Search (44 results, page 1 of 3)

  • × theme_ss:"Automatisches Klassifizieren"
  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Piros, A.: Automatic interpretation of complex UDC numbers : towards support for library systems (2015) 0.02
    0.024787461 = product of:
      0.07436238 = sum of:
        0.012701438 = weight(_text_:of in 2301) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012701438 = score(doc=2301,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.20732687 = fieldWeight in 2301, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2301)
        0.023125032 = weight(_text_:systems in 2301) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023125032 = score(doc=2301,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.19207339 = fieldWeight in 2301, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2301)
        0.03853591 = weight(_text_:software in 2301) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03853591 = score(doc=2301,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.24794699 = fieldWeight in 2301, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2301)
      0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
    
    Abstract
    Analytico-synthetic and faceted classifications, such as Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) express content of documents with complex, pre-combined classification codes. Without classification authority control that would help manage and access structured notations, the use of UDC codes in searching and browsing is limited. Existing UDC parsing solutions are usually created for a particular database system or a specific task and are not widely applicable. The approach described in this paper provides a solution by which the analysis and interpretation of UDC notations would be stored into an intermediate format (in this case, in XML) by automatic means without any data or information loss. Due to its richness, the output file can be converted into different formats, such as standard mark-up and data exchange formats or simple lists of the recommended entry points of a UDC number. The program can also be used to create authority records containing complex UDC numbers which can be comprehensively analysed in order to be retrieved effectively. The Java program, as well as the corresponding schema definition it employs, is under continuous development. The current version of the interpreter software is now available online for testing purposes at the following web site: http://interpreter-eto.rhcloud.com. The future plan is to implement conversion methods for standard formats and to create standard online interfaces in order to make it possible to use the features of software as a service. This would result in the algorithm being able to be employed both in existing and future library systems to analyse UDC numbers without any significant programming effort.
    Source
    Classification and authority control: expanding resource discovery: proceedings of the International UDC Seminar 2015, 29-30 October 2015, Lisbon, Portugal. Eds.: Slavic, A. u. M.I. Cordeiro
  2. AlQenaei, Z.M.; Monarchi, D.E.: ¬The use of learning techniques to analyze the results of a manual classification system (2016) 0.02
    0.024767645 = product of:
      0.074302934 = sum of:
        0.019801848 = weight(_text_:of in 2836) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019801848 = score(doc=2836,freq=28.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.32322758 = fieldWeight in 2836, product of:
              5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
                28.0 = termFreq=28.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2836)
        0.020439833 = weight(_text_:systems in 2836) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020439833 = score(doc=2836,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.1697705 = fieldWeight in 2836, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2836)
        0.034061253 = weight(_text_:software in 2836) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034061253 = score(doc=2836,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.21915624 = fieldWeight in 2836, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2836)
      0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
    
    Abstract
    Classification is the process of assigning objects to pre-defined classes based on observations or characteristics of those objects, and there are many approaches to performing this task. The overall objective of this study is to demonstrate the use of two learning techniques to analyze the results of a manual classification system. Our sample consisted of 1,026 documents, from the ACM Computing Classification System, classified by their authors as belonging to one of the groups of the classification system: "H.3 Information Storage and Retrieval." A singular value decomposition of the documents' weighted term-frequency matrix was used to represent each document in a 50-dimensional vector space. The analysis of the representation using both supervised (decision tree) and unsupervised (clustering) techniques suggests that two pairs of the ACM classes are closely related to each other in the vector space. Class 1 (Content Analysis and Indexing) is closely related to Class 3 (Information Search and Retrieval), and Class 4 (Systems and Software) is closely related to Class 5 (Online Information Services). Further analysis was performed to test the diffusion of the words in the two classes using both cosine and Euclidean distance.
