Search (487 results, page 1 of 25)

  • × theme_ss:"Wissensrepräsentation"
  1. Xiong, C.: Knowledge based text representations for information retrieval (2016) 0.24
    0.23678769 = product of:
      0.42621782 = sum of:
        0.041482 = product of:
          0.124446005 = sum of:
            0.124446005 = weight(_text_:3a in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.124446005 = score(doc=5820,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.3321406 = queryWeight, product of:
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03917671 = queryNorm
                0.3746787 = fieldWeight in 5820, 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=5820)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
        0.17599323 = weight(_text_:2f in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.17599323 = score(doc=5820,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.3321406 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.5298757 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
        0.016397487 = weight(_text_:of in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016397487 = score(doc=5820,freq=30.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.26765788 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
              5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
                30.0 = termFreq=30.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
        0.016351866 = weight(_text_:systems in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016351866 = score(doc=5820,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.1358164 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
        0.17599323 = weight(_text_:2f in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.17599323 = score(doc=5820,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.3321406 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.5298757 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
      0.5555556 = coord(5/9)
    
    Abstract
    The successes of information retrieval (IR) in recent decades were built upon bag-of-words representations. Effective as it is, bag-of-words is only a shallow text understanding; there is a limited amount of information for document ranking in the word space. This dissertation goes beyond words and builds knowledge based text representations, which embed the external and carefully curated information from knowledge bases, and provide richer and structured evidence for more advanced information retrieval systems. This thesis research first builds query representations with entities associated with the query. Entities' descriptions are used by query expansion techniques that enrich the query with explanation terms. Then we present a general framework that represents a query with entities that appear in the query, are retrieved by the query, or frequently show up in the top retrieved documents. A latent space model is developed to jointly learn the connections from query to entities and the ranking of documents, modeling the external evidence from knowledge bases and internal ranking features cooperatively. To further improve the quality of relevant entities, a defining factor of our query representations, we introduce learning to rank to entity search and retrieve better entities from knowledge bases. In the document representation part, this thesis research also moves one step forward with a bag-of-entities model, in which documents are represented by their automatic entity annotations, and the ranking is performed in the entity space.
    This proposal includes plans to improve the quality of relevant entities with a co-learning framework that learns from both entity labels and document labels. We also plan to develop a hybrid ranking system that combines word based and entity based representations together with their uncertainties considered. At last, we plan to enrich the text representations with connections between entities. We propose several ways to infer entity graph representations for texts, and to rank documents using their structure representations. This dissertation overcomes the limitation of word based representations with external and carefully curated information from knowledge bases. We believe this thesis research is a solid start towards the new generation of intelligent, semantic, and structured information retrieval.
    Content
    Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Language and Information Technologies. Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cs.cmu.edu%2F~cx%2Fpapers%2Fknowledge_based_text_representation.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0SaTSvhWLTh__Uz_HtOtl3.
    Imprint
    Pittsburgh, PA : Carnegie Mellon University, School of Computer Science, Language Technologies Institute
  2. 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) 0.20
    0.20049646 = product of:
      0.45111704 = sum of:
        0.062223002 = product of:
          0.186669 = sum of:
            0.186669 = weight(_text_:3a in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.186669 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.3321406 = queryWeight, product of:
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03917671 = 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)
        0.186669 = weight(_text_:2f in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.186669 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.3321406 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = 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)
        0.015556021 = weight(_text_:of in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015556021 = score(doc=400,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = 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)
        0.186669 = weight(_text_:2f in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.186669 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.3321406 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = 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)
      0.44444445 = coord(4/9)
    
    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
  3. Stojanovic, N.: Ontology-based Information Retrieval : methods and tools for cooperative query answering (2005) 0.18
    0.17981176 = product of:
      0.32366115 = sum of:
        0.041482 = product of:
          0.124446005 = sum of:
            0.124446005 = weight(_text_:3a in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.124446005 = score(doc=701,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.3321406 = queryWeight, product of:
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03917671 = 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)
        0.124446005 = weight(_text_:2f in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.124446005 = score(doc=701,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.3321406 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = 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)
        0.016935252 = weight(_text_:of in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016935252 = score(doc=701,freq=32.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.27643585 = fieldWeight in 701, product of:
              5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
                32.0 = termFreq=32.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=701)
        0.016351866 = weight(_text_:systems in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016351866 = score(doc=701,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.1358164 = fieldWeight in 701, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=701)
        0.124446005 = weight(_text_:2f in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.124446005 = score(doc=701,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.3321406 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = 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)
      0.5555556 = coord(5/9)
    
