-
Rolland-Thomas, P.: Thesaural codes : an appraisal of their use in the Library of Congress Subject Headings (1993)
0.15
0.14603876 = product of:
0.18254843 = sum of:
0.057711232 = weight(_text_:list in 549) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.057711232 = score(doc=549,freq=2.0), product of:
0.25191793 = queryWeight, product of:
5.183657 = idf(docFreq=673, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.22908744 = fieldWeight in 549, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.183657 = idf(docFreq=673, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=549)
0.019651264 = weight(_text_:of in 549) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019651264 = score(doc=549,freq=28.0), product of:
0.07599624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.25858206 = fieldWeight in 549, product of:
5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
28.0 = termFreq=28.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=549)
0.06143454 = weight(_text_:subject in 549) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06143454 = score(doc=549,freq=10.0), product of:
0.17381717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.35344344 = fieldWeight in 549, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=549)
0.043751396 = product of:
0.08750279 = sum of:
0.08750279 = weight(_text_:headings in 549) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08750279 = score(doc=549,freq=6.0), product of:
0.23569997 = queryWeight, product of:
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.37124652 = fieldWeight in 549, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=549)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.8 = coord(4/5)
- Abstract
- LCSH is known as such since 1975. It always has created headings to serve the LC collections instead of a theoretical basis. It started to replace cross reference codes by thesaural codes in 1986, in a mechanical fashion. It was in no way transformed into a thesaurus. Its encyclopedic coverage, its pre-coordinate concepts make it substantially distinct, considering that thesauri usually map a restricted field of knowledge and use uniterms. The questions raised are whether the new symbols comply with thesaurus standards and if they are true to one or to several models. Explanations and definitions from other lists of subject headings and thesauri, literature in the field of classification and subject indexing will provide some answers. For instance, see refers from a subject heading not used to another or others used. Exceptionally it will lead from a specific term to a more general one. Some equate a see reference with the equivalence relationship. Such relationships are pointed by USE in LCSH. See also references are made from the broader subject to narrower parts of it and also between associated subjects. They suggest lateral or vertical connexions as well as reciprocal relationships. They serve a coordination purpose for some, lay down a methodical search itinerary for others. Since their inception in the 1950's thesauri have been devised for indexing and retrieving information in the fields of science and technology. Eventually they attended to a number of social sciences and humanities. Research derived from thesauri was voluminous. Numerous guidelines are designed. They did not discriminate between the "hard" sciences and the social sciences. RT relationships are widely but diversely used in numerous controlled vocabularies. LCSH's aim is to achieve a list almost free of RT and SA references. It thus restricts relationships to BT/NT, USE and UF. This raises the question as to whether all fields of knowledge can "fit" in the Procrustean bed of RT/NT, i.e., genus/species relationships. Standard codes were devised. It was soon realized that BT/NT, well suited to the genus/species couple could not signal a whole-part relationship. In LCSH, BT and NT function as reciprocals, the whole-part relationship is taken into account by ISO. It is amply elaborated upon by authors. The part-whole connexion is sometimes studied apart. The decision to replace cross reference codes was an improvement. Relations can now be distinguished through the distinct needs of numerous fields of knowledge are not attended to. Topic inclusion, and topic-subtopic, could provide the missing link where genus/species or whole/part are inadequate. Distinct codes, BT/NT and whole/part, should be provided. Sorting relationships with mechanical means can only lead to confusion.
-
Sy, M.-F.; Ranwez, S.; Montmain, J.; Ragnault, A.; Crampes, M.; Ranwez, V.: User centered and ontology based information retrieval system for life sciences (2012)
0.10
0.10164306 = product of:
0.12705383 = sum of:
0.057711232 = weight(_text_:list in 699) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.057711232 = score(doc=699,freq=2.0), product of:
0.25191793 = queryWeight, product of:
5.183657 = idf(docFreq=673, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.22908744 = fieldWeight in 699, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.183657 = idf(docFreq=673, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=699)
0.01660835 = weight(_text_:of in 699) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01660835 = score(doc=699,freq=20.0), product of:
0.07599624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.21854173 = fieldWeight in 699, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=699)
0.02747436 = weight(_text_:subject in 699) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02747436 = score(doc=699,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17381717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.15806471 = fieldWeight in 699, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=699)
0.02525988 = product of:
0.05051976 = sum of:
0.05051976 = weight(_text_:headings in 699) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05051976 = score(doc=699,freq=2.0), product of:
0.23569997 = queryWeight, product of:
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.21433927 = fieldWeight in 699, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=699)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.8 = coord(4/5)
- Abstract
- Background: Because of the increasing number of electronic resources, designing efficient tools to retrieve and exploit them is a major challenge. Some improvements have been offered by semantic Web technologies and applications based on domain ontologies. In life science, for instance, the Gene Ontology is widely exploited in genomic applications and the Medical Subject Headings is the basis of biomedical publications indexation and information retrieval process proposed by PubMed. However current search engines suffer from two main drawbacks: there is limited user interaction with the list of retrieved resources and no explanation for their adequacy to the query is provided. Users may thus be confused by the selection and have no idea on how to adapt their queries so that the results match their expectations. Results: This paper describes an information retrieval system that relies on domain ontology to widen the set of relevant documents that is retrieved and that uses a graphical rendering of query results to favor user interactions. Semantic proximities between ontology concepts and aggregating models are used to assess documents adequacy with respect to a query. The selection of documents is displayed in a semantic map to provide graphical indications that make explicit to what extent they match the user's query; this man/machine interface favors a more interactive and iterative exploration of data corpus, by facilitating query concepts weighting and visual explanation. We illustrate the benefit of using this information retrieval system on two case studies one of which aiming at collecting human genes related to transcription factors involved in hemopoiesis pathway. Conclusions: The ontology based information retrieval system described in this paper (OBIRS) is freely available at: http://www.ontotoolkit.mines-ales.fr/ObirsClient/. This environment is a first step towards a user centred application in which the system enlightens relevant information to provide decision help.
