Search (1 results, page 1 of 1)

Did you mean:
precises%3a%2fdocuments %2f subject classification schemes%3a bliss%2c henry evelyn %2f bliss bibliographic classification %2f texts%22 1
precises%3a%2f_documents %2f subject classification schemes%3a bliss%2c henry evelyn %2f bliss bibliographic classification %2f texts%22 1
precises%3a%2fdocuments %2f subject classification schemes%3a bliss%2c heery evelyn %2f bliss bibliographic classification %2f texts%22 1
precises%3a%2fdocuments %2f subject classification schemes%3a bliss%2c henry evelyn %2f bloss bibliographic classification %2f texts%22 1
precises%3a%2fdocuments %2f subject classification schemes%3a bloss%2c henry evelyn %2f bliss bibliographic classification %2f texts%22 1

Wijnhoven. F.; Wognum, P.M.; Weg, R.L.W. van de: Knowledge ontology development (1996) 0.01

0.009389086 = product of:
  0.043815732 = sum of:
    0.016822865 = weight(_text_:classification in 907) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016822865 = score(doc=907,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 907, 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=907)
    0.016822865 = weight(_text_:classification in 907) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016822865 = score(doc=907,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 907, 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=907)
    0.010170003 = product of:
      0.020340007 = sum of:
        0.020340007 = weight(_text_:22 in 907) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020340007 = score(doc=907,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 907, 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=907)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract: Knowledge-containing documents and data about knowledge have been handled in stable environments by bureaucratic systems using very stable knowledge ontologies. These systems, though not always very effective in such environments, will become highly ineffective in environments where knowledge has to be updated and replaced frequently. Moreover, organizations in such dynamic environments also use knowledge from extemal resources extensively. This makes the development of a stable ontology for knowledge storage and retrieval particularly complicated. This paper describes eight context classes of knowledge ontology development and explores elements of a method for ontology development. These classes are based an the differences in contexts defined along three dimensions: knowledge dynamics, complexity and social dispersion. Ontology development matches these contexts and ontology needs defined by (logical and social) structure and ontology maturity. The classification framework and methodology are applied to two cases. The first case illustrates a descriptive use of our framework to characterize ontology development in an academic environment. The second case illustrates a normative use of our framework. The method proposed seemed to be empirically valid and rich and be useful for detecting options for ontology improvement.
Source: Knowledge management: organization competence and methodolgy. Proceedings of the Fourth International ISMICK Symposium, 21-22 October 1996, Netherlands. Ed.: J.F. Schreinemakers