    Abstract
    By the explosion of possibilities for a ubiquitous content production, the information overload problem reaches the level of complexity which cannot be managed by traditional modelling approaches anymore. Due to their pure syntactical nature traditional information retrieval approaches did not succeed in treating content itself (i.e. its meaning, and not its representation). This leads to a very low usefulness of the results of a retrieval process for a user's task at hand. In the last ten years ontologies have been emerged from an interesting conceptualisation paradigm to a very promising (semantic) modelling technology, especially in the context of the Semantic Web. From the information retrieval point of view, ontologies enable a machine-understandable form of content description, such that the retrieval process can be driven by the meaning of the content. However, the very ambiguous nature of the retrieval process in which a user, due to the unfamiliarity with the underlying repository and/or query syntax, just approximates his information need in a query, implies a necessity to include the user in the retrieval process more actively in order to close the gap between the meaning of the content and the meaning of a user's query (i.e. his information need). This thesis lays foundation for such an ontology-based interactive retrieval process, in which the retrieval system interacts with a user in order to conceptually interpret the meaning of his query, whereas the underlying domain ontology drives the conceptualisation process. In that way the retrieval process evolves from a query evaluation process into a highly interactive cooperation between a user and the retrieval system, in which the system tries to anticipate the user's information need and to deliver the relevant content proactively. Moreover, the notion of content relevance for a user's query evolves from a content dependent artefact to the multidimensional context-dependent structure, strongly influenced by the user's preferences. This cooperation process is realized as the so-called Librarian Agent Query Refinement Process. In order to clarify the impact of an ontology on the retrieval process (regarding its complexity and quality), a set of methods and tools for different levels of content and query formalisation is developed, ranging from pure ontology-based inferencing to keyword-based querying in which semantics automatically emerges from the results. Our evaluation studies have shown that the possibilities to conceptualize a user's information need in the right manner and to interpret the retrieval results accordingly are key issues for realizing much more meaningful information retrieval systems.
    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.
  4. Bittner, T.; Donnelly, M.; Winter, S.: Ontology and semantic interoperability (2006) 0.14
    0.1384162 = product of:
      0.24914916 = sum of:
        0.10067343 = weight(_text_:applications in 4820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10067343 = score(doc=4820,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.5836958 = fieldWeight in 4820, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4820)
        0.012701439 = weight(_text_:of in 4820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012701439 = score(doc=4820,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.20732689 = fieldWeight in 4820, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4820)
        0.0490556 = weight(_text_:systems in 4820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0490556 = score(doc=4820,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.4074492 = fieldWeight in 4820, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4820)
        0.070794985 = weight(_text_:software in 4820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.070794985 = score(doc=4820,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.4555077 = fieldWeight in 4820, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4820)
        0.015923709 = product of:
          0.031847417 = sum of:
            0.031847417 = weight(_text_:22 in 4820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031847417 = score(doc=4820,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03917671 = 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)
      0.5555556 = coord(5/9)
    
    Abstract
    One of the major problems facing systems for Computer Aided Design (CAD), Architecture Engineering and Construction (AEC) and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) applications today is the lack of interoperability among the various systems. When integrating software applications, substantial di culties can arise in translating information from one application to the other. In this paper, we focus on semantic di culties that arise in software integration. Applications may use di erent terminologies to describe the same domain. Even when appli-cations use the same terminology, they often associate di erent semantics with the terms. This obstructs information exchange among applications. To cir-cumvent this obstacle, we need some way of explicitly specifying the semantics for each terminology in an unambiguous fashion. Ontologies can provide such specification. It will be the task of this paper to explain what ontologies are and how they can be used to facilitate interoperability between software systems used in computer aided design, architecture engineering and construction, and geographic information processing.
    Date
    3.12.2016 18:39:22
  5. Innovations and advanced techniques in systems, computing sciences and software engineering (2008) 0.12
    0.12090521 = product of:
      0.27203673 = sum of:
        0.059322387 = weight(_text_:applications in 4319) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.059322387 = score(doc=4319,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.34394607 = fieldWeight in 4319, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4319)
        0.012963352 = weight(_text_:of in 4319) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012963352 = score(doc=4319,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.21160212 = fieldWeight in 4319, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4319)
        0.08175933 = weight(_text_:systems in 4319) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08175933 = score(doc=4319,freq=32.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.679082 = fieldWeight in 4319, product of:
              5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
                32.0 = termFreq=32.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4319)
        0.117991656 = weight(_text_:software in 4319) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.117991656 = score(doc=4319,freq=24.0), product of:
            0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.75917953 = fieldWeight in 4319, product of:
              4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
                24.0 = termFreq=24.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4319)
      0.44444445 = coord(4/9)
    