-
Jacobs, I.: From chaos, order: W3C standard helps organize knowledge : SKOS Connects Diverse Knowledge Organization Systems to Linked Data (2009)
0.08
0.082749076 = product of:
0.13791512 = sum of:
0.020551786 = weight(_text_:of in 3062) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020551786 = score(doc=3062,freq=40.0), product of:
0.07599624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.2704316 = fieldWeight in 3062, product of:
6.3245554 = tf(freq=40.0), with freq of:
40.0 = termFreq=40.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3062)
0.058885895 = weight(_text_:subject in 3062) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.058885895 = score(doc=3062,freq=12.0), product of:
0.17381717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.33878064 = fieldWeight in 3062, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3062)
0.058477443 = product of:
0.116954885 = sum of:
0.116954885 = weight(_text_:headings in 3062) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.116954885 = score(doc=3062,freq=14.0), product of:
0.23569997 = queryWeight, product of:
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.49620238 = fieldWeight in 3062, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3062)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- 18 August 2009 -- Today W3C announces a new standard that builds a bridge between the world of knowledge organization systems - including thesauri, classifications, subject headings, taxonomies, and folksonomies - and the linked data community, bringing benefits to both. Libraries, museums, newspapers, government portals, enterprises, social networking applications, and other communities that manage large collections of books, historical artifacts, news reports, business glossaries, blog entries, and other items can now use Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS) to leverage the power of linked data. As different communities with expertise and established vocabularies use SKOS to integrate them into the Semantic Web, they increase the value of the information for everyone.
- Content
- SKOS Adapts to the Diversity of Knowledge Organization Systems A useful starting point for understanding the role of SKOS is the set of subject headings published by the US Library of Congress (LOC) for categorizing books, videos, and other library resources. These headings can be used to broaden or narrow queries for discovering resources. For instance, one can narrow a query about books on "Chinese literature" to "Chinese drama," or further still to "Chinese children's plays." Library of Congress subject headings have evolved within a community of practice over a period of decades. By now publishing these subject headings in SKOS, the Library of Congress has made them available to the linked data community, which benefits from a time-tested set of concepts to re-use in their own data. This re-use adds value ("the network effect") to the collection. When people all over the Web re-use the same LOC concept for "Chinese drama," or a concept from some other vocabulary linked to it, this creates many new routes to the discovery of information, and increases the chances that relevant items will be found. As an example of mapping one vocabulary to another, a combined effort from the STITCH, TELplus and MACS Projects provides links between LOC concepts and RAMEAU, a collection of French subject headings used by the Bibliothèque Nationale de France and other institutions. SKOS can be used for subject headings but also many other approaches to organizing knowledge. Because different communities are comfortable with different organization schemes, SKOS is designed to port diverse knowledge organization systems to the Web. "Active participation from the library and information science community in the development of SKOS over the past seven years has been key to ensuring that SKOS meets a variety of needs," said Thomas Baker, co-chair of the Semantic Web Deployment Working Group, which published SKOS. "One goal in creating SKOS was to provide new uses for well-established knowledge organization systems by providing a bridge to the linked data cloud." SKOS is part of the Semantic Web technology stack. Like the Web Ontology Language (OWL), SKOS can be used to define vocabularies. But the two technologies were designed to meet different needs. SKOS is a simple language with just a few features, tuned for sharing and linking knowledge organization systems such as thesauri and classification schemes. OWL offers a general and powerful framework for knowledge representation, where additional "rigor" can afford additional benefits (for instance, business rule processing). To get started with SKOS, see the SKOS Primer.