  3. Golub, K.; Soergel, D.; Buchanan, G.; Tudhope, D.; Lykke, M.; Hiom, D.: ¬A framework for evaluating automatic indexing or classification in the context of retrieval (2016) 0.02
    0.023156626 = product of:
      0.06946988 = sum of:
        0.014968789 = weight(_text_:of in 3311) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014968789 = score(doc=3311,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.24433708 = fieldWeight in 3311, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3311)
        0.020439833 = weight(_text_:systems in 3311) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020439833 = score(doc=3311,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.1697705 = fieldWeight in 3311, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3311)
        0.034061253 = weight(_text_:software in 3311) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034061253 = score(doc=3311,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.21915624 = fieldWeight in 3311, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3311)
      0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
    
    Abstract
    Tools for automatic subject assignment help deal with scale and sustainability in creating and enriching metadata, establishing more connections across and between resources and enhancing consistency. Although some software vendors and experimental researchers claim the tools can replace manual subject indexing, hard scientific evidence of their performance in operating information environments is scarce. A major reason for this is that research is usually conducted in laboratory conditions, excluding the complexities of real-life systems and situations. The article reviews and discusses issues with existing evaluation approaches such as problems of aboutness and relevance assessments, implying the need to use more than a single "gold standard" method when evaluating indexing and retrieval, and proposes a comprehensive evaluation framework. The framework is informed by a systematic review of the literature on evaluation approaches: evaluating indexing quality directly through assessment by an evaluator or through comparison with a gold standard, evaluating the quality of computer-assisted indexing directly in the context of an indexing workflow, and evaluating indexing quality indirectly through analyzing retrieval performance.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.1, S.3-16
  4. Ko, Y.: ¬A new term-weighting scheme for text classification using the odds of positive and negative class probabilities (2015) 0.01
    0.014341635 = product of:
      0.064537354 = sum of:
        0.050336715 = weight(_text_:applications in 2339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.050336715 = score(doc=2339,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.2918479 = fieldWeight in 2339, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2339)
        0.014200641 = weight(_text_:of in 2339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014200641 = score(doc=2339,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.23179851 = fieldWeight in 2339, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2339)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    Text classification (TC) is a core technique for text mining and information retrieval. It has been applied to many applications in many different research and industrial areas. Term-weighting schemes assign an appropriate weight to each term to obtain a high TC performance. Although term weighting is one of the important modules for TC and TC has different peculiarities from those in information retrieval, many term-weighting schemes used in information retrieval, such as term frequency-inverse document frequency (tf-idf), have been used in TC in the same manner. The peculiarity of TC that differs most from information retrieval is the existence of class information. This article proposes a new term-weighting scheme that uses class information using positive and negative class distributions. As a result, the proposed scheme, log tf-TRR, consistently performs better than do other schemes using class information as well as traditional schemes such as tf-idf.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.12, S.2553-2565
  5. Billal, B.; Fonseca, A.; Sadat, F.; Lounis, H.: Semi-supervised learning and social media text analysis towards multi-labeling categorization (2017) 0.01
    0.010849564 = product of:
      0.04882304 = sum of:
        0.03355781 = weight(_text_:applications in 4095) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03355781 = score(doc=4095,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.19456528 = fieldWeight in 4095, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4095)
        0.01526523 = weight(_text_:of in 4095) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01526523 = score(doc=4095,freq=26.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.2491759 = fieldWeight in 4095, product of:
              5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
                26.0 = termFreq=26.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4095)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    In traditional text classification, classes are mutually exclusive, i.e. it is not possible to have one text or text fragment classified into more than one class. On the other hand, in multi-label classification an individual text may belong to several classes simultaneously. This type of classification is required by a large number of current applications such as big data classification, images and video annotation. Supervised learning is the most used type of machine learning in the classification task. It requires large quantities of labeled data and the intervention of a human tagger in the creation of the training sets. When the data sets become very large or heavily noisy, this operation can be tedious, prone to error and time consuming. In this case, semi-supervised learning, which requires only few labels, is a better choice. In this paper, we study and evaluate several methods to address the problem of multi-label classification using semi-supervised learning and data from social networks. First, we propose a linguistic pre-processing involving tokeni-sation, recognition of named entities and hashtag segmentation in order to decrease the noise in this type of massive and unstructured real data and then we perform a word sense disambiguation using WordNet. Second, several experiments related to multi-label classification and semi-supervised learning are carried out on these data sets and compared to each other. These evaluations compare the results of the approaches considered. This paper proposes a method for combining semi-supervised methods with a graph method for the extraction of subjects in social networks using a multi-label classification approach. Experiments show that the performance of the proposed model increases in 4 p.p. the precision of the classification when compared to a baseline.