    Abstract
    Innovations and Advanced Techniques in Systems, Computing Sciences and Software Engineering includes a set of rigorously reviewed world-class manuscripts addressing and detailing state-of-the-art research projects in the areas of Computer Science, Software Engineering, Computer Engineering, and Systems Engineering and Sciences. Innovations and Advanced Techniques in Systems, Computing Sciences and Software Engineering includes selected papers form the conference proceedings of the International Conference on Systems, Computing Sciences and Software Engineering (SCSS 2007) which was part of the International Joint Conferences on Computer, Information and Systems Sciences and Engineering (CISSE 2007).
    Content
    Inhalt: Image and Pattern Recognition: Compression, Image processing, Signal Processing Architectures, Signal Processing for Communication, Signal Processing Implementation, Speech Compression, and Video Coding Architectures. Languages and Systems: Algorithms, Databases, Embedded Systems and Applications, File Systems and I/O, Geographical Information Systems, Kernel and OS Structures, Knowledge Based Systems, Modeling and Simulation, Object Based Software Engineering, Programming Languages, and Programming Models and tools. Parallel Processing: Distributed Scheduling, Multiprocessing, Real-time Systems, Simulation Modeling and Development, and Web Applications. New trends in computing: Computers for People of Special Needs, Fuzzy Inference, Human Computer Interaction, Incremental Learning, Internet-based Computing Models, Machine Intelligence, Natural Language Processing, Neural Networks, and Online Decision Support System
    LCSH
    Computer Systems Organization and Communication Networks
    Software Engineering/Programming and Operating Systems
    Software engineering
    RSWK
    Computerarchitektur / Software Engineering / Telekommunikation / Online-Publikation
    Subject
    Computerarchitektur / Software Engineering / Telekommunikation / Online-Publikation
    Computer Systems Organization and Communication Networks
    Software Engineering/Programming and Operating Systems
    Software engineering
  6. Semantic applications (2018) 0.10
    0.1017558 = product of:
      0.22895055 = sum of:
        0.1258418 = weight(_text_:applications in 5204) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1258418 = score(doc=5204,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.7296198 = fieldWeight in 5204, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5204)
        0.014968789 = weight(_text_:of in 5204) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014968789 = score(doc=5204,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.24433708 = fieldWeight in 5204, 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=5204)
        0.054078713 = weight(_text_:systems in 5204) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054078713 = score(doc=5204,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.4491705 = fieldWeight in 5204, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5204)
        0.034061253 = weight(_text_:software in 5204) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034061253 = score(doc=5204,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.21915624 = fieldWeight in 5204, 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=5204)
      0.44444445 = coord(4/9)
    
    Abstract
    This book describes proven methodologies for developing semantic applications: software applications which explicitly or implicitly uses the semantics (i.e., the meaning) of a domain terminology in order to improve usability, correctness, and completeness. An example is semantic search, where synonyms and related terms are used for enriching the results of a simple text-based search. Ontologies, thesauri or controlled vocabularies are the centerpiece of semantic applications. The book includes technological and architectural best practices for corporate use.
    Content
    Introduction.- Ontology Development.- Compliance using Metadata.- Variety Management for Big Data.- Text Mining in Economics.- Generation of Natural Language Texts.- Sentiment Analysis.- Building Concise Text Corpora from Web Contents.- Ontology-Based Modelling of Web Content.- Personalized Clinical Decision Support for Cancer Care.- Applications of Temporal Conceptual Semantic Systems.- Context-Aware Documentation in the Smart Factory.- Knowledge-Based Production Planning for Industry 4.0.- Information Exchange in Jurisdiction.- Supporting Automated License Clearing.- Managing cultural assets: Implementing typical cultural heritage archive's usage scenarios via Semantic Web technologies.- Semantic Applications for Process Management.- Domain-Specific Semantic Search Applications.
    LCSH
    Management information systems
    Information Systems Applications (incl. Internet)
    Management of Computing and Information Systems
    Subject
    Management information systems
    Information Systems Applications (incl. Internet)
    Management of Computing and Information Systems
  7. ¬The Semantic Web : research and applications ; second European Semantic WebConference, ESWC 2005, Heraklion, Crete, Greece, May 29 - June 1, 2005 ; proceedings (2005) 0.08
    0.08195424 = product of:
      0.18439704 = sum of:
        0.07118686 = weight(_text_:applications in 439) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07118686 = score(doc=439,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.41273528 = fieldWeight in 439, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=439)
        0.0063507194 = weight(_text_:of in 439) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0063507194 = score(doc=439,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.103663445 = fieldWeight in 439, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=439)
        0.0490556 = weight(_text_:systems in 439) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0490556 = score(doc=439,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.4074492 = fieldWeight in 439, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=439)
        0.05780387 = weight(_text_:software in 439) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05780387 = score(doc=439,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.3719205 = fieldWeight in 439, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=439)
      0.44444445 = coord(4/9)
    