-
Peponakis, M.; Mastora, A.; Kapidakis, S.; Doerr, M.: Expressiveness and machine processability of Knowledge Organization Systems (KOS) : an analysis of concepts and relations (2020)
0.08
0.07823846 = product of:
0.13039742 = sum of:
0.026260108 = weight(_text_:of in 5787) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026260108 = score(doc=5787,freq=32.0), product of:
0.07599624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.34554482 = fieldWeight in 5787, product of:
5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
32.0 = termFreq=32.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5787)
0.059483737 = weight(_text_:subject in 5787) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.059483737 = score(doc=5787,freq=6.0), product of:
0.17381717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.34222013 = fieldWeight in 5787, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5787)
0.044653583 = product of:
0.08930717 = sum of:
0.08930717 = weight(_text_:headings in 5787) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08930717 = score(doc=5787,freq=4.0), product of:
0.23569997 = queryWeight, product of:
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.3789019 = fieldWeight in 5787, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5787)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- This study considers the expressiveness (that is the expressive power or expressivity) of different types of Knowledge Organization Systems (KOS) and discusses its potential to be machine-processable in the context of the Semantic Web. For this purpose, the theoretical foundations of KOS are reviewed based on conceptualizations introduced by the Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD) and the Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS); natural language processing techniques are also implemented. Applying a comparative analysis, the dataset comprises a thesaurus (Eurovoc), a subject headings system (LCSH) and a classification scheme (DDC). These are compared with an ontology (CIDOC-CRM) by focusing on how they define and handle concepts and relations. It was observed that LCSH and DDC focus on the formalism of character strings (nomens) rather than on the modelling of semantics; their definition of what constitutes a concept is quite fuzzy, and they comprise a large number of complex concepts. By contrast, thesauri have a coherent definition of what constitutes a concept, and apply a systematic approach to the modelling of relations. Ontologies explicitly define diverse types of relations, and are by their nature machine-processable. The paper concludes that the potential of both the expressiveness and machine processability of each KOS is extensively regulated by its structural rules. It is harder to represent subject headings and classification schemes as semantic networks with nodes and arcs, while thesauri are more suitable for such a representation. In addition, a paradigm shift is revealed which focuses on the modelling of relations between concepts, rather than the concepts themselves.
-
Gödert, W.; Hubrich, J.; Nagelschmidt, M.: Semantic knowledge representation for information retrieval (2014)
0.06
0.06286735 = product of:
0.10477891 = sum of:
0.013645152 = weight(_text_:of in 987) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013645152 = score(doc=987,freq=6.0), product of:
0.07599624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.17955035 = fieldWeight in 987, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=987)
0.07138049 = weight(_text_:subject in 987) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07138049 = score(doc=987,freq=6.0), product of:
0.17381717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.41066417 = fieldWeight in 987, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=987)
0.019753272 = product of:
0.039506543 = sum of:
0.039506543 = weight(_text_:22 in 987) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.039506543 = score(doc=987,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17018363 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 987, 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=987)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- This book covers the basics of semantic web technologies and indexing languages, and describes their contribution to improve languages as a tool for subject queries and knowledge exploration. The book is relevant to information scientists, knowledge workers and indexers. It provides a suitable combination of theoretical foundations and practical applications.
- Content
- Introduction: envisioning semantic information spacesIndexing and knowledge organization -- Semantic technologies for knowledge representation -- Information retrieval and knowledge exploration -- Approaches to handle heterogeneity -- Problems with establishing semantic interoperability -- Formalization in indexing languages -- Typification of semantic relations -- Inferences in retrieval processes -- Semantic interoperability and inferences -- Remaining research questions.