  6. Egbert, J.; Biber, D.; Davies, M.: Developing a bottom-up, user-based method of web register classification (2015) 0.01
    0.009004432 = product of:
      0.04051994 = sum of:
        0.024596233 = weight(_text_:of in 2158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024596233 = score(doc=2158,freq=30.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.4014868 = fieldWeight in 2158, product of:
              5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
                30.0 = termFreq=30.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2158)
        0.015923709 = product of:
          0.031847417 = sum of:
            0.031847417 = weight(_text_:22 in 2158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031847417 = score(doc=2158,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03917671 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2158, 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=2158)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    This paper introduces a project to develop a reliable, cost-effective method for classifying Internet texts into register categories, and apply that approach to the analysis of a large corpus of web documents. To date, the project has proceeded in 2 key phases. First, we developed a bottom-up method for web register classification, asking end users of the web to utilize a decision-tree survey to code relevant situational characteristics of web documents, resulting in a bottom-up identification of register and subregister categories. We present details regarding the development and testing of this method through a series of 10 pilot studies. Then, in the second phase of our project we applied this procedure to a corpus of 53,000 web documents. An analysis of the results demonstrates the effectiveness of these methods for web register classification and provides a preliminary description of the types and distribution of registers on the web.
    Date
    4. 8.2015 19:22:04
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.9, S.1817-1831
  7. HaCohen-Kerner, Y. et al.: Classification using various machine learning methods and combinations of key-phrases and visual features (2016) 0.01
    0.008249789 = product of:
      0.03712405 = sum of:
        0.010584532 = weight(_text_:of in 2748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010584532 = score(doc=2748,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.17277241 = fieldWeight in 2748, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2748)
        0.026539518 = product of:
          0.053079035 = sum of:
            0.053079035 = weight(_text_:22 in 2748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.053079035 = score(doc=2748,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03917671 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2748, 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=2748)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Date
    1. 2.2016 18:25:22
  8. Zhu, W.Z.; Allen, R.B.: Document clustering using the LSI subspace signature model (2013) 0.01
    0.0075302785 = product of:
      0.033886254 = sum of:
        0.017962547 = weight(_text_:of in 690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017962547 = score(doc=690,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.2932045 = fieldWeight in 690, 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=690)
        0.015923709 = product of:
          0.031847417 = sum of:
            0.031847417 = weight(_text_:22 in 690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031847417 = score(doc=690,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03917671 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 690, 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=690)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    We describe the latent semantic indexing subspace signature model (LSISSM) for semantic content representation of unstructured text. Grounded on singular value decomposition, the model represents terms and documents by the distribution signatures of their statistical contribution across the top-ranking latent concept dimensions. LSISSM matches term signatures with document signatures according to their mapping coherence between latent semantic indexing (LSI) term subspace and LSI document subspace. LSISSM does feature reduction and finds a low-rank approximation of scalable and sparse term-document matrices. Experiments demonstrate that this approach significantly improves the performance of major clustering algorithms such as standard K-means and self-organizing maps compared with the vector space model and the traditional LSI model. The unique contribution ranking mechanism in LSISSM also improves the initialization of standard K-means compared with random seeding procedure, which sometimes causes low efficiency and effectiveness of clustering. A two-stage initialization strategy based on LSISSM significantly reduces the running time of standard K-means procedures.