    Abstract
    This book constitutes the refereed proceedings of the Second European Semantic Web Conference, ESWC 2005, heldin Heraklion, Crete, Greece in May/June 2005. The 48 revised full papers presented were carefully reviewed and selected from 148 submissions. The papers are organized in topical sections on semantic Web services, languages, ontologies, reasoning and querying, search and information retrieval, user and communities, natural language for the semantic Web, annotation tools, and semantic Web applications.
    LCSH
    Information storage and retrieval systems
    Information systems
    Software engineering
    Subject
    Information storage and retrieval systems
    Information systems
    Software engineering
  8. Assem, M. van: Converting and integrating vocabularies for the Semantic Web (2010) 0.06
    0.06416068 = product of:
      0.14436153 = sum of:
        0.08878562 = weight(_text_:applications in 4639) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08878562 = score(doc=4639,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.51477134 = fieldWeight in 4639, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4639)
        0.011975031 = weight(_text_:of in 4639) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011975031 = score(doc=4639,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.19546966 = fieldWeight in 4639, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4639)
        0.016351866 = weight(_text_:systems in 4639) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016351866 = score(doc=4639,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.1358164 = fieldWeight in 4639, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4639)
        0.027249003 = weight(_text_:software in 4639) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027249003 = score(doc=4639,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.17532499 = fieldWeight in 4639, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4639)
      0.44444445 = coord(4/9)
    
    Abstract
    This thesis focuses on conversion of vocabularies for representation and integration of collections on the Semantic Web. A secondary focus is how to represent metadata schemas (RDF Schemas representing metadata element sets) such that they interoperate with vocabularies. The primary domain in which we operate is that of cultural heritage collections. The background worldview in which a solution is sought is that of the Semantic Web research paradigmwith its associated theories, methods, tools and use cases. In other words, we assume the SemanticWeb is in principle able to provide the context to realize interoperable collections. Interoperability is dependent on the interplay between representations and the applications that use them. We mean applications in the widest sense, such as "search" and "annotation". These applications or tasks are often present in software applications, such as the E-Culture application. It is therefore necessary that applications requirements on the vocabulary representation are met. This leads us to formulate the following problem statement: HOW CAN EXISTING VOCABULARIES BE MADE AVAILABLE TO SEMANTIC WEB APPLICATIONS?
    We refine the problem statement into three research questions. The first two focus on the problem of conversion of a vocabulary to a Semantic Web representation from its original format. Conversion of a vocabulary to a representation in a Semantic Web language is necessary to make the vocabulary available to SemanticWeb applications. In the last question we focus on integration of collection metadata schemas in a way that allows for vocabulary representations as produced by our methods. Academisch proefschrift ter verkrijging van de graad Doctor aan de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Dutch Research School for Information and Knowledge Systems.
  9. Renear, A.H.; Wickett, K.M.; Urban, R.J.; Dubin, D.; Shreeves, S.L.: Collection/item metadata relationships (2008) 0.06
    0.060443893 = product of:
      0.13599876 = sum of:
        0.07118686 = weight(_text_:applications in 2623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07118686 = score(doc=2623,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.41273528 = fieldWeight in 2623, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2623)
        0.014200641 = weight(_text_:of in 2623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014200641 = score(doc=2623,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.23179851 = fieldWeight in 2623, 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=2623)
        0.034687545 = weight(_text_:systems in 2623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034687545 = score(doc=2623,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.28811008 = fieldWeight in 2623, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2623)
        0.015923709 = product of:
          0.031847417 = sum of:
            0.031847417 = weight(_text_:22 in 2623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031847417 = score(doc=2623,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03917671 = 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)
      0.44444445 = coord(4/9)
    
    Abstract
    Contemporary retrieval systems, which search across collections, usually ignore collection-level metadata. Alternative approaches, exploiting collection-level information, will require an understanding of the various kinds of relationships that can obtain between collection-level and item-level metadata. This paper outlines the problem and describes a project that is developing a logic-based framework for classifying collection/item metadata relationships. This framework will support (i) metadata specification developers defining metadata elements, (ii) metadata creators describing objects, and (iii) system designers implementing systems that take advantage of collection-level metadata. We present three examples of collection/item metadata relationship categories, attribute/value-propagation, value-propagation, and value-constraint and show that even in these simple cases a precise formulation requires modal notions in addition to first-order logic. These formulations are related to recent work in information retrieval and ontology evaluation.
    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
  10. Mainzer, K.: ¬The emergence of self-conscious systems : from symbolic AI to embodied robotics (2014) 0.06
    0.058544915 = product of:
      0.13172606 = sum of:
        0.041947264 = weight(_text_:applications in 3398) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041947264 = score(doc=3398,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.2432066 = fieldWeight in 3398, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3398)
        0.021169065 = weight(_text_:of in 3398) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021169065 = score(doc=3398,freq=32.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.34554482 = fieldWeight in 3398, 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=3398)
        0.020439833 = weight(_text_:systems in 3398) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020439833 = score(doc=3398,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.1697705 = fieldWeight in 3398, 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=3398)
        0.048169892 = weight(_text_:software in 3398) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.048169892 = score(doc=3398,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.30993375 = fieldWeight in 3398, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3398)
      0.44444445 = coord(4/9)
    
