Search (71 results, page 2 of 4)

0.011092915 = product of:
  0.06655749 = sum of:
    0.06655749 = weight(_text_:problem in 134) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06655749 = score(doc=134,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.20485485 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04826377 = queryNorm
        0.32490072 = fieldWeight in 134, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=134)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Metadata related to cultural items such as literature, music and movies is a valuable resource that is currently exploited in many applications and services based on semantic web technologies. A vast amount of such information has been created by memory institutions in the last decades using different standard or ad hoc schemas, and a main challenge is to make this legacy data accessible as reusable semantic data. On one hand, this is a syntactic problem that can be solved by transforming to formats that are compatible with the tools and services used for semantic aware services. On the other hand, this is a semantic problem. Simply transforming from one format to another does not automatically enable semantic interoperability and legacy data often needs to be reinterpreted as well as transformed. The conceptual model in the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records, initially developed as a conceptual framework for library standards and systems, is a major step towards a shared semantic model of the products of artistic and intellectual endeavor of mankind. The model is generally accepted as sufficiently generic to serve as a conceptual framework for a broad range of cultural heritage metadata. Unfortunately, the existing large body of legacy data makes a transition to this model difficult. For instance, most bibliographic data is still only available in various MARC-based formats which is hard to render into reusable and meaningful semantic data. Making legacy bibliographic data accessible as semantic data is a complex problem that includes interpreting and transforming the information. In this article, we present our work on transforming and enhancing legacy bibliographic information into a representation where the structure and semantics of the FRBR model is explicit.

0.010898459 = product of:
  0.06539075 = sum of:
    0.06539075 = weight(_text_:22 in 1287) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06539075 = score(doc=1287,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1690115 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04826377 = queryNorm
        0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 1287, 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=1287)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Content

Vortrag anlässlich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".

0.010898459 = product of:
  0.06539075 = sum of:
    0.06539075 = weight(_text_:22 in 3278) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06539075 = score(doc=3278,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1690115 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04826377 = queryNorm
        0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3278, 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=3278)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Source

Metadata and semantics research: 10th International Conference, MTSR 2016, Göttingen, Germany, November 22-25, 2016, Proceedings. Eds.: E. Garoufallou

0.009706301 = product of:
  0.058237802 = sum of:
    0.058237802 = weight(_text_:problem in 553) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.058237802 = score(doc=553,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.20485485 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04826377 = queryNorm
        0.28428814 = fieldWeight in 553, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=553)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Currently, a number of efforts are being carried out to integrate collections from different institutions and containing heterogeneous material. Examples of such projects are The European Library [1] and the Memory of the Netherlands [2]. A crucial point for the success of these is the availability to provide a unified access on top of the different collections, e.g. using one single vocabulary for querying or browsing the objects they contain. This is made difficult by the fact that the objects from different collections are often described using different vocabularies - thesauri, classification schemes - and are therefore not interoperable at the semantic level. To solve this problem, one can turn to semantic links - mappings - between the elements of the different vocabularies. If one knows that a concept C from a vocabulary V is semantically equivalent to a concept to a concept D from vocabulary W, then an appropriate search engine can return all the objects that were indexed against D for a query for objects described using C. We thus have an access to other collections, using a single one vocabulary. This is however an ideal situation, and hard alignment work is required to reach it. Several projects in the past have tried to implement such a solution, like MACS [3] and Renardus [4]. They have demonstrated very interesting results, but also highlighted the difficulty of aligning manually all the different vocabularies involved in practical cases, which sometimes contain hundreds of thousands of concepts. To alleviate this problem, a number of tools have been proposed in order to provide with candidate mappings between two input vocabularies, making alignment a (semi-) automatic task. Recently, the Semantic Web community has produced a lot of these alignment tools'. Several techniques are found, depending on the material they exploit: labels of concepts, structure of vocabularies, collection objects and external knowledge sources. Throughout our presentation, we will present a concrete heterogeneity case where alignment techniques have been applied to build a (pilot) browser, developed in the context of the STITCH project [5]. This browser enables a unified access to two collections of illuminated manuscripts, using the description vocabulary used in the first collection, Mandragore [6], or the one used by the second, Iconclass [7]. In our talk, we will also make the point for using unified representations the vocabulary semantic and lexical information. Additionally to ease the use of the alignment tools that have these vocabularies as input, turning to a standard representation format helps designing applications that are more generic, like the browser we demonstrate. We give pointers to SKOS [8], an open and web-enabled format currently developed by the Semantic Web community.
References [1] http:// www.theeuropeanlibrary.org [2] http://www.geheugenvannederland.nl [3] http://macs.cenl.org [4] Day, M., Koch, T., Neuroth, H.: Searching and browsing multiple subject gateways in the Renardus service. In Proceedings of the RC33 Sixth International Conference on Social Science Methodology, Amsterdam , 2005. [5] http://stitch.cs.vu.nl [6] http://mandragore.bnf.fr [7] http://www.iconclass.nl [8] www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/ 1 The Semantic Web vision supposes sharing data using different conceptualizations (ontologies), and therefore implies to tackle the semantic interoperability problem

