-
Gams, E.; Mitterdorfer, D.: Semantische Content Management Systeme (2009)
0.05
0.04880413 = product of:
0.09760826 = sum of:
0.09760826 = product of:
0.19521652 = sum of:
0.19521652 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 4865) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.19521652 = score(doc=4865,freq=6.0), product of:
0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
0.050545633 = queryNorm
0.66592443 = fieldWeight in 4865, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4865)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Content Management Systeme (CMS) sind in vielen Organisationen bereits seit längerer Zeit fester Bestandteil zur Verwaltung und kollaborativen Bearbeitung von Text- und Multimedia-Inhalten. Im Zuge der rasch ansteigenden Fülle an Informationen und somit auch Wissen wird die Überschaubarkeit der Datenbestände jedoch massiv eingeschränkt. Diese und zusätzliche Anforderungen, wie automatisch Datenquellen aus dem World Wide Web (WWW) zu extrahieren, lassen traditionelle CMS immer mehr an ihre Grenzen stoßen. Dieser Beitrag diskutiert die neuen Herausforderungen an traditionelle CMS und bietet Lösungsvorschläge, wie CMS kombiniert mit semantischen Technologien diesen Herausforderungen begegnen können. Die Autoren stellen eine generische Systemarchitektur für Content Management Systeme vor, die einerseits Inhalte für das Semantic Web generieren, andererseits Content aus dem Web 2.0 syndizieren können und bei der Aufbereitung des Content den User mittels semantischer Technologien wie Reasoning oder Informationsextraktion unterstützen. Dabei wird auf Erfahrungen bei der prototypischen Implementierung von semantischer Technologie in ein bestehendes CMS System zurückgegriffen.
- Object
- Web 2.0
- Source
- Social Semantic Web: Web 2.0, was nun? Hrsg.: A. Blumauer u. T. Pellegrini
-
Derntl, M.; Hampel, T.; Motschnig, R.; Pitner, T.: Social Tagging und Inclusive Universal Access (2008)
0.04
0.039848406 = product of:
0.07969681 = sum of:
0.07969681 = product of:
0.15939362 = sum of:
0.15939362 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 2864) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.15939362 = score(doc=2864,freq=4.0), product of:
0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
0.050545633 = queryNorm
0.543725 = fieldWeight in 2864, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2864)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Der vorliegende Artikel beleuchtet und bewertet Social Tagging als aktuelles Phänomen des Web 2.0 im Kontext bekannter Techniken der semantischen Datenorganisation. Tagging wird in einen Raum verwandter Ordnungs- und Strukturierungsansätze eingeordnet, um die fundamentalen Grundlagen des Social Tagging zu identifizieren und zuzuweisen. Dabei wird Tagging anhand des Inclusive Universal Access Paradigmas bewertet, das technische als auch menschlich-soziale Kriterien für die inklusive und barrierefreie Bereitstellung und Nutzung von Diensten definiert. Anhand dieser Bewertung werden fundamentale Prinzipien des "Inclusive Social Tagging" hergeleitet, die der Charakterisierung und Bewertung gängiger Tagging-Funktionalitäten in verbreiteten Web-2.0-Diensten dienen. Aus der Bewertung werden insbesondere Entwicklungsmöglichkeiten von Social Tagging und unterstützenden Diensten erkennbar.
-
Hausenblas, M.: Anreicherung von Webinhalten mit Semantik : Microformats und RDFa (2009)
0.04
0.037569433 = product of:
0.07513887 = sum of:
0.07513887 = product of:
0.15027773 = sum of:
0.15027773 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 4862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.15027773 = score(doc=4862,freq=2.0), product of:
0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
0.050545633 = queryNorm
0.5126288 = fieldWeight in 4862, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4862)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Social Semantic Web: Web 2.0, was nun? Hrsg.: A. Blumauer u. T. Pellegrini
-
Kruk, S.R.; McDaniel, B.: Conclusions: The future of semantic digital libraries (2009)
0.03
0.032873254 = product of:
0.06574651 = sum of:
0.06574651 = product of:
0.13149302 = sum of:
0.13149302 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 3372) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.13149302 = score(doc=3372,freq=2.0), product of:
0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
0.050545633 = queryNorm
0.4485502 = fieldWeight in 3372, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3372)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Through out this book we showed that Semantic Digital Libraries are no longer an abstract concept; we have presented both underlying technologies, examples of semantic digital libraries, and their applications. However, the bright future of this technology only begins, and we expect more and more genuine applications of semantic digital libraries to emerge. In this section we will spotlight on three of, in our opinion, the most promising of applications: semantic museums, eLearning 2.0, and semantic digital libraries in enterprises.