    Date
    23. 3.2013 13:22:36
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.4, S.844-860
  9. Liu, R.-L.: ¬A passage extractor for classification of disease aspect information (2013) 0.01
    0.006667861 = product of:
      0.030005373 = sum of:
        0.016735615 = weight(_text_:of in 1107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016735615 = score(doc=1107,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.27317715 = fieldWeight in 1107, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1107)
        0.013269759 = product of:
          0.026539518 = sum of:
            0.026539518 = weight(_text_:22 in 1107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.026539518 = score(doc=1107,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03917671 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1107, 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=1107)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    Retrieval of disease information is often based on several key aspects such as etiology, diagnosis, treatment, prevention, and symptoms of diseases. Automatic identification of disease aspect information is thus essential. In this article, I model the aspect identification problem as a text classification (TC) problem in which a disease aspect corresponds to a category. The disease aspect classification problem poses two challenges to classifiers: (a) a medical text often contains information about multiple aspects of a disease and hence produces noise for the classifiers and (b) text classifiers often cannot extract the textual parts (i.e., passages) about the categories of interest. I thus develop a technique, PETC (Passage Extractor for Text Classification), that extracts passages (from medical texts) for the underlying text classifiers to classify. Case studies on thousands of Chinese and English medical texts show that PETC enhances a support vector machine (SVM) classifier in classifying disease aspect information. PETC also performs better than three state-of-the-art classifier enhancement techniques, including two passage extraction techniques for text classifiers and a technique that employs term proximity information to enhance text classifiers. The contribution is of significance to evidence-based medicine, health education, and healthcare decision support. PETC can be used in those application domains in which a text to be classified may have several parts about different categories.
    Date
    28.10.2013 19:22:57
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.11, S.2265-2277
  10. Kasprzik, A.: Automatisierte und semiautomatisierte Klassifizierung : eine Analyse aktueller Projekte (2014) 0.00
    0.0045415005 = product of:
      0.040873505 = sum of:
        0.040873505 = weight(_text_:software in 2470) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040873505 = score(doc=2470,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.2629875 = fieldWeight in 2470, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2470)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    Das sprunghafte Anwachsen der Menge digital verfügbarer Dokumente gepaart mit dem Zeit- und Personalmangel an wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken legt den Einsatz von halb- oder vollautomatischen Verfahren für die verbale und klassifikatorische Inhaltserschließung nahe. Nach einer kurzen allgemeinen Einführung in die gängige Methodik beleuchtet dieser Artikel eine Reihe von Projekten zur automatisierten Klassifizierung aus dem Zeitraum 2007-2012 und aus dem deutschsprachigen Raum. Ein Großteil der vorgestellten Projekte verwendet Methoden des Maschinellen Lernens aus der Künstlichen Intelligenz, arbeitet meist mit angepassten Versionen einer kommerziellen Software und bezieht sich in der Regel auf die Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC). Als Datengrundlage dienen Metadatensätze, Abstracs, Inhaltsverzeichnisse und Volltexte in diversen Datenformaten. Die abschließende Analyse enthält eine Anordnung der Projekte nach einer Reihe von verschiedenen Kriterien und eine Zusammenfassung der aktuellen Lage und der größten Herausfordungen für automatisierte Klassifizierungsverfahren.