- Date
- 23. 7.2017 13:49:22
- LCSH
- World Wide Web / Subject access
- Subject
- World Wide Web / Subject access
-
Buente, W.; Baybayan, C.K.; Hajibayova, L.; McCorkhill, M.; Panchyshyn, R.: Exploring the renaissance of wayfinding and voyaging through the lens of knowledge representation, organization and discovery systems (2020)
0.06
0.055791665 = product of:
0.09298611 = sum of:
0.0270683 = weight(_text_:of in 105) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0270683 = score(doc=105,freq=34.0), product of:
0.07599624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.35617945 = fieldWeight in 105, product of:
5.8309517 = tf(freq=34.0), with freq of:
34.0 = termFreq=34.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=105)
0.034342952 = weight(_text_:subject in 105) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.034342952 = score(doc=105,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17381717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.19758089 = fieldWeight in 105, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=105)
0.03157485 = product of:
0.0631497 = sum of:
0.0631497 = weight(_text_:headings in 105) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0631497 = score(doc=105,freq=2.0), product of:
0.23569997 = queryWeight, product of:
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.2679241 = fieldWeight in 105, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=105)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- The purpose of this paper is to provide a critical analysis from an ethical perspective of how the concept of indigenous wayfinding and voyaging is mapped in knowledge representation, organization and discovery systems. Design/methodology/approach In this study, the Dewey Decimal Classification, the Library of Congress Subject Headings, the Library of Congress Classifications systems and the Web of Science citation database were methodically examined to determine how these systems represent and facilitate the discovery of indigenous knowledge of wayfinding and voyaging. Findings The analysis revealed that there was no dedicated representation of the indigenous practices of wayfinding and voyaging in the major knowledge representation, organization and discovery systems. By scattering indigenous practice across various, often very broad and unrelated classes, coherence in the record is disrupted, resulting in misrepresentation of these indigenous concepts. Originality/value This study contributes to a relatively limited research literature on representation and organization of indigenous knowledge of wayfinding and voyaging. This study calls to foster a better understanding and appreciation for the rich knowledge that indigenous cultures provide for an enlightened society.
- Object
- Web of Science
- Source
- Journal of documentation. 76(2020) no.6, S.1279-1293
-
Zeng, M.L.; Fan, W.; Lin, X.: SKOS for an integrated vocabulary structure (2008)
0.05
0.052390117 = product of:
0.13097529 = sum of:
0.022282438 = weight(_text_:of in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022282438 = score(doc=2654,freq=36.0), product of:
0.07599624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.2932045 = fieldWeight in 2654, product of:
6.0 = tf(freq=36.0), with freq of:
36.0 = termFreq=36.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2654)
0.108692855 = sum of:
0.071445726 = weight(_text_:headings in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.071445726 = score(doc=2654,freq=4.0), product of:
0.23569997 = queryWeight, product of:
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.3031215 = fieldWeight in 2654, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2654)
0.03724713 = weight(_text_:22 in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03724713 = score(doc=2654,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17018363 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.21886435 = fieldWeight in 2654, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2654)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- In order to transfer the Chinese Classified Thesaurus (CCT) into a machine-processable format and provide CCT-based Web services, a pilot study has been conducted in which a variety of selected CCT classes and mapped thesaurus entries are encoded with SKOS. OWL and RDFS are also used to encode the same contents for the purposes of feasibility and cost-benefit comparison. CCT is a collected effort led by the National Library of China. It is an integration of the national standards Chinese Library Classification (CLC) 4th edition and Chinese Thesaurus (CT). As a manually created mapping product, CCT provides for each of the classes the corresponding thesaurus terms, and vice versa. The coverage of CCT includes four major clusters: philosophy, social sciences and humanities, natural sciences and technologies, and general works. There are 22 main-classes, 52,992 sub-classes and divisions, 110,837 preferred thesaurus terms, 35,690 entry terms (non-preferred terms), and 59,738 pre-coordinated headings (Chinese Classified Thesaurus, 2005) Major challenges of encoding this large vocabulary comes from its integrated structure. CCT is a result of the combination of two structures (illustrated in Figure 1): a thesaurus that uses ISO-2788 standardized structure and a classification scheme that is basically enumerative, but provides some flexibility for several kinds of synthetic mechanisms Other challenges include the complex relationships caused by differences of granularities of two original schemes and their presentation with various levels of SKOS elements; as well as the diverse coordination of entries due to the use of auxiliary tables and pre-coordinated headings derived from combining classes, subdivisions, and thesaurus terms, which do not correspond to existing unique identifiers. The poster reports the progress, shares the sample SKOS entries, and summarizes problems identified during the SKOS encoding process. Although OWL Lite and OWL Full provide richer expressiveness, the cost-benefit issues and the final purposes of encoding CCT raise questions of using such approaches.
- 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
-
Zeng, M.L.; Zumer, M.: Introducing FRSAD and mapping it with SKOS and other models (2009)
0.05
0.049291875 = product of:
0.12322968 = sum of:
0.022282438 = weight(_text_:of in 3150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022282438 = score(doc=3150,freq=16.0), product of:
0.07599624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.2932045 = fieldWeight in 3150, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3150)
0.100947246 = weight(_text_:subject in 3150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.100947246 = score(doc=3150,freq=12.0), product of:
0.17381717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.5807668 = fieldWeight in 3150, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3150)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- The Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Records (FRSAR) Working Group was formed in 2005 as the third IFLA working group of the FRBR family to address subject authority data issues and to investigate the direct and indirect uses of subject authority data by a wide range of users. This paper introduces the Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD), the model developed by the FRSAR Working Group, and discusses it in the context of other related conceptual models defined in the specifications during recent years, including the British Standard BS8723-5: Structured vocabularies for information retrieval - Guide Part 5: Exchange formats and protocols for interoperability, W3C's SKOS Simple Knowledge Organization System Reference, and OWL Web Ontology Language Reference. These models enable the consideration of the functions of subject authority data and concept schemes at a higher level that is independent of any implementation, system, or specific context, while allowing us to focus on the semantics, structures, and interoperability of subject authority data.
