Search (80 results, page 4 of 4)

0.002667959 = product of:
  0.013339795 = sum of:
    0.013339795 = product of:
      0.02667959 = sum of:
        0.02667959 = weight(_text_:management in 2962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02667959 = score(doc=2962,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 2962, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2962)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to discuss alternative definitions of and approaches to the semantic web. It aims to clarify the relationship between the semantic web, Web 2.0 and Library 2.0. Design/methodology/approach - The paper is based on a literature review and evaluation of systems with semantic web features. It identifies and describes semantic web projects of relevance to libraries and evaluates the usefulness of JeromeDL and other social semantic digital library systems. It discusses actual and potential applications for libraries and makes recommendations for actions needed by researchers and practitioners. Findings - The paper concludes that the library community has a lot to offer to, and benefit from, the semantic web, but there is limited interest in the library community. It recommends that there be greater collaboration between semantic web researchers and project developers, library management systems providers and the library community. Librarians should get involved in the development of semantic web standards, for example, metadata and taxonomies. Originality/value - The paper clarifies the distinction between semantic web and Web 2.0 in a digital library environment. It evaluates and predicts future developments for operational systems.

0.002667959 = product of:
  0.013339795 = sum of:
    0.013339795 = product of:
      0.02667959 = sum of:
        0.02667959 = weight(_text_:management in 3244) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02667959 = score(doc=3244,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 3244, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3244)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Towards the semantic Web: ontology-driven knowledge management. Eds.: J. Davies, u.a

0.002667959 = product of:
  0.013339795 = sum of:
    0.013339795 = product of:
      0.02667959 = sum of:
        0.02667959 = weight(_text_:management in 3377) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02667959 = score(doc=3377,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 3377, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3377)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

The structural and syntactic web put in place in the early 90s is still much the same as what we use today: resources (web pages, files, etc.) connected by untyped hyperlinks. By untyped, we mean that there is no easy way for a computer to figure out what a link between two pages means - for example, on the W3C website, there are hundreds of links to the various organisations that are registered members of the association, but there is nothing explicitly saying that the link is to an organisation that is a "member of" the W3C or what type of organisation is represented by the link. On John's work page, he links to many papers he has written, but it does not explicitly say that he is the author of those papers or that he wrote such-and-such when he was working at a particular university. In fact, the Web was envisaged to be much more, as one can see from the image in Fig. 1 which is taken from Tim Berners Lee's original outline for the Web in 1989, entitled "Information Management: A Proposal". In this, all the resources are connected by links describing the type of relationships, e.g. "wrote", "describe", "refers to", etc. This is a precursor to the Semantic Web which we will come back to later.

0.002667959 = product of:
  0.013339795 = sum of:
    0.013339795 = product of:
      0.02667959 = sum of:
        0.02667959 = weight(_text_:management in 4320) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02667959 = score(doc=4320,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 4320, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4320)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

An information-seeking system is described which combines traditional keyword querying of WWW resources with the ability to browse and query against RD annotations of those resources. RDF(S) and RDF are used to specify and populate an ontology and the resultant RDF annotations are then indexed along with the full text of the annotated resources. The resultant index allows both keyword querying against the full text of the document and the literal values occurring in the RDF annotations, along with the ability to browse and query the ontology. We motivate our approach as a key enabler for fully exploiting the Semantic Web in the area of knowledge management and argue that the ability to combine searching and browsing behaviours more fully supports a typical information-seeking task. The approach is characterised as "low threshold, high ceiling" in the sense that where RDF annotations exist they are exploited for an improved information-seeking experience but where they do not yet exist, a search capability is still available.