  11. Cortez, E.; Herrera, M.R.; Silva, A.S. da; Moura, E.S. de; Neubert, M.: Lightweight methods for large-scale product categorization (2011) 0.00
    0.0024443932 = product of:
      0.021999538 = sum of:
        0.021999538 = weight(_text_:of in 4758) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021999538 = score(doc=4758,freq=24.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.3591007 = fieldWeight in 4758, product of:
              4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
                24.0 = termFreq=24.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4758)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    In this article, we present a study about classification methods for large-scale categorization of product offers on e-shopping web sites. We present a study about the performance of previously proposed approaches and deployed a probabilistic approach to model the classification problem. We also studied an alternative way of modeling information about the description of product offers and investigated the usage of price and store of product offers as features adopted in the classification process. Our experiments used two collections of over a million product offers previously categorized by human editors and taxonomies of hundreds of categories from a real e-shopping web site. In these experiments, our method achieved an improvement of up to 9% in the quality of the categorization in comparison with the best baseline we have found.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.9, S.1839-1848
  12. Fang, H.: Classifying research articles in multidisciplinary sciences journals into subject categories (2015) 0.00
    0.002424508 = product of:
      0.021820573 = sum of:
        0.021820573 = weight(_text_:of in 2194) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021820573 = score(doc=2194,freq=34.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.35617945 = fieldWeight in 2194, 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=2194)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    In the Thomson Reuters Web of Science database, the subject categories of a journal are applied to all articles in the journal. However, many articles in multidisciplinary Sciences journals may only be represented by a small number of subject categories. To provide more accurate information on the research areas of articles in such journals, we can classify articles in these journals into subject categories as defined by Web of Science based on their references. For an article in a multidisciplinary sciences journal, the method counts the subject categories in all of the article's references indexed by Web of Science, and uses the most numerous subject categories of the references to determine the most appropriate classification of the article. We used articles in an issue of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) to validate the correctness of the method by comparing the obtained results with the categories of the articles as defined by PNAS and their content. This study shows that the method provides more precise search results for the subject category of interest in bibliometric investigations through recognition of articles in multidisciplinary sciences journals whose work relates to a particular subject category.
    Object
    Web of science
  13. Suominen, A.; Toivanen, H.: Map of science with topic modeling : comparison of unsupervised learning and human-assigned subject classification (2016) 0.00
    0.002277429 = product of:
      0.02049686 = sum of:
        0.02049686 = weight(_text_:of in 3121) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02049686 = score(doc=3121,freq=30.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.33457235 = fieldWeight in 3121, product of:
              5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
                30.0 = termFreq=30.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3121)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    The delineation of coordinates is fundamental for the cartography of science, and accurate and credible classification of scientific knowledge presents a persistent challenge in this regard. We present a map of Finnish science based on unsupervised-learning classification, and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of this approach vis-à-vis those generated by human reasoning. We conclude that from theoretical and practical perspectives there exist several challenges for human reasoning-based classification frameworks of scientific knowledge, as they typically try to fit new-to-the-world knowledge into historical models of scientific knowledge, and cannot easily be deployed for new large-scale data sets. Automated classification schemes, in contrast, generate classification models only from the available text corpus, thereby identifying credibly novel bodies of knowledge. They also lend themselves to versatile large-scale data analysis, and enable a range of Big Data possibilities. However, we also argue that it is neither possible nor fruitful to declare one or another method a superior approach in terms of realism to classify scientific knowledge, and we believe that the merits of each approach are dependent on the practical objectives of analysis.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.10, S.2464-2476
  14. Qu, B.; Cong, G.; Li, C.; Sun, A.; Chen, H.: ¬An evaluation of classification models for question topic categorization (2012) 0.00
    0.0022002053 = product of:
      0.019801848 = sum of:
        0.019801848 = weight(_text_:of in 237) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019801848 = score(doc=237,freq=28.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.32322758 = fieldWeight in 237, product of:
              5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
