Search (14 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Automatisches Abstracting"
  1. Wu, Y.-f.B.; Li, Q.; Bot, R.S.; Chen, X.: Finding nuggets in documents : a machine learning approach (2006) 0.09
    0.08752376 = product of:
      0.13128564 = sum of:
        0.068818994 = weight(_text_:interest in 5290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.068818994 = score(doc=5290,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25074318 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.27446008 = fieldWeight in 5290, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5290)
        0.062466644 = sum of:
          0.028277358 = weight(_text_:classification in 5290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.028277358 = score(doc=5290,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
                0.05046903 = queryNorm
              0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 5290, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5290)
          0.034189284 = weight(_text_:22 in 5290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.034189284 = score(doc=5290,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17673394 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.05046903 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5290, 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=5290)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Document keyphrases provide a concise summary of a document's content, offering semantic metadata summarizing a document. They can be used in many applications related to knowledge management and text mining, such as automatic text summarization, development of search engines, document clustering, document classification, thesaurus construction, and browsing interfaces. Because only a small portion of documents have keyphrases assigned by authors, and it is time-consuming and costly to manually assign keyphrases to documents, it is necessary to develop an algorithm to automatically generate keyphrases for documents. This paper describes a Keyphrase Identification Program (KIP), which extracts document keyphrases by using prior positive samples of human identified phrases to assign weights to the candidate keyphrases. The logic of our algorithm is: The more keywords a candidate keyphrase contains and the more significant these keywords are, the more likely this candidate phrase is a keyphrase. KIP's learning function can enrich the glossary database by automatically adding new identified keyphrases to the database. KIP's personalization feature will let the user build a glossary database specifically suitable for the area of his/her interest. The evaluation results show that KIP's performance is better than the systems we compared to and that the learning function is effective.
    Date
    22. 7.2006 17:25:48
  2. Vanderwende, L.; Suzuki, H.; Brockett, J.M.; Nenkova, A.: Beyond SumBasic : task-focused summarization with sentence simplification and lexical expansion (2007) 0.07
    0.06873091 = product of:
      0.103096366 = sum of:
        0.082582794 = weight(_text_:interest in 948) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.082582794 = score(doc=948,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25074318 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.3293521 = fieldWeight in 948, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=948)
        0.02051357 = product of:
          0.04102714 = sum of:
            0.04102714 = weight(_text_:22 in 948) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04102714 = score(doc=948,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17673394 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05046903 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 948, 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=948)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    In recent years, there has been increased interest in topic-focused multi-document summarization. In this task, automatic summaries are produced in response to a specific information request, or topic, stated by the user. The system we have designed to accomplish this task comprises four main components: a generic extractive summarization system, a topic-focusing component, sentence simplification, and lexical expansion of topic words. This paper details each of these components, together with experiments designed to quantify their individual contributions. We include an analysis of our results on two large datasets commonly used to evaluate task-focused summarization, the DUC2005 and DUC2006 datasets, using automatic metrics. Additionally, we include an analysis of our results on the DUC2006 task according to human evaluation metrics. In the human evaluation of system summaries compared to human summaries, i.e., the Pyramid method, our system ranked first out of 22 systems in terms of overall mean Pyramid score; and in the human evaluation of summary responsiveness to the topic, our system ranked third out of 35 systems.
  3. Over, P.; Dang, H.; Harman, D.: DUC in context (2007) 0.04
    0.036703467 = product of:
      0.110110395 = sum of:
        0.110110395 = weight(_text_:interest in 934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.110110395 = score(doc=934,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25074318 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.43913615 = fieldWeight in 934, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=934)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Recent years have seen increased interest in text summarization with emphasis on evaluation of prototype systems. Many factors can affect the design of such evaluations, requiring choices among competing alternatives. This paper examines several major themes running through three evaluations: SUMMAC, NTCIR, and DUC, with a concentration on DUC. The themes are extrinsic and intrinsic evaluation, evaluation procedures and methods, generic versus focused summaries, single- and multi-document summaries, length and compression issues, extracts versus abstracts, and issues with genre.