0.002667959 = product of:
  0.013339795 = sum of:
    0.013339795 = product of:
      0.02667959 = sum of:
        0.02667959 = weight(_text_:management in 4403) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02667959 = score(doc=4403,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 4403, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4403)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Towards the semantic Web: ontology-driven knowledge management. Eds.: J. Davies, u.a

0.002667959 = product of:
  0.013339795 = sum of:
    0.013339795 = product of:
      0.02667959 = sum of:
        0.02667959 = weight(_text_:management in 4749) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02667959 = score(doc=4749,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 4749, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4749)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Overlapping structures in XML are not symptoms of a misunderstanding of the intrinsic characteristics of a text document nor evidence of extreme scholarly requirements far beyond those needed by the most common XML-based applications. On the contrary, overlaps have started to appear in a large number of incredibly popular applications hidden under the guise of syntactical tricks to the basic hierarchy of the XML data format. Unfortunately, syntactical tricks have the drawback that the affected structures require complicated workarounds to support even the simplest query or usage. In this article, we present Extremely Annotational Resource Description Framework (RDF) Markup (EARMARK), an approach to overlapping markup that simplifies and streamlines the management of multiple hierarchies on the same content, and provides an approach to sophisticated queries and usages over such structures without the need of ad-hoc applications, simply by using Semantic Web tools and languages. We compare how relevant tasks (e.g., the identification of the contribution of an author in a word processor document) are of some substantial complexity when using the original data format and become more or less trivial when using EARMARK. We finally evaluate positively the memory and disk requirements of EARMARK documents in comparison to Open Office and Microsoft Word XML-based formats.

0.002667959 = product of:
  0.013339795 = sum of:
    0.013339795 = product of:
      0.02667959 = sum of:
        0.02667959 = weight(_text_:management in 112) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02667959 = score(doc=112,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 112, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=112)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Over the past 3 years, the semantic web activity has gained momentum with the widespread publishing of structured data as RDF. The Linked Data paradigm has therefore evolved from a practical research idea into a very promising candidate for addressing one of the biggest challenges in the area of the Semantic Web vision: the exploitation of the Web as a platform for data and information integration. To translate this initial success into a world-scale reality, a number of research challenges need to be addressed: the performance gap between relational and RDF data management has to be closed, coherence and quality of data published on theWeb have to be improved, provenance and trust on the Linked Data Web must be established and generally the entrance barrier for data publishers and users has to be lowered. In this vision statement we discuss these challenges and argue, that research approaches tackling these challenges should be integrated into a mutual refinement cycle. We also present two crucial use-cases for the widespread adoption of linked data.

0.002667959 = product of:
  0.013339795 = sum of:
    0.013339795 = product of:
      0.02667959 = sum of:
        0.02667959 = weight(_text_:management in 414) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02667959 = score(doc=414,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 414, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=414)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

The resource description framework (RDF for short) provides a flexible method for modeling information on the Web [34,40]. All data items in RDF are uniformly represented as triples of the form (subject, predicate, object), sometimes also referred to as (subject, property, value) triples. As a running example for this chapter, a small fragment of an RDF dataset concerning music and music fans is given in Fig. 2.1. Spurred by efforts like the Linking Open Data project, increasingly large volumes of data are being published in RDF. Notable contributors in this respect include areas as diverse as the government, the life sciences, Web 2.0 communities, and so on. To give an idea of the volumes of RDF data concerned, as of September 2012, there are 31,634,213,770 triples in total published by data sources participating in the Linking Open Data project. Many individual data sources (like, e.g., PubMed, DBpedia, MusicBrainz) contain hundreds of millions of triples (797, 672, and 179 millions, respectively). These large volumes of RDF data motivate the need for scalable native RDF data management solutions capabable of efficiently storing, indexing, and querying RDF data. In this chapter, we present a general and up-to-date survey of the current state of the art in RDF storage and indexing.

0.002667959 = product of:
  0.013339795 = sum of:
    0.013339795 = product of:
      0.02667959 = sum of:
        0.02667959 = weight(_text_:management in 429) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02667959 = score(doc=429,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 429, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=429)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

We are witnessing a smooth evolution of the Web from a worldwide information space of linked documents to a global knowledge base, where resources are identified by means of uniform resource identifiers (URIs, essentially string identifiers) and are semantically described and correlated through resource description framework (RDF, a metadata data model) statements. With the size and availability of data constantly increasing (currently around 7 billion RDF triples and 150 million RDF links), a fundamental problem lies in the difficulty users face to find and retrieve the information they are interested in. In general, to access semantic data, users need to know the organization of data and the syntax of a specific query language (e.g., SPARQL or variants thereof). Clearly, this represents an obstacle to information access for nonexpert users. For this reason, keyword search-based systems are increasingly capturing the attention of researchers. Recently, many approaches to keyword-based search over structured and semistructured data have been proposed]. These approaches usually implement IR strategies on top of traditional database management systems with the goal of freeing the users from having to know data organization and query languages.