                28.0 = termFreq=28.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=237)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    We study the problem of question topic classification using a very large real-world Community Question Answering (CQA) dataset from Yahoo! Answers. The dataset comprises 3.9 million questions and these questions are organized into more than 1,000 categories in a hierarchy. To the best knowledge, this is the first systematic evaluation of the performance of different classification methods on question topic classification as well as short texts. Specifically, we empirically evaluate the following in classifying questions into CQA categories: (a) the usefulness of n-gram features and bag-of-word features; (b) the performance of three standard classification algorithms (naive Bayes, maximum entropy, and support vector machines); (c) the performance of the state-of-the-art hierarchical classification algorithms; (d) the effect of training data size on performance; and (e) the effectiveness of the different components of CQA data, including subject, content, asker, and the best answer. The experimental results show what aspects are important for question topic classification in terms of both effectiveness and efficiency. We believe that the experimental findings from this study will be useful in real-world classification problems.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.5, S.889-903
  15. Maghsoodi, N.; Homayounpour, M.M.: Improving Farsi multiclass text classification using a thesaurus and two-stage feature selection (2011) 0.00
    0.0021201707 = product of:
      0.019081537 = sum of:
        0.019081537 = weight(_text_:of in 4775) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019081537 = score(doc=4775,freq=26.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.31146988 = fieldWeight in 4775, product of:
              5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
                26.0 = termFreq=26.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4775)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    The progressive increase of information content has recently made it necessary to create a system for automatic classification of documents. In this article, a system is presented for the categorization of multiclass Farsi documents that requires fewer training examples and can help to compensate the shortcoming of the standard training dataset. The new idea proposed in the present article is based on extending the feature vector by adding some words extracted from a thesaurus and then filtering the new feature vector by applying secondary feature selection to discard inappropriate features. In fact, a phase of secondary feature selection is applied to choose more appropriate features among the features added from a thesaurus to enhance the effect of using a thesaurus on the efficiency of the classifier. To evaluate the proposed system, a corpus is gathered from the Farsi Wikipedia website and some articles in the Hamshahri newspaper, the Roshd periodical, and the Soroush magazine. In addition to studying the role of a thesaurus and applying secondary feature selection, the effect of a various number of categories, size of the training dataset, and average number of words in the test data also are examined. As the results indicate, classification efficiency improves by applying this approach, especially when available data is not sufficient for some text categories.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.10, S.2055-2066
  16. Liu, R.-L.: Context-based term frequency assessment for text classification (2010) 0.00
    0.0021169065 = product of:
      0.019052157 = sum of:
        0.019052157 = weight(_text_:of in 3331) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019052157 = score(doc=3331,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.3109903 = fieldWeight in 3331, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3331)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    Automatic text classification (TC) is essential for the management of information. To properly classify a document d, it is essential to identify the semantics of each term t in d, while the semantics heavily depend on context (neighboring terms) of t in d. Therefore, we present a technique CTFA (Context-based Term Frequency Assessment) that improves text classifiers by considering term contexts in test documents. The results of the term context recognition are used to assess term frequencies of terms, and hence CTFA may easily work with various kinds of text classifiers that base their TC decisions on term frequencies, without needing to modify the classifiers. Moreover, CTFA is efficient, and neither huge memory nor domain-specific knowledge is required. Empirical results show that CTFA successfully enhances performance of several kinds of text classifiers on different experimental data.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.2, S.300-309
  17. Desale, S.K.; Kumbhar, R.: Research on automatic classification of documents in library environment : a literature review (2013) 0.00
    0.0021169065 = product of:
      0.019052157 = sum of:
        0.019052157 = weight(_text_:of in 1071) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019052157 = score(doc=1071,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.3109903 = fieldWeight in 1071, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1071)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    This paper aims to provide an overview of automatic classification research, which focuses on issues related to the automatic classification of documents in a library environment. The review covers literature published in mainstream library and information science studies. The review was done on literature published in both academic and professional LIS journals and other documents. This review reveals that basically three types of research are being done on automatic classification: 1) hierarchical classification using different library classification schemes, 2) text categorization and document categorization using different type of classifiers with or without using training documents, and 3) automatic bibliographic classification. Predominantly this research is directed towards solving problems of organization of digital documents in an online environment. However, very little research is devoted towards solving the problems of arrangement of physical documents.
