels more confident that the system handles the query properly. Evaluations with 30 subjects showed that user satisfaction is improved, whereas no conclusive results were received for efficiency.

0.0438943 = product of:
  0.13168289 = sum of:
    0.13168289 = weight(_text_:query in 2861) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13168289 = score(doc=2861,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.22937049 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049352113 = queryNorm
        0.5741056 = fieldWeight in 2861, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2861)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Today's conventional search engines hardly do provide the essential content relevant to the user's search query. This is because the context and semantics of the request made by the user is not analyzed to the full extent. So here the need for a semantic web search arises. SWS is upcoming in the area of web search which combines Natural Language Processing and Artificial Intelligence. The objective of the work done here is to design, develop and implement a semantic search engine- SIEU(Semantic Information Extraction in University Domain) confined to the university domain. SIEU uses ontology as a knowledge base for the information retrieval process. It is not just a mere keyword search. It is one layer above what Google or any other search engines retrieve by analyzing just the keywords. Here the query is analyzed both syntactically and semantically. The developed system retrieves the web results more relevant to the user query through keyword expansion. The results obtained here will be accurate enough to satisfy the request made by the user. The level of accuracy will be enhanced since the query is analyzed semantically. The system will be of great use to the developers and researchers who work on web. The Google results are re-ranked and optimized for providing the relevant links. For ranking an algorithm has been applied which fetches more apt results for the user query.

0.043546803 = product of:
  0.1306404 = sum of:
    0.1306404 = product of:
      0.3919212 = sum of:
        0.3919212 = weight(_text_:3a in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.3919212 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.41840777 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049352113 = queryNorm
            0.93669677 = fieldWeight in 1826, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1826)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CDQQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdigbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fvolltexte%2Fdocuments%2F3131107&ei=HzFWVYvGMsiNsgGTyoFI&usg=AFQjCNE2FHUeR9oQTQlNC4TPedv4Mo3DaQ&sig2=Rlzpr7a3BLZZkqZCXXN_IA&bvm=bv.93564037,d.bGg&cad=rja

0.040800452 = product of:
  0.12240136 = sum of:
    0.12240136 = weight(_text_:query in 4802) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12240136 = score(doc=4802,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.22937049 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049352113 = queryNorm
        0.5336404 = fieldWeight in 4802, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4802)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The power of search is with no doubt one of the main aspects for the success of the Web. Currently available search engines on the Web allow to return results with a high precision. Nevertheless, if we limit our attention only to lookup search we are missing another important search task. In exploratory search, the user is willing not only to find documents relevant with respect to her query but she is also interested in learning, discovering and understanding novel knowledge on complex and sometimes unknown topics. In the paper we address this issue presenting LED, a web based system that aims to improve (lookup) Web search by enabling users to properly explore knowledge associated to her query. We rely on DBpedia to explore the semantics of keywords within the query thus suggesting potentially interesting related topics/keywords to the user.

0.039691657 = product of:
  0.11907496 = sum of:
    0.11907496 = product of:
      0.23814993 = sum of:
        0.23814993 = weight(_text_:page in 496) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.23814993 = score(doc=496,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.27565226 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.5854197 = idf(docFreq=450, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049352113 = queryNorm
            0.86395055 = fieldWeight in 496, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.5854197 = idf(docFreq=450, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=496)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)