-
Baião Salgado Silva, G.; Lima, G.Â. Borém de Oliveira: Using topic maps in establishing compatibility of semantically structured hypertext contents (2012)
0.05
0.04765218 = product of:
0.0794203 = sum of:
0.028616289 = weight(_text_:of in 633) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028616289 = score(doc=633,freq=38.0), product of:
0.07599624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.37654874 = fieldWeight in 633, product of:
6.164414 = tf(freq=38.0), with freq of:
38.0 = termFreq=38.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=633)
0.034342952 = weight(_text_:subject in 633) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.034342952 = score(doc=633,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17381717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.19758089 = fieldWeight in 633, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=633)
0.016461061 = product of:
0.032922123 = sum of:
0.032922123 = weight(_text_:22 in 633) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032922123 = score(doc=633,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17018363 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 633, 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=633)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- Considering the characteristics of hypertext systems and problems such as cognitive overload and the disorientation of users, this project studies subject hypertext documents that have undergone conceptual structuring using facets for content representation and improvement of information retrieval during navigation. The main objective was to assess the possibility of the application of topic map technology for automating the compatibilization process of these structures. For this purpose, two dissertations from the UFMG Information Science Post-Graduation Program were adopted as samples. Both dissertations had been duly analyzed and structured on the MHTX (Hypertextual Map) prototype database. The faceted structures of both dissertations, which had been represented in conceptual maps, were then converted into topic maps. It was then possible to use the merge property of the topic maps to promote the semantic interrelationship between the maps and, consequently, between the hypertextual information resources proper. The merge results were then analyzed in the light of theories dealing with the compatibilization of languages developed within the realm of information technology and librarianship from the 1960s on. The main goals accomplished were: (a) the detailed conceptualization of the merge process of the topic maps, considering the possible compatibilization levels and the applicability of this technology in the integration of faceted structures; and (b) the production of a detailed sequence of steps that may be used in the implementation of topic maps based on faceted structures.
- Date
- 22. 2.2013 11:39:23
-
Fluit, C.; Horst, H. ter; Meer, J. van der; Sabou, M.; Mika, P.: Spectacle (2004)
0.05
0.0459886 = product of:
0.1149715 = sum of:
0.08656685 = weight(_text_:list in 4337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08656685 = score(doc=4337,freq=2.0), product of:
0.25191793 = queryWeight, product of:
5.183657 = idf(docFreq=673, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.34363115 = fieldWeight in 4337, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.183657 = idf(docFreq=673, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4337)
0.02840465 = weight(_text_:of in 4337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02840465 = score(doc=4337,freq=26.0), product of:
0.07599624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.37376386 = fieldWeight in 4337, product of:
5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
26.0 = termFreq=26.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4337)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Many Semantic Web initiatives improve the capabilities of machines to exchange the meaning of information with other machines. These efforts lead to an increased quality of the application's results, but their user interfaces take little or no advantage of the semantic richness. For example, an ontology-based search engine will use its ontology when evaluating the user's query (e.g. for query formulation, disambiguation or evaluation), but fails to use it to significantly enrich the presentation of the results to a human user. For example, one could imagine replacing the endless list of hits with a structured presentation based on the semantic properties of the hits. Another problem is that the modelling of a domain is done from a single perspective (most often that of the information provider). Therefore, presentation based on the resulting ontology is unlikely to satisfy the needs of all the different types of users of the information. So even assuming an ontology for the domain is in place, mapping that ontology to the needs of individual users - based on their tasks, expertise and personal preferences - is not trivial.
-
Khoo, C.S.G.; Zhang, D.; Wang, M.; Yun, X.J.: Subject organization in three types of information resources : an exploratory study (2012)
0.04
0.039814036 = product of:
0.09953509 = sum of:
0.022741921 = weight(_text_:of in 831) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022741921 = score(doc=831,freq=24.0), product of:
0.07599624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.2992506 = fieldWeight in 831, product of:
4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
24.0 = termFreq=24.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=831)
0.07679317 = weight(_text_:subject in 831) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07679317 = score(doc=831,freq=10.0), product of:
0.17381717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.4418043 = fieldWeight in 831, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=831)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Knowledge tends to be structured differently in different types of information resources and information genres due to the different purposes of the resource/genre, and the characteristics of the media or format of the resource. This study investigates subject organization in three types of information resources: books (i.e. monographs), Web directories and information websites that provide information on particular subjects. Twelve subjects (topics) were selected in the areas of science, arts/humanities and social science, and two books, two Web directories and two information websites were sampled for each subject. The top two levels of the hierarchical subject organization in each resource were harvested and analyzed. Books have the highest proportion of general subject categories (e.g. history, theory and definition) and process categories (indicating step-by-step instructions). Information websites have the highest proportion of target user categories and genre-specific categories (e.g. about us and contact us), whereas Web directories have the highest proportion of specialty categories (i.e. sub-disciplines), industry-role categories (e.g. stores, schools and associations) and format categories (e.g. books, blogs and videos). Some disciplinary differences were also identified.
