Search (10 results, page 1 of 1)

0.011900439 = product of:
  0.047601756 = sum of:
    0.047601756 = product of:
      0.09520351 = sum of:
        0.09520351 = weight(_text_:lernen in 4376) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09520351 = score(doc=4376,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19222628 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6033173 = idf(docFreq=442, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0343058 = queryNorm
            0.49526796 = fieldWeight in 4376, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.6033173 = idf(docFreq=442, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4376)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Ein grundsätzliches Problem der Literaturverwaltung besteht darin, daß viele Nutzer der Retrievalsysteme gar nicht genau sagen können, was sie suchen. Erst im Prozeß des erkundenden Suchens lernen sie genauer zu präzisieren, was sie finden wollen. Dieser Lernprozeß wird durch einzelne Suchwörter (Suchwortketten) nur unzureichend unterstützt, weshalb der benutzer häufig unzufrieden mit dem Ergebnis eines solchen Suchprozesses ist. Notwendig sind reichhaltigere Begriffsnetze, die thematisch geordnete Zusammenhänge darstellen und sich flexibel verfeinern, vergröbern oder verändern lassen, um in geeignetem Umfang die wünschenswerte Orientierung liefern zu können. Das Computerprogramm TOSCANA könnte hier weiterhelfen

0.0066114943 = product of:
  0.026445977 = sum of:
    0.026445977 = product of:
      0.10578391 = sum of:
        0.10578391 = weight(_text_:learning in 594) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10578391 = score(doc=594,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15317118 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.464877 = idf(docFreq=1382, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0343058 = queryNorm
            0.6906254 = fieldWeight in 594, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.464877 = idf(docFreq=1382, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=594)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Data analysis, learning symbolic and numeric knowledge. Hrsg.: E. Diday

0.005809953 = product of:
  0.023239812 = sum of:
    0.023239812 = product of:
      0.046479624 = sum of:
        0.046479624 = weight(_text_:22 in 3142) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046479624 = score(doc=3142,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.120133065 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0343058 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3142, 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=3142)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

26. 2.2008 15:58:22

0.0046479623 = product of:
  0.01859185 = sum of:
    0.01859185 = product of:
      0.0371837 = sum of:
        0.0371837 = weight(_text_:22 in 1901) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0371837 = score(doc=1901,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.120133065 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0343058 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1901, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1901)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Knowledge organization. 22(1995) no.2, S.78-81

0.004066967 = product of:
  0.016267868 = sum of:
    0.016267868 = product of:
      0.032535736 = sum of:
        0.032535736 = weight(_text_:22 in 5095) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032535736 = score(doc=5095,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.120133065 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0343058 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5095, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5095)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

22. 1.2016 17:47:06

0.004066967 = product of:
  0.016267868 = sum of:
    0.016267868 = product of:
      0.032535736 = sum of:
        0.032535736 = weight(_text_:22 in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032535736 = score(doc=2654,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.120133065 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0343058 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2654, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2654)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

22. 1.2016 17:30:31

0.0028334977 = product of:
  0.011333991 = sum of:
    0.011333991 = product of:
      0.045335963 = sum of:
        0.045335963 = weight(_text_:learning in 5084) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045335963 = score(doc=5084,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15317118 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.464877 = idf(docFreq=1382, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0343058 = queryNorm
            0.29598233 = fieldWeight in 5084, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.464877 = idf(docFreq=1382, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5084)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Logic-based networks are semantic networks that support reasoning capabilities. In this paper, knowledge processing within logicbased networks is viewed as three stages. The first stage involves the formation of concepts and relations: the basic primitives with which we wish to formulate knowledge. The second stage involves the formation of wellformed formulas that express knowledge about the primitive concepts and relations once isolated. The final stage involves efficiently processing the wffs to the desired end. Our research involves each of these steps as they relate to Sowa's conceptual structures and Wille's concept lattices. Formal Concept Analysis gives us a capability to perform concept formation via symbolic machine learning. Concept(ual) Graphs provide a means to describe relational properties between primitive concept and relation types. Finally, techniques from other areas of computer science are required to compute logic-based networks efficiently. This paper illustrates the three stages of knowledge processing in practical terms using examples from our research

0.0023375163 = product of:
  0.009350065 = sum of:
    0.009350065 = product of:
      0.03740026 = sum of:
        0.03740026 = weight(_text_:learning in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03740026 = score(doc=5089,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15317118 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.464877 = idf(docFreq=1382, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0343058 = queryNorm
            0.24417296 = fieldWeight in 5089, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.464877 = idf(docFreq=1382, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5089)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