    Abstract
    Knowledge representation, which is today used in database applications, artificial intelligence (AI), software engineering and many other disciplines of computer science has deep roots in logic and philosophy. In the beginning, there was Aristotle (384 bc-322 bc) who developed logic as a precise method for reasoning about knowledge. Syllogisms were introduced as formal patterns for representing special figures of logical deductions. According to Aristotle, the subject of ontology is the study of categories of things that exist or may exist in some domain. In modern times, Descartes considered the human brain as a store of knowledge representation. Recognition was made possible by an isomorphic correspondence between internal geometrical representations (ideae) and external situations and events. Leibniz was deeply influenced by these traditions. In his mathesis universalis, he required a universal formal language (lingua universalis) to represent human thinking by calculation procedures and to implement them by means of mechanical calculating machines. An ars iudicandi should allow every problem to be decided by an algorithm after representation in numeric symbols. An ars iveniendi should enable users to seek and enumerate desired data and solutions of problems. In the age of mechanics, knowledge representation was reduced to mechanical calculation procedures. In the twentieth century, computational cognitivism arose in the wake of Turing's theory of computability. In its functionalism, the hardware of a computer is related to the wetware of the human brain. The mind is understood as the software of a computer.
    Series
    History and philosophy of technoscience; 3
  11. Resource Description Framework (RDF) (2004) 0.06
    0.055449694 = product of:
      0.16634908 = sum of:
        0.09491582 = weight(_text_:applications in 3063) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09491582 = score(doc=3063,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.5503137 = fieldWeight in 3063, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3063)
        0.016935252 = weight(_text_:of in 3063) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016935252 = score(doc=3063,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.27643585 = fieldWeight in 3063, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3063)
        0.054498006 = weight(_text_:software in 3063) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054498006 = score(doc=3063,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.35064998 = fieldWeight in 3063, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3063)
      0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
    
    Abstract
    The Resource Description Framework (RDF) integrates a variety of applications from library catalogs and world-wide directories to syndication and aggregation of news, software, and content to personal collections of music, photos, and events using XML as an interchange syntax. The RDF specifications provide a lightweight ontology system to support the exchange of knowledge on the Web. The W3C Semantic Web Activity Statement explains W3C's plans for RDF, including the RDF Core WG, Web Ontology and the RDF Interest Group.
    Content
    Specifications - Bookmarks (Intro * Articles) - Projects and Applications - Developer tools - Schemas - Related Technologies - Timeline
  12. Developments in applied artificial intelligence : proceedings / 16th International Conference on Industrial and Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence and Expert Systems, IEA/AIE 2003, Loughborough, UK, June 23 - 26, 2003 (2003) 0.05
    0.05399434 = product of:
      0.16198301 = sum of:
        0.10274939 = weight(_text_:applications in 441) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10274939 = score(doc=441,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.5957321 = fieldWeight in 441, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=441)
        0.009166474 = weight(_text_:of in 441) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009166474 = score(doc=441,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.1496253 = fieldWeight in 441, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=441)
        0.050067157 = weight(_text_:systems in 441) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.050067157 = score(doc=441,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.41585106 = fieldWeight in 441, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=441)
      0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
    
    Abstract
    This book constitutes the refereed proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Industrial and Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence and Expert Systems, IEA/AIE 2003, held in Loughborough, UK in June 2003. The 81 revised full papers presented were carefully reviewed and selected from more than 140 submissions. Among the topics addressed are soft computing, fuzzy logic, diagnosis, knowledge representation, knowledge management, automated reasoning, machine learning, planning and scheduling, evolutionary computation, computer vision, agent systems, algorithmic learning, tutoring systems, financial analysis, etc.
    LCSH
    Artificial intelligence / Industrial applications / Congresses
    Expert systems (Computer science) / Industrial applications / Congresses
    Subject
    Artificial intelligence / Industrial applications / Congresses
    Expert systems (Computer science) / Industrial applications / Congresses
  13. Chaudhury, S.; Mallik, A.; Ghosh, H.: Multimedia ontology : representation and applications (2016) 0.05
    0.053987335 = product of:
      0.161962 = sum of:
        0.10274939 = weight(_text_:applications in 2801) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10274939 = score(doc=2801,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.5957321 = fieldWeight in 2801, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2801)
        0.018332949 = weight(_text_:of in 2801) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018332949 = score(doc=2801,freq=24.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.2992506 = fieldWeight in 2801, 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=2801)
        0.040879667 = weight(_text_:systems in 2801) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040879667 = score(doc=2801,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.339541 = fieldWeight in 2801, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2801)
      0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
    