- Source
- Categories, contexts and relations in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the Twelfth International ISKO Conference 6-9 August 2012, Mysore, India. Eds.: Neelameghan, A. u. K.S. Raghavan
-
Buizza, G.: Subject analysis and indexing : an "Italian version" of the analytico-synthetic model (2011)
0.04
0.03900359 = product of:
0.09750897 = sum of:
0.026128478 = weight(_text_:of in 1812) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026128478 = score(doc=1812,freq=22.0), product of:
0.07599624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.34381276 = fieldWeight in 1812, product of:
4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
22.0 = termFreq=22.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1812)
0.07138049 = weight(_text_:subject in 1812) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07138049 = score(doc=1812,freq=6.0), product of:
0.17381717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.41066417 = fieldWeight in 1812, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1812)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- The paper presents the theoretical foundation of Italian indexing system. A consistent integration of vocabulary control through a thesaurus (semantics) and of role analysis to construct subject strings (syntax) allows to represent the full theme of a work, even if complex, in one string. The conceptual model produces a binary scheme: each aspect (entities, relationships, etc.) consists of a couple of elements, drawing the two lines of semantics and syntax. The meaning of 'concept' and 'theme' is analysed, also in comparison with the FRBR and FRSAD models, with the proposal of an en riched model. A double existence of concepts is suggested: document-independent adn document-dependent.
- Source
- Subject access: preparing for the future. Conference on August 20 - 21, 2009 in Florence, the IFLA Classification and Indexing Section sponsored an IFLA satellite conference entitled "Looking at the Past and Preparing for the Future". Eds.: P. Landry et al
-
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
0.03859378 = product of:
0.096484445 = sum of:
0.077187285 = product of:
0.23156185 = sum of:
0.23156185 = weight(_text_:3a in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.23156185 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
0.41201854 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = 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)
0.019297158 = weight(_text_:of in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019297158 = score(doc=400,freq=12.0), product of:
0.07599624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.25392252 = fieldWeight in 400, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=400)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- On a scientific concept hierarchy, a parent concept may have a few attributes, each of which has multiple values being a group of child concepts. We call these attributes facets: classification has a few facets such as application (e.g., face recognition), model (e.g., svm, knn), and metric (e.g., precision). In this work, we aim at building faceted concept hierarchies from scientific literature. Hierarchy construction methods heavily rely on hypernym detection, however, the faceted relations are parent-to-child links but the hypernym relation is a multi-hop, i.e., ancestor-to-descendent link with a specific facet "type-of". We use information extraction techniques to find synonyms, sibling concepts, and ancestor-descendent relations from a data science corpus. And we propose a hierarchy growth algorithm to infer the parent-child links from the three types of relationships. It resolves conflicts by maintaining the acyclic structure of a hierarchy.
- Content
- Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Faclanthology.org%2FD19-5317.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0ZZFyq5wWTtNTvNkrvjlGA.
- Source
- Graph-Based Methods for Natural Language Processing - proceedings of the Thirteenth Workshop (TextGraphs-13): November 4, 2019, Hong Kong : EMNLP-IJCNLP 2019. Ed.: Dmitry Ustalov
-
Broughton, V.: Facet analysis as a fundamental theory for structuring subject organization tools (2007)
0.04
0.038361106 = product of:
0.09590276 = sum of:
0.018193537 = weight(_text_:of in 537) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018193537 = score(doc=537,freq=6.0), product of:
0.07599624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.23940048 = fieldWeight in 537, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=537)
0.07770923 = weight(_text_:subject in 537) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07770923 = score(doc=537,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17381717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.4470745 = fieldWeight in 537, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=537)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- The presentation will examine the potential of facet analysis as a basis for determining status and relationships of concepts in subject based tools using a controlled vocabulary, and the extent to which it can be used as a general theory of knowledge organization as opposed to a methodology for structuring classifications only.