0.009606745 = product of:
  0.05764047 = sum of:
    0.05764047 = weight(_text_:problem in 2152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05764047 = score(doc=2152,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20485485 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04826377 = queryNorm
        0.28137225 = fieldWeight in 2152, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2152)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

The role of DDC in the ongoing HILT (High-level Thesaurus) project is discussed. A phased initiative, funded by JISC in the UK, HILT addresses an issue of likely interest to anyone serving users wishing to cross-search or cross-browse groups of networked information services, whether at regional, national or international level - the problem of subject-based retrieval from multiple sources using different subject schemes for resource description. Although all three phases of HILT to date are covered, the primary concern is with the subject interoperability solution piloted in phase II, and with the use of DDC as a spine in that approach.

0.009606745 = product of:
  0.05764047 = sum of:
    0.05764047 = weight(_text_:problem in 241) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05764047 = score(doc=241,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20485485 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04826377 = queryNorm
        0.28137225 = fieldWeight in 241, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=241)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

The semantic heterogeneity presented by Web information in the Agricultural domain presents tremendous information retrieval challenges. This article presents work taking place at the Food and Agriculture Organizations (FAO) which addresses this challenge. Based on the analysis of resources in the domain of agriculture, this paper proposes (a) an application profile (AP) for dealing with the problem of heterogeneity originating from differences in terminologies, domain coverage, and domain modelling, and (b) a root application ontology (AAO) based on the application profile which can serve as a basis for extending knowledge of the domain. The paper explains how even a small investment in the enhancement of relations between vocabularies, both metadata and domain-specific, yields a relatively large return on investment.

0.009606745 = product of:
  0.05764047 = sum of:
    0.05764047 = weight(_text_:problem in 3035) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05764047 = score(doc=3035,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20485485 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04826377 = queryNorm
        0.28137225 = fieldWeight in 3035, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3035)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Most libraries and other cultural heritage institutions use controlled knowledge organisation systems, such as thesauri, to describe their collections. Unfortunately, as most of these institutions use different such systems, united access to heterogeneous collections is difficult. Things are even worse in an international context when concepts have labels in different languages. In order to overcome the multilingual interoperability problem between European Libraries, extensive work has been done to manually map concepts from different knowledge organisation systems, which is a tedious and expensive process. Within the TELplus project, we developed and evaluated methods to automatically discover these mappings, using different ontology matching techniques. In experiments on major French, English and German subject heading lists Rameau, LCSH and SWD, we show that we can automatically produce mappings of surprisingly good quality, even when using relatively naive translation and matching methods.

0.009606745 = product of:
  0.05764047 = sum of:
    0.05764047 = weight(_text_:problem in 3393) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05764047 = score(doc=3393,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20485485 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04826377 = queryNorm
        0.28137225 = fieldWeight in 3393, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3393)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Digital Libraries currently face the challenge of integrating many different types of research information (e.g. publications, primary data, expert's profiles, institutional profiles, project information etc.) according to their scientific users' needs. To date no general, integrated model for knowledge organization and retrieval in Digital Libraries exists. This causes the problem of structural and semantic heterogeneity due to the wide range of metadata standards, indexing vocabularies and indexing approaches used for different types of information. The research presented in this paper focuses on areas in which activities are being undertaken in the field of Digital Libraries in order to treat semantic interoperability problems. We present a model for the integrated retrieval of factual and textual data which combines multiple approaches to semantic interoperability und sets them into context. Embedded in the research cycle, traditional content indexing methods for publications meet the newer, but rarely used ontology-based approaches which seem to be better suited for representing complex information like the one contained in survey data. The benefits of our model are (1) easy re-use of available knowledge organisation systems and (2) reduced efforts for domain modelling with ontologies.