  4. Marcu, D.: Automatic abstracting and summarization (2009) 0.03
    0.032115534 = product of:
      0.0963466 = sum of:
        0.0963466 = weight(_text_:interest in 3748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0963466 = score(doc=3748,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25074318 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.38424414 = fieldWeight in 3748, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3748)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    After lying dormant for a few decades, the field of automated text summarization has experienced a tremendous resurgence of interest. Recently, many new algorithms and techniques have been proposed for identifying important information in single documents and document collections, and for mapping this information into grammatical, cohesive, and coherent abstracts. Since 1997, annual workshops, conferences, and large-scale comparative evaluations have provided a rich environment for exchanging ideas between researchers in Asia, Europe, and North America. This entry reviews the main developments in the field and provides a guiding map to those interested in understanding the strengths and weaknesses of an increasingly ubiquitous technology.
  5. Díaz, A.; Gervás, P.: User-model based personalized summarization (2007) 0.03
    0.027527599 = product of:
      0.082582794 = sum of:
        0.082582794 = weight(_text_:interest in 952) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.082582794 = score(doc=952,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25074318 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.3293521 = fieldWeight in 952, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=952)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The potential of summary personalization is high, because a summary that would be useless to decide the relevance of a document if summarized in a generic manner, may be useful if the right sentences are selected that match the user interest. In this paper we defend the use of a personalized summarization facility to maximize the density of relevance of selections sent by a personalized information system to a given user. The personalization is applied to the digital newspaper domain and it used a user-model that stores long and short term interests using four reference systems: sections, categories, keywords and feedback terms. On the other side, it is crucial to measure how much information is lost during the summarization process, and how this information loss may affect the ability of the user to judge the relevance of a given document. The results obtained in two personalization systems show that personalized summaries perform better than generic and generic-personalized summaries in terms of identifying documents that satisfy user preferences. We also considered a user-centred direct evaluation that showed a high level of user satisfaction with the summaries.
  6. Wang, W.; Hwang, D.: Abstraction Assistant : an automatic text abstraction system (2010) 0.03
    0.027527599 = product of:
      0.082582794 = sum of:
        0.082582794 = weight(_text_:interest in 3981) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.082582794 = score(doc=3981,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25074318 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.3293521 = fieldWeight in 3981, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3981)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    In the interest of standardization and quality assurance, it is desirable for authors and staff of access services to follow the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) guidelines in preparing abstracts. Using the statistical approach an extraction system (the Abstraction Assistant) was developed to generate informative abstracts to meet the ANSI guidelines for structural content elements. The system performance is evaluated by comparing the system-generated abstracts with the author's original abstracts and the manually enhanced system abstracts on three criteria: balance (satisfaction of the ANSI standards), fluency (text coherence), and understandability (clarity). The results suggest that it is possible to use the system output directly without manual modification, but there are issues that need to be addressed in further studies to make the system a better tool.
  7. Shen, D.; Yang, Q.; Chen, Z.: Noise reduction through summarization for Web-page classification (2007) 0.01
    0.014962973 = product of:
      0.044888917 = sum of:
        0.044888917 = product of:
          0.089777835 = sum of:
            0.089777835 = weight(_text_:classification in 953) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.089777835 = score(doc=953,freq=14.0), product of:
                0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05046903 = queryNorm
                0.55856633 = fieldWeight in 953, product of:
                  3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                    14.0 = termFreq=14.0
                  3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=953)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Due to a large variety of noisy information embedded in Web pages, Web-page classification is much more difficult than pure-text classification. In this paper, we propose to improve the Web-page classification performance by removing the noise through summarization techniques. We first give empirical evidence that ideal Web-page summaries generated by human editors can indeed improve the performance of Web-page classification algorithms. We then put forward a new Web-page summarization algorithm based on Web-page layout and evaluate it along with several other state-of-the-art text summarization algorithms on the LookSmart Web directory. Experimental results show that the classification algorithms (NB or SVM) augmented by any summarization approach can achieve an improvement by more than 5.0% as compared to pure-text-based classification algorithms. We further introduce an ensemble method to combine the different summarization algorithms. The ensemble summarization method achieves more than 12.0% improvement over pure-text based methods.