0.002667959 = product of:
  0.013339795 = sum of:
    0.013339795 = product of:
      0.02667959 = sum of:
        0.02667959 = weight(_text_:management in 3297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02667959 = score(doc=3297,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 3297, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3297)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

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.

0.0023105205 = product of:
  0.011552602 = sum of:
    0.011552602 = product of:
      0.023105204 = sum of:
        0.023105204 = weight(_text_:management in 117) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023105204 = score(doc=117,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            0.16125548 = fieldWeight in 117, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=117)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Semantic Web ist Vision, Konzept und Programm für die nächste Generation des Internets. Semantik ist dabei ein wesentliches Element in der Transformation von Information in Wissen, sei es um eine effizientere Maschine-Maschine-Kommunikation zu ermöglichen oder um Geschäftsprozess-Management, Wissensmanagement und innerbetriebliche Kooperation durch Modellierung zu verbessern. Der Band richtet sich gleichermaßen an ein praxisorientiertes und wissenschaftliches Publikum, das nicht nur aus der technischen Perspektive einen Zugang zum Thema sucht. Der praktische Nutzen wird in der Fülle von Anwendungsbeispielen offensichtlich, in denen semantische Technologien zum Einsatz kommen. Praxisorientierung ist auch das Leitthema der Semantic Web School, die sich zum Ziel gesetzt hat, den Wissenstransfer zu semantischen Technologien anzukurbeln und den interdisziplinären Diskurs über deren Nutzen und Folgen zu intensivieren. Der vorliegende Band vereinigt 33 Beiträge von 57 Autoren aus 35 Institutionen zu einem virulenten und multidisziplinären Thema. Der Band richtet sich gleichermaßen an interessierte Laien und fachfremde Experten, die nicht nur aus der technischen Perspektive einen Zugang zum Thema suchen. Denn obwohl das Thema Semantic Web zu überwiegendem Maße ein technisches ist, sollen hier bewusst jene Aspekte angesprochen werden. die außerhalb einer ingenieurswissenschaftlichen Perspektive von Relevanz sind und vor allem die praktischen Aspekte semantischer Technologien adressieren. Dieser Anforderung wird durch die vielen Praxisbezüge und Anwendungsbeispiele innerhalb der einzelnen Beiträge Rechnung getragen. Hierbei ist es den Herausgebern jedoch wichtig darauf hinzuweisen, das Semantic Web und semantische Technologien nicht als verheißungsvolles Allheilmittel der durch Informationstechnologien heraufbeschworenen Probleme und Herausforderungen zu betrachten. Ganz im Gegenteil plädieren die Herausgeber für eine verstärkte Auseinandersetzung mit dem Thema unter Einbeziehung einer großen Vielfalt an Experten aus den unterschiedlichsten Fachbereichen, die einen reflektierten und kritischen Beitrag zu den positiven und negativen Effekten semantischer Technologien beitragen sollen.