  18. Teich, E.; Degaetano-Ortlieb, S.; Fankhauser, P.; Kermes, H.; Lapshinova-Koltunski, E.: ¬The linguistic construal of disciplinarity : a data-mining approach using register features (2016) 0.00
    0.0021169065 = product of:
      0.019052157 = sum of:
        0.019052157 = weight(_text_:of in 3015) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019052157 = score(doc=3015,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.3109903 = fieldWeight in 3015, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3015)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    We analyze the linguistic evolution of selected scientific disciplines over a 30-year time span (1970s to 2000s). Our focus is on four highly specialized disciplines at the boundaries of computer science that emerged during that time: computational linguistics, bioinformatics, digital construction, and microelectronics. Our analysis is driven by the question whether these disciplines develop a distinctive language use-both individually and collectively-over the given time period. The data set is the English Scientific Text Corpus (scitex), which includes texts from the 1970s/1980s and early 2000s. Our theoretical basis is register theory. In terms of methods, we combine corpus-based methods of feature extraction (various aggregated features [part-of-speech based], n-grams, lexico-grammatical patterns) and automatic text classification. The results of our research are directly relevant to the study of linguistic variation and languages for specific purposes (LSP) and have implications for various natural language processing (NLP) tasks, for example, authorship attribution, text mining, or training NLP tools.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.7, S.1668-1678
  19. Schaalje, G.B.; Blades, N.J.; Funai, T.: ¬An open-set size-adjusted Bayesian classifier for authorship attribution (2013) 0.00
    0.0019958385 = product of:
      0.017962547 = sum of:
        0.017962547 = weight(_text_:of in 1041) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017962547 = score(doc=1041,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.2932045 = fieldWeight in 1041, 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=1041)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    Recent studies of authorship attribution have used machine-learning methods including regularized multinomial logistic regression, neural nets, support vector machines, and the nearest shrunken centroid classifier to identify likely authors of disputed texts. These methods are all limited by an inability to perform open-set classification and account for text and corpus size. We propose a customized Bayesian logit-normal-beta-binomial classification model for supervised authorship attribution. The model is based on the beta-binomial distribution with an explicit inverse relationship between extra-binomial variation and text size. The model internally estimates the relationship of extra-binomial variation to text size, and uses Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) to produce distributions of posterior authorship probabilities instead of point estimates. We illustrate the method by training the machine-learning methods as well as the open-set Bayesian classifier on undisputed papers of The Federalist, and testing the method on documents historically attributed to Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison. The Bayesian classifier was the best classifier of these texts.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.9, S.1815-1825
  20. Wartena, C.; Sommer, M.: Automatic classification of scientific records using the German Subject Heading Authority File (SWD) (2012) 0.00
    0.0019502735 = product of:
      0.017552461 = sum of:
        0.017552461 = weight(_text_:of in 472) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017552461 = score(doc=472,freq=22.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.28651062 = fieldWeight in 472, product of:
              4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
                22.0 = termFreq=22.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=472)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    The following paper deals with an automatic text classification method which does not require training documents. For this method the German Subject Heading Authority File (SWD), provided by the linked data service of the German National Library is used. Recently the SWD was enriched with notations of the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC). In consequence it became possible to utilize the subject headings as textual representations for the notations of the DDC. Basically, we we derive the classification of a text from the classification of the words in the text given by the thesaurus. The method was tested by classifying 3826 OAI-Records from 7 different repositories. Mean reciprocal rank and recall were chosen as evaluation measure. Direct comparison to a machine learning method has shown that this method is definitely competitive. Thus we can conclude that the enriched version of the SWD provides high quality information with a broad coverage for classification of German scientific articles.
    Content
    This work is partially based on the Bachelor thesis of Maike Sommer. Vgl. auch: http://sda2012.dke-research.de.
    Source
    Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Semantic Digital Archives held in conjunction with the 16th Int. Conference on Theory and Practice of Digital Libraries (TPDL) on September 27, 2012 in Paphos, Cyprus [http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-912/proceedings.pdf]. Eds.: A. Mitschik et al

Languages

  • e 43
  • d 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 42
  • el 2
  • s 1
  • More… Less…