-
Deokattey, S.; Neelameghan, A.; Kumar, V.: ¬A method for developing a domain ontology : a case study for a multidisciplinary subject (2010)
0.04
0.036416426 = product of:
0.091041066 = sum of:
0.06799558 = weight(_text_:subject in 3694) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06799558 = score(doc=3694,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17381717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.3911902 = fieldWeight in 3694, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3694)
0.023045486 = product of:
0.04609097 = sum of:
0.04609097 = weight(_text_:22 in 3694) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04609097 = score(doc=3694,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17018363 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3694, 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=3694)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- A method to develop a prototype domain ontology has been described. The domain selected for the study is Accelerator Driven Systems. This is a multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary subject comprising Nuclear Physics, Nuclear and Reactor Engineering, Reactor Fuels and Radioactive Waste Management. Since Accelerator Driven Systems is a vast topic, select areas in it were singled out for the study. Both qualitative and quantitative methods such as Content analysis, Facet analysis and Clustering were used, to develop the web-based model.
- Date
- 22. 7.2010 19:41:16
-
Barsalou, L.W.: Frames, concepts, and conceptual fields (1992)
0.04
0.03580339 = product of:
0.089508474 = sum of:
0.07213905 = weight(_text_:list in 3217) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07213905 = score(doc=3217,freq=2.0), product of:
0.25191793 = queryWeight, product of:
5.183657 = idf(docFreq=673, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.2863593 = fieldWeight in 3217, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.183657 = idf(docFreq=673, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3217)
0.017369429 = weight(_text_:of in 3217) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017369429 = score(doc=3217,freq=14.0), product of:
0.07599624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.22855641 = fieldWeight in 3217, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3217)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- In this chapter I propose that frames provide the fundamental representation of knowledge in human cognition. In the first section, I raise problems with the feature list representations often found in theories of knowledge, and I sketch the solutions that frames provide to them. In the second section, I examine the three fundamental concepts of frames: attribute-value sets, structural invariants, and constraints. Because frames also represents the attributes, values, structural invariants, and constraints within a frame, the mechanism that constructs frames builds them recursively. The frame theory I propose borrows heavily from previous frame theories, although its collection of representational components is somewhat unique. Furthermore, frame theorists generally assume that frames are rigid configurations of independent attributes, whereas I propose that frames are dynamic relational structures whose form is flexible and context dependent. In the third section, I illustrate how frames support a wide variety of representational tasks central to conceptual processing in natural and artificial intelligence. Frames can represent exemplars and propositions, prototypes and membership, subordinates and taxonomies. Frames can also represent conceptual combinations, event sequences, rules, and plans. In the fourth section, I show how frames define the extent of conceptual fields and how they provide a powerful productive mechanism for generating specific concepts within a field.
-
Panzer, M.: Towards the "webification" of controlled subject vocabulary : a case study involving the Dewey Decimal Classification (2007)
0.03
0.03455106 = product of:
0.08637765 = sum of:
0.018382076 = weight(_text_:of in 538) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018382076 = score(doc=538,freq=8.0), product of:
0.07599624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.24188137 = fieldWeight in 538, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=538)
0.06799558 = weight(_text_:subject in 538) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06799558 = score(doc=538,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17381717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.3911902 = fieldWeight in 538, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=538)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- The presentation will briefly introduce a series of major principles for bringing subject terminology to the network level. A closer look at one KOS in particular, the Dewey Decimal Classification, should help to gain more insight into the perceived difficulties and potential benefits of building taxonomy services out and on top of classic large-scale vocabularies or taxonomies.
-
Deokattey, S.; Dixit, D.K.; Bhanumurthy, K.: Co-word and facet analysis as tools for conceptualization in ontologies : a preliminary study of a micro-domain (2012)
0.03
0.032890264 = product of:
0.08222566 = sum of:
0.022741921 = weight(_text_:of in 841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022741921 = score(doc=841,freq=24.0), product of:
0.07599624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.2992506 = fieldWeight in 841, product of:
4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
24.0 = termFreq=24.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=841)
0.059483737 = weight(_text_:subject in 841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.059483737 = score(doc=841,freq=6.0), product of:
0.17381717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.34222013 = fieldWeight in 841, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=841)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Conceptualization is at the core of developing domain ontologies. This paper reports a study for developing an ontology for a micro-domain - Test Blanket Module (TBM), an integral part of thermonuclear or fusion reactors. Sample data downloaded from yielded 1115 unique DEI (indexer-assigned) descriptors assigned to 548 records on TBM. The frequencies of occurrence of all the unique descriptors, the corresponding co-word DEI descriptors (AN numbers) were identified On the basis of their research linkages the descriptors were grouped into four quadrants. It was found, that the descriptors in the 2nd and 3rd quadrants were at the core of the selected subject. A total of 31 core descriptors from these were selected for conceptualization and for each the co-occurring descriptors and their frequencies of co-occurrence with the selected descriptor were noted. Only descriptor pairs that co-occurred 10 times or higher were considered. Comparison of Co-Word Word Blocks (CWWBs) and word blocks (INISWB) from the INIS thesaurus showed differences. Co-words were used to semantically enrich descriptors transforming them into more comprehensive concepts; these were used as building blocks for conceptualization and for domain ontology. This method could be replicated to generate semantic networks (which could form an Ontological layer on any subject of study) and also in query expansion during search and retrieval in interdisciplinary subject domains.