Content

Der dritte Teil des Bandes thematisiert die organisationalen Dimensionen des Semantic Web und demonstriert unter dem Stichwort "Wissensmanagement" eine Reihe von Konzepten und Anwendungen im betrieblichen und kollaborativen Umgang mit Information. Der Beitrag von Andreas Blumauer und Thomas Fundneider bietet einen Überblick über den Einsatz semantischer Technologien am Beispiel eines integrierten Wissensmanagement-Systems. Michael John und Jörg Drescher zeichnen den historischen Entwicklungsprozess des IT-Einsatzes für das Management von Informations- und Wissensprozessen im betrieblichen Kontext. Vor dem Hintergrund der betrieblichen Veränderungen durch Globalisierung und angeheizten Wettbewerb zeigt Heiko Beier, welche Rollen, Prozesse und Instrumente in wissensbasierten Organisationen die effiziente Nutzung von Wissen unterstützen. Mit dem Konzept des kollaborativen Wissensmanagement präsentiert das Autorenteam Schmitz et al. einen innovativen WissensmanagementAnsatz auf Peer-to-Peer-Basis mit dem Ziel der kollaborativen Einbindung und Pflege von dezentralisierten Wissensbasen. York Sure und Christoph Tempich demonstrieren anhand der Modellierungsmethode DILIGENT, welchen Beitrag Ontologien bei der Wissensvernetzung in Organisationen leisten können. Hannes Werthner und Michael Borovicka adressieren die Bedeutung semantischer Technologien für eCommerce und demonstrieren am Beispiel HARMONISE deren Einsatz im Bereich des eTourismus. Erweitert wird diese Perspektive durch den Beitrag von Fill et al., in dem das Zusammenspiel zwischen Web-Services und Geschäftsprozessen aus der Perspektive der Wirtschaftsinformatik analysiert wird. Abschließend präsentiert das Autorenteam Angele et al. eine Reihe von realisierten Anwendungen auf Basis semantischer Technologien und identifiziert kritische Faktoren für deren Einsatz.
Im vierten Teil des Bandes stehen die technischen und infrastrukturellen Aspekte im Mittelpunkt des Interesses, die für den Aufbau und Betrieb semantischer Systeme von Relevanz sind. Wolfgang Kienreich und Markus Strohmaier identifizieren die Wissensmodellierung als Basis für den Einsatz semantischer Technologien für das Knowledge Engineering und stellen zwei grundlegende Modellierungsparadigmen vor. Andreas Koller argumentiert, dass die strukturierte Ablage von Content in Content Management Systemen den Lift-Off des Semantic Web stützen wird und zeigt eine Reihe von einfachen Maßnahmen auf, wie CMS Semantic Web tauglich gemacht werden können. Alois Reitbauer gibt einen leicht verständlichen Überblick über technische Fragestellungen der IT-Integration und demonstriert anhand von Beispielen die Vorteile semantischer Technologien gegenüber konventionellen Methoden. Gerald Reif veranschaulicht die Einsatzgebiete und Leistungsfähigkeit der semantischen Annotation und stellt Tools vor, die den Nutzer bei der Dokumentenverschlagwortung unterstützen. Robert Baumgartner stellt die Funktionsweise von Wrappertechnologien zur Extraktion von Daten aus unstrukturierten Dokumenten vor und demonstriert den Nutzen am Beispiel eines B2B-Szenarios. Michael Granitzer bietet einen Überblick über statistische Verfahren der Textanalyse und zeigt, welchen Beitrag diese zur Wartung von Ontologien leisten können.

0.002303783 = product of:
  0.011518915 = sum of:
    0.011518915 = product of:
      0.02303783 = sum of:
        0.02303783 = weight(_text_:22 in 2656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02303783 = score(doc=2656,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14886121 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2656, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2656)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

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

0.0021343674 = product of:
  0.010671836 = sum of:
    0.010671836 = product of:
      0.021343673 = sum of:
        0.021343673 = weight(_text_:management in 4404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021343673 = score(doc=4404,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            0.14896142 = fieldWeight in 4404, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4404)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Towards the semantic Web: ontology-driven knowledge management. Eds.: J. Davies, u.a

0.0021343674 = product of:
  0.010671836 = sum of:
    0.010671836 = product of:
      0.021343673 = sum of:
        0.021343673 = weight(_text_:management in 411) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021343673 = score(doc=411,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            0.14896142 = fieldWeight in 411, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=411)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