Concepts & Language: Knowledge organization by procedures of natural language processing. A case study using the method GABEK (J. Zelger, J. Gadner) - Computer aided narrative analysis using conceptual graphs (H. Schärfe, P. 0hrstrom) - Pragmatic representation of argumentative text: a challenge for the conceptual graph approach (H. Irandoust, B. Moulin) - Conceptual graphs as a knowledge representation core in a complex language learning environment (G. Angelova, A. Nenkova, S. Boycheva, T. Nikolov) - Conceptual Modeling and Ontologies: Relationships and actions in conceptual categories (Ch. Landauer, K.L. Bellman) - Concept approximations for formal concept analysis (J. Saquer, J.S. Deogun) - Faceted information representation (U. Priß) - Simple concept graphs with universal quantifiers (J. Tappe) - A framework for comparing methods for using or reusing multiple ontologies in an application (J. van ZyI, D. Corbett) - Designing task/method knowledge-based systems with conceptual graphs (M. Leclère, F.Trichet, Ch. Choquet) - A logical ontology (J. Farkas, J. Sarbo) - Algorithms and Tools: Fast concept analysis (Ch. Lindig) - A framework for conceptual graph unification (D. Corbett) - Visual CP representation of knowledge (H.D. Pfeiffer, R.T. Hartley) - Maximal isojoin for representing software textual specifications and detecting semantic anomalies (Th. Charnois) - Troika: using grids, lattices and graphs in knowledge acquisition (H.S. Delugach, B.E. Lampkin) - Open world theorem prover for conceptual graphs (J.E. Heaton, P. Kocura) - NetCare: a practical conceptual graphs software tool (S. Polovina, D. Strang) - CGWorld - a web based workbench for conceptual graphs management and applications (P. Dobrev, K. Toutanova) - Position papers: The edition project: Peirce's existential graphs (R. Mülller) - Mining association rules using formal concept analysis (N. Pasquier) - Contextual logic summary (R Wille) - Information channels and conceptual scaling (K.E. Wolff) - Spatial concepts - a rule exploration (S. Rudolph) - The TEXT-TO-ONTO learning environment (A. Mädche, St. Staab) - Controlling the semantics of metadata on audio-visual documents using ontologies (Th. Dechilly, B. Bachimont) - Building the ontological foundations of a terminology from natural language to conceptual graphs with Ribosome, a knowledge extraction system (Ch. Jacquelinet, A. Burgun) - CharGer: some lessons learned and new directions (H.S. Delugach) - Knowledge management using conceptual graphs (W.K. Pun)

0.0020035855 = product of:
  0.008014342 = sum of:
    0.008014342 = product of:
      0.032057367 = sum of:
        0.032057367 = weight(_text_:learning in 691) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032057367 = score(doc=691,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15317118 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.464877 = idf(docFreq=1382, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0343058 = queryNorm
            0.20929112 = fieldWeight in 691, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.464877 = idf(docFreq=1382, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=691)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Computer scientists create models of a perceived reality. Through AI techniques, these models aim at providing the basic support for emulating cognitive behavior such as reasoning and learning, which is one of the main goals of the Al research effort. Such computer models are formed through the interaction of various acquisition and inference mechanisms: perception, concept learning, conceptual clustering, hypothesis testing, probabilistic inference, etc., and are represented using different paradigms tightly linked to the processes that use them. Among these paradigms let us cite: biological models (neural nets, genetic programming), logic-based models (first-order logic, modal logic, rule-based systems), virtual reality models (object systems, agent systems), probabilistic models (Bayesian nets, fuzzy logic), linguistic models (conceptual dependency graphs, language-based rep resentations), etc. One of the strengths of the Conceptual Graph (CG) theory is its versatility in terms of the representation paradigms under which it falls. It can be viewed and therefore used, under different representation paradigms, which makes it a popular choice for a wealth of applications. Its full coupling with different cognitive processes lead to the opening of the field toward related research communities such as the Description Logic, Formal Concept Analysis, and Computational Linguistic communities. We now see more and more research results from one community enrich the other, laying the foundations of common philosophical grounds from which a successful synergy can emerge. ICCS 2000 embodies this spirit of research collaboration. It presents a set of papers that we believe, by their exposure, will benefit the whole community. For instance, the technical program proposes tracks on Conceptual Ontologies, Language, Formal Concept Analysis, Computational Aspects of Conceptual Structures, and Formal Semantics, with some papers on pragmatism and human related aspects of computing. Never before was the program of ICCS formed by so heterogeneously rooted theories of knowledge representation and use. We hope that this swirl of ideas will benefit you as much as it already has benefited us while putting together this program

0.0018889984 = product of:
  0.0075559937 = sum of:
    0.0075559937 = product of:
      0.030223975 = sum of:
        0.030223975 = weight(_text_:learning in 3291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030223975 = score(doc=3291,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15317118 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.464877 = idf(docFreq=1382, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0343058 = queryNorm
            0.19732155 = fieldWeight in 3291, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.464877 = idf(docFreq=1382, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3291)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The web is a network of linked sites whereby each site either forms a physical portal or a standalone page. In the former case, the portal presents an access point to its embedded web pages that coherently present a specific topic. In the latter case, there are millions of standalone web pages, that are scattered throughout the web, having the same topic and could be conceptually linked together to form virtual portals. Search engines have been developed to help users in reaching the adequate pages in an efficient and effective manner. All the known current search engine techniques rely on the web page as the basic atomic search unit. They ignore the conceptual links, that reveal the implicit web related meanings, among the retrieved pages. However, building a semantic model for the whole portal may contain more semantic information than a model of scattered individual pages. In addition, user queries can be poor and contain imprecise terms that do not reflect the real user intention. Consequently, retrieving the standalone individual pages that are directly related to the query may not satisfy the user's need. In this paper, we propose PREFCA, a Portal Retrieval Engine based on Formal Concept Analysis that relies on the portal as the main search unit. PREFCA consists of three phases: First, the information extraction phase that is concerned with extracting portal's semantic data. Second, the formal concept analysis phase that utilizes formal concept analysis to discover the conceptual links among portal and attributes. Finally, the information retrieval phase where we propose a portal ranking method to retrieve ranked pairs of portals and embedded pages. Additionally, we apply the network analysis rules to output some portal characteristics. We evaluated PREFCA using two data sets, namely the Forum for Information Retrieval Evaluation 2010 and ClueWeb09 (category B) test data, for physical and virtual portals respectively. PREFCA proves higher F-measure accuracy, better Mean Average Precision ranking and comparable network analysis and efficiency results than other search engine approaches, namely Term Frequency Inverse Document Frequency (TF-IDF), Latent Semantic Analysis (LSA), and BM25 techniques. As well, it gains high Mean Average Precision in comparison with learning to rank techniques. Moreover, PREFCA also gains better reach time than Carrot as a well-known topic-based search engine.