  8. Goh, A.; Hui, S.C.: TES: a text extraction system (1996) 0.01
    0.009117142 = product of:
      0.027351426 = sum of:
        0.027351426 = product of:
          0.054702852 = sum of:
            0.054702852 = weight(_text_:22 in 6599) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.054702852 = score(doc=6599,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17673394 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05046903 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 6599, 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=6599)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    26. 2.1997 10:22:43
  9. Robin, J.; McKeown, K.: Empirically designing and evaluating a new revision-based model for summary generation (1996) 0.01
    0.009117142 = product of:
      0.027351426 = sum of:
        0.027351426 = product of:
          0.054702852 = sum of:
            0.054702852 = weight(_text_:22 in 6751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.054702852 = score(doc=6751,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17673394 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05046903 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 6751, 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=6751)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    6. 3.1997 16:22:15
  10. Jones, P.A.; Bradbeer, P.V.G.: Discovery of optimal weights in a concept selection system (1996) 0.01
    0.009117142 = product of:
      0.027351426 = sum of:
        0.027351426 = product of:
          0.054702852 = sum of:
            0.054702852 = weight(_text_:22 in 6974) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.054702852 = score(doc=6974,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17673394 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05046903 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 6974, 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=6974)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Information retrieval: new systems and current research. Proceedings of the 16th Research Colloquium of the British Computer Society Information Retrieval Specialist Group, Drymen, Scotland, 22-23 Mar 94. Ed.: R. Leon
  11. Wang, S.; Koopman, R.: Embed first, then predict (2019) 0.01
    0.0066650375 = product of:
      0.019995112 = sum of:
        0.019995112 = product of:
          0.039990224 = sum of:
            0.039990224 = weight(_text_:classification in 5400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.039990224 = score(doc=5400,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05046903 = queryNorm
                0.24880521 = fieldWeight in 5400, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5400)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Automatic subject prediction is a desirable feature for modern digital library systems, as manual indexing can no longer cope with the rapid growth of digital collections. It is also desirable to be able to identify a small set of entities (e.g., authors, citations, bibliographic records) which are most relevant to a query. This gets more difficult when the amount of data increases dramatically. Data sparsity and model scalability are the major challenges to solving this type of extreme multilabel classification problem automatically. In this paper, we propose to address this problem in two steps: we first embed different types of entities into the same semantic space, where similarity could be computed easily; second, we propose a novel non-parametric method to identify the most relevant entities in addition to direct semantic similarities. We show how effectively this approach predicts even very specialised subjects, which are associated with few documents in the training set and are more problematic for a classifier.
    Footnote
    Beitrag eines Special Issue: Research Information Systems and Science Classifications; including papers from "Trajectories for Research: Fathoming the Promise of the NARCIS Classification," 27-28 September 2018, The Hague, The Netherlands.
  12. Kim, H.H.; Kim, Y.H.: Generic speech summarization of transcribed lecture videos : using tags and their semantic relations (2016) 0.01
    0.0056982143 = product of:
      0.017094642 = sum of:
        0.017094642 = product of:
          0.034189284 = sum of:
            0.034189284 = weight(_text_:22 in 2640) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.034189284 = score(doc=2640,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17673394 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05046903 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2640, 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=2640)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    22. 1.2016 12:29:41
  13. Oh, H.; Nam, S.; Zhu, Y.: Structured abstract summarization of scientific articles : summarization using full-text section information (2023) 0.01
    0.0056982143 = product of:
      0.017094642 = sum of:
        0.017094642 = product of:
          0.034189284 = sum of:
            0.034189284 = weight(_text_:22 in 889) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.034189284 = score(doc=889,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17673394 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05046903 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 889, 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=889)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    22. 1.2023 18:57:12
  14. Jiang, Y.; Meng, R.; Huang, Y.; Lu, W.; Liu, J.: Generating keyphrases for readers : a controllable keyphrase generation framework (2023) 0.01
    0.0056982143 = product of:
      0.017094642 = sum of:
        0.017094642 = product of:
          0.034189284 = sum of:
            0.034189284 = weight(_text_:22 in 1012) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.034189284 = score(doc=1012,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17673394 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05046903 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1012, 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=1012)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    22. 6.2023 14:55:20