The Web has become the world's largest database, with search being the main tool that allows organizations and individuals to exploit its huge amount of information. Search on the Web has been traditionally based on textual and structural similarities, ignoring to a large degree the semantic dimension, i.e., understanding the meaning of the query and of the document content. Combining search and semantics gives birth to the idea of semantic search. Traditional search engines have already advertised some semantic dimensions. Some of them, for instance, can enhance their generated result sets with documents that are semantically related to the query terms even though they may not include these terms. Nevertheless, the exploitation of the semantic search has not yet reached its full potential. In this book, Roberto De Virgilio, Francesco Guerra and Yannis Velegrakis present an extensive overview of the work done in Semantic Search and other related areas. They explore different technologies and solutions in depth, making their collection a valuable and stimulating reading for both academic and industrial researchers. The book is divided into three parts. The first introduces the readers to the basic notions of the Web of Data. It describes the different kinds of data that exist, their topology, and their storing and indexing techniques. The second part is dedicated to Web Search. It presents different types of search, like the exploratory or the path-oriented, alongside methods for their efficient and effective implementation. Other related topics included in this part are the use of uncertainty in query answering, the exploitation of ontologies, and the use of semantics in mashup design and operation. The focus of the third part is on linked data, and more specifically, on applying ideas originating in recommender systems on linked data management, and on techniques for the efficiently querying answering on linked data.

0.0021343674 = product of:
  0.010671836 = sum of:
    0.010671836 = product of:
      0.021343673 = sum of:
        0.021343673 = weight(_text_:management in 2028) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021343673 = score(doc=2028,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            0.14896142 = fieldWeight in 2028, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2028)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

This book constitutes the refereed proceedings of the 12th Extended Semantic Web Conference, ESWC 2014, held in Anissaras, Portoroz, Slovenia, in May/June 2015. The 43 revised full papers presented together with three invited talks were carefully reviewed and selected from 164 submissions. This program was completed by a demonstration and poster session, in which researchers had the chance to present their latest results and advances in the form of live demos. In addition, the PhD Symposium program included 12 contributions, selected out of 16 submissions. The core tracks of the research conference were complemented with new tracks focusing on linking machine and human computation at web scale (cognition and Semantic Web, Human Computation and Crowdsourcing) beside the following subjects Vocabularies, Schemas, Ontologies, Reasoning, Linked Data, Semantic Web and Web Science, Semantic Data Management, Big data, Scalability, Natural Language Processing and Information Retrieval, Machine Learning, Mobile Web, Internet of Things and Semantic Streams, Services, Web APIs and the Web of Things, Cognition and Semantic Web, Human Computation and Crowdsourcing and In-Use Industrial Track as well

0.0020158102 = product of:
  0.01007905 = sum of:
    0.01007905 = product of:
      0.0201581 = sum of:
        0.0201581 = weight(_text_:22 in 2665) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0201581 = score(doc=2665,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14886121 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 2665, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2665)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

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

0.0018675713 = product of:
  0.009337856 = sum of:
    0.009337856 = product of:
      0.018675713 = sum of:
        0.018675713 = weight(_text_:management in 1210) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018675713 = score(doc=1210,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            0.13034125 = fieldWeight in 1210, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1210)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

The Semantic Web activity is a W3C project whose goal is to enable a 'cooperative' Web where machines and humans can exchange electronic content that has clear-cut, unambiguous meaning. This vision is based on the automated sharing of metadata terms across Web applications. The declaration of schemas in metadata registries advance this vision by providing a common approach for the discovery, understanding, and exchange of semantics. However, many of the issues regarding registries are not clear, and ideas vary regarding their scope and purpose. Additionally, registry issues are often difficult to describe and comprehend without a working example. This article will explore the role of metadata registries and will describe three prototypes, written by the Dublin Core Metadata Initiative. The article will outline how the prototypes are being used to demonstrate and evaluate application scope, functional requirements, and technology solutions for metadata registries. Metadata schema registries are, in effect, databases of schemas that can trace an historical line back to shared data dictionaries and the registration process encouraged by the ISO/IEC 11179 community. New impetus for the development of registries has come with the development activities surrounding creation of the Semantic Web. The motivation for establishing registries arises from domain and standardization communities, and from the knowledge management community. Examples of current registry activity include:

0.0016007755 = product of:
  0.0080038775 = sum of:
    0.0080038775 = product of:
      0.016007755 = sum of:
        0.016007755 = weight(_text_:management in 1516) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016007755 = score(doc=1516,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            0.11172107 = fieldWeight in 1516, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1516)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Content