0.009606745 = product of:
  0.05764047 = sum of:
    0.05764047 = weight(_text_:problem in 4158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05764047 = score(doc=4158,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20485485 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04826377 = queryNorm
        0.28137225 = fieldWeight in 4158, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4158)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

The treatment of subjects by Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) has attracted less attention than some of its other aspects, but there seems to be a general consensus that it needs work. While some have proposed elaborating its subject categories-concepts, objects, events, and places-to increase their semantic complexity, a working group of the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) has recently made a promising proposal that essentially bypasses those categories in favor of one entity, thema. This article gives an overview of the proposal and discusses its relevance to another difficult problem, ambiguities in the establishment of headings for buildings.Use of dynamic links from subject-based finding aids to records for electronic resources in the OPAC is suggested as one method for by-passing the OPAC search interface, thus making the library's electronic resources more accessible. This method simplifies maintenance of links to electronic resources and aids instruction by providing a single, consistent access point to them. Results of a usage study from before and after this project was completed show a consistent, often dramatic increase in use of the library's electronic resources.

0.009606745 = product of:
  0.05764047 = sum of:
    0.05764047 = weight(_text_:problem in 1577) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05764047 = score(doc=1577,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20485485 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04826377 = queryNorm
        0.28137225 = fieldWeight in 1577, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1577)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Ontology alignment became a very important problem to ensure semantic interoperability for different sources of information heterogeneous and distributed. Instance-based ontology alignment represents a very promising technique to find semantic correspondences between entities of different ontologies when they contain a lot of instances. In this paper, we describe a new approach to manage ontologies that do not share common instances.This approach extracts the argument and event structures from a set of instances of the concept of the source ontology and compared them with other semantic features extracted from a set of instances of the concept of the target ontology using Generative Lexicon Theory. We show that it is theoretically powerful because it is based on linguistic semantics and useful in practice. We present the experimental results obtained by running our approach on Biblio test of Benchmark series of OAEI 2011. The results show the good performance of our approach.

0.009247649 = product of:
  0.055485893 = sum of:
    0.055485893 = weight(_text_:22 in 4379) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.055485893 = score(doc=4379,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1690115 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04826377 = queryNorm
        0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 4379, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4379)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Am 29. und 30. Oktober 2009 fand in der Königlichen Bibliothek in Den Haag das zweite internationale UDC-Seminar zum Thema "Classification at a Crossroad" statt. Organisiert wurde diese Konferenz - wie auch die erste Konferenz dieser Art im Jahr 2007 - vom UDC-Konsortium (UDCC). Im Mittelpunkt der diesjährigen Veranstaltung stand die Erschließung des World Wide Web unter besserer Nutzung von Klassifikationen (im Besonderen natürlich der UDC), einschließlich benutzerfreundlicher Repräsentationen von Informationen und Wissen. Standards, neue Technologien und Dienste, semantische Suche und der multilinguale Zugriff spielten ebenfalls eine Rolle. 135 Teilnehmer aus 35 Ländern waren dazu nach Den Haag gekommen. Das Programm umfasste mit 22 Vorträgen aus 14 verschiedenen Ländern eine breite Palette, wobei Großbritannien mit fünf Beiträgen am stärksten vertreten war. Die Tagesschwerpunkte wurden an beiden Konferenztagen durch die Eröffnungsvorträge gesetzt, die dann in insgesamt sechs thematischen Sitzungen weiter vertieft wurden.

Date

22. 1.2010 15:06:54

0.009247649 = product of:
  0.055485893 = sum of:
    0.055485893 = weight(_text_:22 in 1967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.055485893 = score(doc=1967,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1690115 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04826377 = queryNorm
        0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 1967, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1967)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

This paper reports on the second part of an initiative of the authors on researching classification systems with the conceptual model defined by the Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD) final report. In an earlier study, the authors explored whether the FRSAD conceptual model could be extended beyond subject authority data to model classification data. The focus of the current study is to determine if classification data modeled using FRSAD can be used to solve real-world discovery problems in multicultural and multilingual contexts. The paper discusses the relationships between entities (same type or different types) in the context of classification systems that involve multiple translations and /or multicultural implementations. Results of two case studies are presented in detail: (a) two instances of the DDC (DDC 22 in English, and the Swedish-English mixed translation of DDC 22), and (b) Chinese Library Classification. The use cases of conceptual models in practice are also discussed.