-
Peters, I.; Stock, W.G.: Folksonomies in Wissensrepräsentation und Information Retrieval (2008)
0.03
0.028177075 = product of:
0.05635415 = sum of:
0.05635415 = product of:
0.1127083 = sum of:
0.1127083 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 1597) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.1127083 = score(doc=1597,freq=2.0), product of:
0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
0.050545633 = queryNorm
0.3844716 = fieldWeight in 1597, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1597)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Die populären Web 2.0-Dienste werden von Prosumern - Produzenten und gleichsam Konsumenten - nicht nur dazu genutzt, Inhalte zu produzieren, sondern auch, um sie inhaltlich zu erschließen. Folksonomies erlauben es dem Nutzer, Dokumente mit eigenen Schlagworten, sog. Tags, zu beschreiben, ohne dabei auf gewisse Regeln oder Vorgaben achten zu müssen. Neben einigen Vorteilen zeigen Folksonomies aber auch zahlreiche Schwächen (u. a. einen Mangel an Präzision). Um diesen Nachteilen größtenteils entgegenzuwirken, schlagen wir eine Interpretation der Tags als natürlichsprachige Wörter vor. Dadurch ist es uns möglich, Methoden des Natural Language Processing (NLP) auf die Tags anzuwenden und so linguistische Probleme der Tags zu beseitigen. Darüber hinaus diskutieren wir Ansätze und weitere Vorschläge (Tagverteilungen, Kollaboration und akteurspezifische Aspekte) hinsichtlich eines Relevance Rankings von getaggten Dokumenten. Neben Vorschlägen auf ähnliche Dokumente ("more like this!") erlauben Folksonomies auch Hinweise auf verwandte Nutzer und damit auf Communities ("more like me!").
-
Stojanovic, N.: Ontology-based Information Retrieval : methods and tools for cooperative query answering (2005)
0.03
0.026759956 = product of:
0.053519912 = sum of:
0.053519912 = product of:
0.16055973 = sum of:
0.16055973 = weight(_text_:3a in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.16055973 = score(doc=701,freq=2.0), product of:
0.42852643 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.050545633 = queryNorm
0.3746787 = fieldWeight in 701, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=701)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Content
- Vgl.: http%3A%2F%2Fdigbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fvolltexte%2Fdocuments%2F1627&ei=tAtYUYrBNoHKtQb3l4GYBw&usg=AFQjCNHeaxKkKU3-u54LWxMNYGXaaDLCGw&sig2=8WykXWQoDKjDSdGtAakH2Q&bvm=bv.44442042,d.Yms.
-
Tudhope, D.; Hodge, G.: Terminology registries (2007)
0.02
0.017120589 = product of:
0.034241177 = sum of:
0.034241177 = product of:
0.068482354 = sum of:
0.068482354 = weight(_text_:22 in 539) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.068482354 = score(doc=539,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050545633 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 539, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=539)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 26.12.2011 13:22:07
-
Haller, S.H.M.: Mappingverfahren zur Wissensorganisation (2002)
0.02
0.017120589 = product of:
0.034241177 = sum of:
0.034241177 = product of:
0.068482354 = sum of:
0.068482354 = weight(_text_:22 in 3406) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.068482354 = score(doc=3406,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050545633 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3406, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3406)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 30. 5.2010 16:22:35
-
Fischer, D.H.: Converting a thesaurus to OWL : Notes on the paper "The National Cancer Institute's Thesaurus and Ontology" (2004)
0.02
0.016436627 = product of:
0.032873254 = sum of:
0.032873254 = product of:
0.06574651 = sum of:
0.06574651 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 2362) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06574651 = score(doc=2362,freq=2.0), product of:
0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
0.050545633 = queryNorm
0.2242751 = fieldWeight in 2362, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2362)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The paper analysed here is a kind of position paper. In order to get a better under-standing of the reported work I used the retrieval interface of the thesaurus, the so-called NCI DTS Browser accessible via the Web3, and I perused the cited OWL file4 with numerous "Find" and "Find next" string searches. In addition the file was im-ported into Protégé 2000, Release 2.0, with OWL Plugin 1.0 and Racer Plugin 1.7.14. At the end of the paper's introduction the authors say: "In the following sections, this paper will describe the terminology development process at NCI, and the issues associated with converting a description logic based nomenclature to a semantically rich OWL ontology." While I will not deal with the first part, i.e. the terminology development process at NCI, I do not see the thesaurus as a description logic based nomenclature, or its cur-rent state and conversion already result in a "rich" OWL ontology. What does "rich" mean here? According to my view there is a great quantity of concepts and links but a very poor description logic structure which enables inferences. And what does the fol-lowing really mean, which is said a few lines previously: "Although editors have defined a number of named ontologic relations to support the description-logic based structure of the Thesaurus, additional relation-ships are considered for inclusion as required to support dependent applications."