    Abstract
    The book covers multimedia ontology in heritage preservation with intellectual explorations of various themes of Indian cultural heritage. The result of more than 15 years of collective research, Multimedia Ontology: Representation and Applications provides a theoretical foundation for understanding the nature of media data and the principles involved in its interpretation. The book presents a unified approach to recent advances in multimedia and explains how a multimedia ontology can fill the semantic gap between concepts and the media world. It relays real-life examples of implementations in different domains to illustrate how this gap can be filled. The book contains information that helps with building semantic, content-based search and retrieval engines and also with developing vertical application-specific search applications. It guides you in designing multimedia tools that aid in logical and conceptual organization of large amounts of multimedia data. As a practical demonstration, it showcases multimedia applications in cultural heritage preservation efforts and the creation of virtual museums. The book describes the limitations of existing ontology techniques in semantic multimedia data processing, as well as some open problems in the representations and applications of multimedia ontology. As an antidote, it introduces new ontology representation and reasoning schemes that overcome these limitations. The long, compiled efforts reflected in Multimedia Ontology: Representation and Applications are a signpost for new achievements and developments in efficiency and accessibility in the field.
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Annals of Library and Information Studies 62(2015) no.4, S.299-300 (A.K. Das)
    LCSH
    Multimedia systems
    Information storage and retrieval systems
    Subject
    Multimedia systems
    Information storage and retrieval systems
  14. ISO 25964 Thesauri and interoperability with other vocabularies (2008) 0.05
    0.051670026 = product of:
      0.116257556 = sum of:
        0.03559343 = weight(_text_:applications in 1169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03559343 = score(doc=1169,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.20636764 = fieldWeight in 1169, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1169)
        0.01931496 = weight(_text_:of in 1169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01931496 = score(doc=1169,freq=74.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.31528005 = fieldWeight in 1169, product of:
              8.602325 = tf(freq=74.0), with freq of:
                74.0 = termFreq=74.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1169)
        0.03244723 = weight(_text_:systems in 1169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03244723 = score(doc=1169,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.2695023 = fieldWeight in 1169, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1169)
        0.028901935 = weight(_text_:software in 1169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028901935 = score(doc=1169,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.18596025 = fieldWeight in 1169, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1169)
      0.44444445 = coord(4/9)
    
    Abstract
    T.1: Today's thesauri are mostly electronic tools, having moved on from the paper-based era when thesaurus standards were first developed. They are built and maintained with the support of software and need to integrate with other software, such as search engines and content management systems. Whereas in the past thesauri were designed for information professionals trained in indexing and searching, today there is a demand for vocabularies that untrained users will find to be intuitive. ISO 25964 makes the transition needed for the world of electronic information management. However, part 1 retains the assumption that human intellect is usually involved in the selection of indexing terms and in the selection of search terms. If both the indexer and the searcher are guided to choose the same term for the same concept, then relevant documents will be retrieved. This is the main principle underlying thesaurus design, even though a thesaurus built for human users may also be applied in situations where computers make the choices. Efficient exchange of data is a vital component of thesaurus management and exploitation. Hence the inclusion in this standard of recommendations for exchange formats and protocols. Adoption of these will facilitate interoperability between thesaurus management systems and the other computer applications, such as indexing and retrieval systems, that will utilize the data. Thesauri are typically used in post-coordinate retrieval systems, but may also be applied to hierarchical directories, pre-coordinate indexes and classification systems. Increasingly, thesaurus applications need to mesh with others, such as automatic categorization schemes, free-text search systems, etc. Part 2 of ISO 25964 describes additional types of structured vocabulary and gives recommendations to enable interoperation of the vocabularies at all stages of the information storage and retrieval process.
    T.2: The ability to identify and locate relevant information among vast collections and other resources is a major and pressing challenge today. Several different types of vocabulary are in use for this purpose. Some of the most widely used vocabularies were designed a hundred years ago and have been evolving steadily. A different generation of vocabularies is now emerging, designed to exploit the electronic media more effectively. A good understanding of the previous generation is still essential for effective access to collections indexed with them. An important object of ISO 25964 as a whole is to support data exchange and other forms of interoperability in circumstances in which more than one structured vocabulary is applied within one retrieval system or network. Sometimes one vocabulary has to be mapped to another, and it is important to understand both the potential and the limitations of such mappings. In other systems, a thesaurus is mapped to a classification scheme, or an ontology to a thesaurus. Comprehensive interoperability needs to cover the whole range of vocabulary types, whether young or old. Concepts in different vocabularies are related only in that they have the same or similar meaning. However, the meaning can be found in a number of different aspects within each particular type of structured vocabulary: - within terms or captions selected in different languages; - in the notation assigned indicating a place within a larger hierarchy; - in the definition, scope notes, history notes and other notes that explain the significance of that concept; and - in explicit relationships to other concepts or entities within the same vocabulary. In order to create mappings from one structured vocabulary to another it is first necessary to understand, within the context of each different type of structured vocabulary, the significance and relative importance of each of the different elements in defining the meaning of that particular concept. ISO 25964-1 describes the key characteristics of thesauri along with additional advice on best practice. ISO 25964-2 focuses on other types of vocabulary and does not attempt to cover all aspects of good practice. It concentrates on those aspects which need to be understood if one of the vocabularies is to work effectively alongside one or more of the others. Recognizing that a new standard cannot be applied to some existing vocabularies, this part of ISO 25964 provides informative description alongside the recommendations, the aim of which is to enable users and system developers to interpret and implement the existing vocabularies effectively. The remainder of ISO 25964-2 deals with the principles and practicalities of establishing mappings between vocabularies.
  15. Semantic technologies in content management systems : trends, applications and evaluations (2012) 0.05
    0.051294416 = product of:
      0.15388325 = sum of:
        0.08878562 = weight(_text_:applications in 4893) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08878562 = score(doc=4893,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.51477134 = fieldWeight in 4893, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4893)
        0.013388492 = weight(_text_:of in 4893) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013388492 = score(doc=4893,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.21854173 = fieldWeight in 4893, 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=4893)
        0.051709145 = weight(_text_:systems in 4893) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.051709145 = score(doc=4893,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.42948917 = fieldWeight in 4893, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4893)
      0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
    