OPEN DATA - OPENS PROBLEMS? Challenges and Opportunities in Social Science Research Data Management / Stefan Kramer - Aktivitäten von GESIS im Kontext von Open Data und Zugang zu sozialwissenschaftlichen Forschungsergebnissen / Anja Wilde, Agnieszka Wenninger, Oliver Hopt, Philipp Schaer und Benjamin Zapilko NUTZER UND NUTZUNG IM ZEITALTER VON SEMANTIC WEB & LINKED DATA Die Erfassung, Nutzung und Weiterverwendung von statistischen Informationen - Erfahrungsbericht / Doris Stärk - Einsatz semantischer Technologien zur Entwicklung eines Lerntrajektoriengenerators in frei zugänglichen, nicht personalisierenden Lernplattformen / Richard Huber, Adrian Paschke, Georges Awad und Kirsten Hantelmann OPEN DATA: KONZEPTE - NUTZUNG - ZUKUNFT Zur Konzeption und Implementierung einer Infrastruktur für freie bibliographische Daten / Adrian Pohl und Felix Ostrowski - Lösung zum multilingualen Wissensmanagement semantischer Informationen / Lars Ludwig - Linked Open Projects: Nachnutzung von Projektergebnissen als Linked Data / Kai Eckert AUSBLICK INFORMATIONSKOMPETENZ GMMIK ['gi-mik] - Ein Modell der Informationskompetenz / Aleksander Knauerhase WORKSHOP Wissensdiagnostik als Instrument für Lernempfehlungen am Beispiel der Facharztprüfung / Werner Povoden, Sabine Povoden und Roland Streule

0.0014398645 = product of:
  0.0071993223 = sum of:
    0.0071993223 = product of:
      0.014398645 = sum of:
        0.014398645 = weight(_text_:22 in 1847) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014398645 = score(doc=1847,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14886121 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            0.09672529 = fieldWeight in 1847, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1847)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 9.2007 10:36:23

0.0013339795 = product of:
  0.0066698976 = sum of:
    0.0066698976 = product of:
      0.013339795 = sum of:
        0.013339795 = weight(_text_:management in 468) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013339795 = score(doc=468,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            0.09310089 = fieldWeight in 468, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=468)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 57(2006) no.8, S.1132-1133 (H. Che): "The World Wide Web has been the main source of an important shift in the way people communicate with each other, get information, and conduct business. However, most of the current Web content is only suitable for human consumption. The main obstacle to providing better quality of service is that the meaning of Web content is not machine-accessible. The "Semantic Web" is envisioned by Tim Berners-Lee as a logical extension to the current Web that enables explicit representations of term meaning. It aims to bring the Web to its full potential via the exploration of these machine-processable metadata. To fulfill this, it pros ides some meta languages like RDF, OWL, DAML+OIL, and SHOE for expressing knowledge that has clear, unambiguous meanings. The first steps in searing the Semantic Web into the current Web are successfully underway. In the forthcoming years, these efforts still remain highly focused in the research and development community. In the next phase, the Semantic Web will respond more intelligently to user queries. The first chapter gets started with an excellent introduction to the Semantic Web vision. At first, today's Web is introduced, and problems with some current applications like search engines are also covered. Subsequently, knowledge management. business-to-consumer electronic commerce, business-to-business electronic commerce, and personal agents are used as examples to show the potential requirements for the Semantic Web. Next comes the brief description of the underpinning technologies, including metadata, ontology, logic, and agent. The differences between the Semantic Web and Artificial Intelligence are also discussed in a later subsection. In section 1.4, the famous "laser-cake" diagram is given to show a layered view of the Semantic Web. From chapter 2, the book starts addressing some of the most important technologies for constructing the Semantic Web. In chapter 2, the authors discuss XML and its related technologies such as namespaces, XPath, and XSLT. XML is a simple, very flexible text format which is often used for the exchange of a wide variety of data on the Web and elsewhere. The W3C has defined various languages on top of XML, such as RDF. Although this chapter is very well planned and written, many details are not included because of the extensiveness of the XML technologies. Many other books on XML provide more comprehensive coverage.