- Source
- Categories, contexts and relations in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the Twelfth International ISKO Conference 6-9 August 2012, Mysore, India. Eds.: Neelameghan, A. u. K.S. Raghavan
-
Klein, M.; Ding, Y.; Fensel, D.; Omelayenko, B.: Ontology management : storing, aligning and maintaining ontologies (2004)
0.03
0.03174635 = product of:
0.07936587 = sum of:
0.057711232 = weight(_text_:list in 4402) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.057711232 = score(doc=4402,freq=2.0), product of:
0.25191793 = queryWeight, product of:
5.183657 = idf(docFreq=673, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.22908744 = fieldWeight in 4402, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.183657 = idf(docFreq=673, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4402)
0.02165464 = weight(_text_:of in 4402) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02165464 = score(doc=4402,freq=34.0), product of:
0.07599624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.28494355 = fieldWeight in 4402, product of:
5.8309517 = tf(freq=34.0), with freq of:
34.0 = termFreq=34.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4402)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Ontologies need to be stored, sometimes aligned and their evolution needs to be managed. All these tasks together are called ontology management. Alignment is a central task in ontology re-use. Re-use of existing ontologies often requires considerable effort: the ontologies either need to be integrated, which means that they are merged into one new ontology, or the ontologies can be kept separate. In both cases, the ontologies have to be aligned, which means that they have to be brought into mutual agreement. The problems that underlie the difficulties in integrating and aligning are the mismatches that may exist between separate ontologies. Ontologies can differ at the language level, which can mean that they are represented in a different syntax, or that the expressiveness of the ontology language is dissimilar. Ontologies also can have mismatches at the model level, for example, in the paradigm, or modelling style. Ontology alignment is very relevant in a Semantic Web context. The Semantic Web will provide us with a lot of freely accessible domain specific ontologies. To form a real web of semantics - which will allow computers to combine and infer implicit knowledge - those separate ontologies should be aligned and linked.
Support for evolving ontologies is required in almost all situations where ontologies are used in real-world applications. In those cases, ontologies are often developed by several persons and will continue to evolve over time, because of changes in the real world, adaptations to different tasks, or alignments to other ontologies. To prevent that such changes will invalidate existing usage, a change management methodology is needed. This involves advanced versioning methods for the development and the maintenance of ontologies, but also configuration management, that takes care of the identification, relations and interpretation of ontology versions. All these aspects come together in integrated ontology library systems. When the number of different ontologies is increasing, the task of storing, maintaining and re-organizing them to secure the successful re-use of ontologies is challenging. Ontology library systems can help in the grouping and reorganizing ontologies for further re-use, integration, maintenance, mapping and versioning. Basically, a library system offers various functions for managing, adapting and standardizing groups of ontologies. Such integrated systems are a requirement for the Semantic Web to grow further and scale up. In this chapter, we describe a number of results with respect to the above mentioned areas. We start with a description of the alignment task and show a meta-ontology that is developed to specify the mappings. Then, we discuss the problems that are caused by evolving ontologies and describe two important elements of a change management methodology. Finally, in Section 4.4 we survey existing library systems and formulate a wish-list of features of an ontology library system.
-
Hudon, M.: Facet (2020)
0.03
0.031425342 = product of:
0.078563355 = sum of:
0.030483223 = weight(_text_:of in 5899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030483223 = score(doc=5899,freq=22.0), product of:
0.07599624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.40111488 = fieldWeight in 5899, product of:
4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
22.0 = termFreq=22.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5899)
0.04808013 = weight(_text_:subject in 5899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04808013 = score(doc=5899,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17381717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.04859849 = queryNorm
0.27661324 = fieldWeight in 5899, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5899)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- S.R. Ranganathan is credited with the introduction of the term "facet" in the field of knowledge organization towards the middle of the twentieth century. Facets have traditionally been used to organize document collections and to express complex subjects. In the digital world, they act as filters to facilitate navigation and improve retrieval. But the popularity of the term does not mean that a definitive characterization of the concept has been established. Indeed, several conceptualizations of the facet co-exist. This article provides an overview of formal and informal definitions found in the literature of knowledge organization, followed by a discussion of four common conceptualizations of the facet: process vs product, nature vs function, object vs subject and organization vs navigation.
- Series
- Reviews of concepts in knowledge organization