    Abstract
    Content Management Systems (CMSs) are used in almost every industry by millions of end-user organizations. In contrast to the 90s, they are no longer used as isolated applications in one organization but they support critical core operations in business ecosystems. Content management today is more interactive and more integrative: interactive because end-users are increasingly content creators themselves and integrative because content elements can be embedded into various other applications. The authors of this book investigate how Semantic Technologies can increase interactivity and integration capabilities of CMSs and discuss their business value to millions of end-user organizations. This book has therefore the objective, to reflect existing applications as well as to discuss and present new applications for CMSs that use Semantic Technologies. An evaluation of 27 CMSs concludes this book and provides a basis for IT executives that plan to adopt or replace a CMS in the near future.
    Content
    On the Changing Market for Content Management Systems: Status and Outlook - Wolfgang Maass Empowering the Distributed Editorial Workforce - Steve McNally The Rise of Semantic-aware Applications - Stéphane Croisier Simplified Semantic Enhancement of JCR-based Content Applications -Bertrand Delacretaz and Michael Marth Dynamic Semantic Publishing - Jem Rayfield Semantics in the Domain of eGovernment - Luis Alvarez Sabucedo and Luis Anido Rifón The Interactive Knowledge Stack (IKS): A Vision for the Future of CMS - Wernher Behrendt Essential Requirements for Semantic CMS - Valentina Presutti Evaluation of Content Management Systems - Tobias Kowatsch and Wolfgang Maass CMS with No Particular Industry Focus (versch. Beiträge)
    LCSH
    Information storage and retrieval systems
    Information Systems
    Management information systems
    Subject
    Information storage and retrieval systems
    Information Systems
    Management information systems
  16. SKOS Simple Knowledge Organization System Reference : W3C Recommendation 18 August 2009 (2009) 0.05
    0.047989633 = product of:
      0.1439689 = sum of:
        0.07118686 = weight(_text_:applications in 4688) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07118686 = score(doc=4688,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.41273528 = fieldWeight in 4688, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4688)
        0.012701439 = weight(_text_:of in 4688) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012701439 = score(doc=4688,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.20732689 = fieldWeight in 4688, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4688)
        0.06008059 = weight(_text_:systems in 4688) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06008059 = score(doc=4688,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.4990213 = fieldWeight in 4688, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4688)
      0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
    
    Abstract
    This document defines the Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS), a common data model for sharing and linking knowledge organization systems via the Web. Many knowledge organization systems, such as thesauri, taxonomies, classification schemes and subject heading systems, share a similar structure, and are used in similar applications. SKOS captures much of this similarity and makes it explicit, to enable data and technology sharing across diverse applications. The SKOS data model provides a standard, low-cost migration path for porting existing knowledge organization systems to the Semantic Web. SKOS also provides a lightweight, intuitive language for developing and sharing new knowledge organization systems. It may be used on its own, or in combination with formal knowledge representation languages such as the Web Ontology language (OWL). This document is the normative specification of the Simple Knowledge Organization System. It is intended for readers who are involved in the design and implementation of information systems, and who already have a good understanding of Semantic Web technology, especially RDF and OWL. For an informative guide to using SKOS, see the [SKOS-PRIMER].
  17. Information and communication technologies : international conference; proceedings / ICT 2010, Kochi, Kerala, India, September 7 - 9, 2010 (2010) 0.04
    0.04402619 = product of:
      0.13207856 = sum of:
        0.0074091726 = weight(_text_:of in 4784) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0074091726 = score(doc=4784,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.120940685 = fieldWeight in 4784, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4784)
        0.057231534 = weight(_text_:systems in 4784) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.057231534 = score(doc=4784,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.47535738 = fieldWeight in 4784, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4784)
        0.06743785 = weight(_text_:software in 4784) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06743785 = score(doc=4784,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.43390724 = fieldWeight in 4784, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4784)
      0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
    