-
Synak, M.; Dabrowski, M.; Kruk, S.R.: Semantic Web and ontologies (2009)
0.01
0.01369647 = product of:
0.02739294 = sum of:
0.02739294 = product of:
0.05478588 = sum of:
0.05478588 = weight(_text_:22 in 3376) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05478588 = score(doc=3376,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050545633 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3376, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3376)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 31. 7.2010 16:58:22
-
OWL Web Ontology Language Test Cases (2004)
0.01
0.01369647 = product of:
0.02739294 = sum of:
0.02739294 = product of:
0.05478588 = sum of:
0.05478588 = weight(_text_:22 in 4685) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05478588 = score(doc=4685,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050545633 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4685, 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=4685)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 14. 8.2011 13:33:22
-
Priss, U.: Faceted information representation (2000)
0.01
0.011984412 = product of:
0.023968823 = sum of:
0.023968823 = product of:
0.047937647 = sum of:
0.047937647 = weight(_text_:22 in 5095) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047937647 = score(doc=5095,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050545633 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5095, 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=5095)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 1.2016 17:47:06
-
Knorz, G.; Rein, B.: Semantische Suche in einer Hochschulontologie (2005)
0.01
0.011984412 = product of:
0.023968823 = sum of:
0.023968823 = product of:
0.047937647 = sum of:
0.047937647 = weight(_text_:22 in 1852) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047937647 = score(doc=1852,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050545633 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1852, 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=1852)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 11. 2.2011 18:22:58
-
Knorz, G.; Rein, B.: Semantische Suche in einer Hochschulontologie : Ontologie-basiertes Information-Filtering und -Retrieval mit relationalen Datenbanken (2005)
0.01
0.011984412 = product of:
0.023968823 = sum of:
0.023968823 = product of:
0.047937647 = sum of:
0.047937647 = weight(_text_:22 in 4324) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047937647 = score(doc=4324,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050545633 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4324, 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=4324)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 11. 2.2011 18:22:25
-
Definition of the CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model (2003)
0.01
0.010272353 = product of:
0.020544706 = sum of:
0.020544706 = product of:
0.04108941 = sum of:
0.04108941 = weight(_text_:22 in 1652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04108941 = score(doc=1652,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050545633 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1652, 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=1652)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 6. 8.2010 14:22:28
-
Gendt, M. van; Isaac, I.; Meij, L. van der; Schlobach, S.: Semantic Web techniques for multiple views on heterogeneous collections : a case study (2006)
0.01
0.010272353 = product of:
0.020544706 = sum of:
0.020544706 = product of:
0.04108941 = sum of:
0.04108941 = weight(_text_:22 in 2418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04108941 = score(doc=2418,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050545633 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2418, 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=2418)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 10th European conference, proceedings / ECDL 2006, Alicante, Spain, September 17 - 22, 2006
-
Renear, A.H.; Wickett, K.M.; Urban, R.J.; Dubin, D.; Shreeves, S.L.: Collection/item metadata relationships (2008)
0.01
0.010272353 = product of:
0.020544706 = sum of:
0.020544706 = product of:
0.04108941 = sum of:
0.04108941 = weight(_text_:22 in 2623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04108941 = score(doc=2623,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050545633 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2623, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2623)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- 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
-
Kruk, S.R.; Kruk, E.; Stankiewicz, K.: Evaluation of semantic and social technologies for digital libraries (2009)
0.01
0.010272353 = product of:
0.020544706 = sum of:
0.020544706 = product of:
0.04108941 = sum of:
0.04108941 = weight(_text_:22 in 3387) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04108941 = score(doc=3387,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050545633 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3387, 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=3387)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 1. 8.2010 12:35:22
-
Bittner, T.; Donnelly, M.; Winter, S.: Ontology and semantic interoperability (2006)
0.01
0.010272353 = product of:
0.020544706 = sum of:
0.020544706 = product of:
0.04108941 = sum of:
0.04108941 = weight(_text_:22 in 4820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04108941 = score(doc=4820,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050545633 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4820, 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=4820)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 3.12.2016 18:39:22
-
Beppler, F.D.; Fonseca, F.T.; Pacheco, R.C.S.: Hermeneus: an architecture for an ontology-enabled information retrieval (2008)
0.01
0.010272353 = product of:
0.020544706 = sum of:
0.020544706 = product of:
0.04108941 = sum of:
0.04108941 = weight(_text_:22 in 3261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04108941 = score(doc=3261,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050545633 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3261, 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=3261)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 28.11.2016 12:43:22