    Abstract
    This book constitutes the proceedings of the International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies held in Kochi, Kerala, India in September 2010.
    LCSH
    Computer software
    Information storage and retrieval systems
    Information systems
    Subject
    Computer software
    Information storage and retrieval systems
    Information systems
  18. Gómez-Pérez, A.; Corcho, O.: Ontology languages for the Semantic Web (2015) 0.04
    0.04371041 = product of:
      0.13113123 = sum of:
        0.08389453 = weight(_text_:applications in 3297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08389453 = score(doc=3297,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.4864132 = fieldWeight in 3297, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3297)
        0.011833867 = weight(_text_:of in 3297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011833867 = score(doc=3297,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.19316542 = fieldWeight in 3297, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3297)
        0.03540283 = weight(_text_:systems in 3297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03540283 = score(doc=3297,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.29405114 = fieldWeight in 3297, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3297)
      0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
    
    Abstract
    Ontologies have proven to be an essential element in many applications. They are used in agent systems, knowledge management systems, and e-commerce platforms. They can also generate natural language, integrate intelligent information, provide semantic-based access to the Internet, and extract information from texts in addition to being used in many other applications to explicitly declare the knowledge embedded in them. However, not only are ontologies useful for applications in which knowledge plays a key role, but they can also trigger a major change in current Web contents. This change is leading to the third generation of the Web-known as the Semantic Web-which has been defined as "the conceptual structuring of the Web in an explicit machine-readable way."1 This definition does not differ too much from the one used for defining an ontology: "An ontology is an explicit, machinereadable specification of a shared conceptualization."2 In fact, new ontology-based applications and knowledge architectures are developing for this new Web. A common claim for all of these approaches is the need for languages to represent the semantic information that this Web requires-solving the heterogeneous data exchange in this heterogeneous environment. Here, we don't decide which language is best of the Semantic Web. Rather, our goal is to help developers find the most suitable language for their representation needs. The authors analyze the most representative ontology languages created for the Web and compare them using a common framework.
    Source
    IEEE intelligent systems 2002, Jan./Feb., S.54-60
  19. Miles, A.: SKOS: requirements for standardization (2006) 0.04
    0.0425388 = product of:
      0.12761639 = sum of:
        0.07118686 = weight(_text_:applications in 5703) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07118686 = score(doc=5703,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.41273528 = fieldWeight in 5703, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5703)
        0.015556021 = weight(_text_:of in 5703) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015556021 = score(doc=5703,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.25392252 = fieldWeight in 5703, 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=5703)
        0.040873505 = weight(_text_:software in 5703) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040873505 = score(doc=5703,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.2629875 = fieldWeight in 5703, 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=5703)
      0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
    
    Abstract
    This paper poses three questions regarding the planned development of the Simple Knowledge Organisation System (SKOS) towards W3C Recommendation status. Firstly, what is the fundamental purpose and therefore scope of SKOS? Secondly, which key software components depend on SKOS, and how do they interact? Thirdly, what is the wider technological and social context in which SKOS is likely to be applied and how might this influence design goals? Some tentative conclusions are drawn and in particular it is suggested that the scope of SKOS be restricted to the formal representation of controlled structured vocabularies intended for use within retrieval applications. However, the main purpose of this paper is to articulate the assumptions that have motivated the design of SKOS, so that these may be reviewed prior to a rigorous standardization initiative.
    Footnote
    Presented at the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications in October 2006
  20. Panzer, M.; Zeng, M.L.: Modeling classification systems in SKOS : Some challenges and best-practice (2009) 0.04
    0.04161918 = product of:
      0.124857545 = sum of:
        0.05872617 = weight(_text_:applications in 3717) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05872617 = score(doc=3717,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.34048924 = fieldWeight in 3717, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3717)
        0.016567415 = weight(_text_:of in 3717) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016567415 = score(doc=3717,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.2704316 = fieldWeight in 3717, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3717)
        0.049563963 = weight(_text_:systems in 3717) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049563963 = score(doc=3717,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.41167158 = fieldWeight in 3717, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3717)
      0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
    
    Abstract
    Representing classification systems on the web for publication and exchange continues to be a challenge within the SKOS framework. This paper focuses on the differences between classification schemes and other families of KOS (knowledge organization systems) that make it difficult to express classifications without sacrificing a large amount of their semantic richness. Issues resulting from the specific set of relationships between classes and topics that defines the basic nature of any classification system are discussed. Where possible, different solutions within the frameworks of SKOS and OWL are proposed and examined.
    Source
    Semantic Interoperability for Linked Data, proc. DC2009: International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Seoul, Korea, October 12-17, 2009

Years

Languages

  • e 442
  • d 33
  • pt 4
  • f 1
  • sp 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 355
  • el 142
  • m 31
  • x 21
  • n 13
  • s 13
  • p 6
  • r 3
  • A 1
  • EL 1
  • More… Less…

Subjects

Classifications