0.009057326 = product of:
  0.054343957 = sum of:
    0.054343957 = weight(_text_:problem in 533) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.054343957 = score(doc=533,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.20485485 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04826377 = queryNorm
        0.2652803 = fieldWeight in 533, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=533)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Recently, a growing amount of systems that allow personal content annotation (tagging) are being created, ranging from personal sites for organising bookmarks (del.icio.us), photos (flickr.com) or videos (video.google.com, youtube.com) to systems for managing bibliographies for scientific research projects (citeulike.org, connotea.org). Simultaneously, a debate on the pro and cons of allowing users to add personal keywords to digital content has arisen. One recurrent point-of-discussion is whether tagging can solve the well-known vocabulary problem: In order to support successful retrieval in complex environments, it is necessary to index an object with a variety of aliases (cf. Furnas 1987). In this spirit, social tagging enhances the pool of rigid, traditional keywording by adding user-created retrieval vocabularies. Furthermore, tagging goes beyond simple personal content-based keywords by providing meta-keywords like funny or interesting that "identify qualities or characteristics" (Golder and Huberman 2006, Kipp and Campbell 2006, Kipp 2007, Feinberg 2006, Kroski 2005). Contrarily, tagging systems are claimed to lead to semantic difficulties that may hinder the precision and recall of tagging systems (e.g. the polysemy problem, cf. Marlow 2006, Lakoff 2005, Golder and Huberman 2006). Empirical research on social tagging is still rare and mostly from a computer linguistics or librarian point-of-view (Voß 2007) which focus either on the automatic statistical analyses of large data sets, or intellectually inspect single cases of tag usage: Some scientists studied the evolution of tag vocabularies and tag distribution in specific systems (Golder and Huberman 2006, Hammond 2005). Others concentrate on tagging behaviour and tagger characteristics in collaborative systems. (Hammond 2005, Kipp and Campbell 2007, Feinberg 2006, Sen 2006). However, little research has been conducted on the functional and linguistic characteristics of tags.1 An analysis of these patterns could show differences between user wording and conventional keywording. In order to provide a reasonable basis for comparison, a classification system for existing tags is needed.

0.008718766 = product of:
  0.052312598 = sum of:
    0.052312598 = weight(_text_:22 in 541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.052312598 = score(doc=541,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1690115 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04826377 = queryNorm
        0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 541, 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=541)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Date

26.12.2011 13:22:46

0.008718766 = product of:
  0.052312598 = sum of:
    0.052312598 = weight(_text_:22 in 2175) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.052312598 = score(doc=2175,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1690115 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04826377 = queryNorm
        0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2175, 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=2175)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Date

22. 8.2009 10:35:21

0.008005621 = product of:
  0.04803372 = sum of:
    0.04803372 = weight(_text_:problem in 543) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04803372 = score(doc=543,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20485485 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04826377 = queryNorm
        0.23447686 = fieldWeight in 543, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=543)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

One of the main features of classic libraries is metadata, which also is the key aspect of the Semantic Web. Librarians in the process of resources annotation use different kinds of Knowledge Organization Systems; KOS range from controlled vocabularies to classifications and categories (e.g., taxonomies) and to relationship lists (e.g., thesauri). The diversity of controlled vocabularies, used by various libraries and organizations, became a bottleneck for efficient information exchange between different entities. Even though a simple one-to-one mapping could be established, based on the similarities between names of concepts, we cannot derive information about the hierarchy between concepts from two different KOS. One of the solutions to this problem is to create an algorithm based on data delivered by large community of users using many classification schemata at once. The rationale behind it is that similar resources can be described by equivalent concepts taken from different taxonomies. The more annotations are collected, the more precise the result of this crosswalk will be.

0.008005621 = product of:
  0.04803372 = sum of:
    0.04803372 = weight(_text_:problem in 1677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04803372 = score(doc=1677,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20485485 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04826377 = queryNorm
        0.23447686 = fieldWeight in 1677, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1677)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

The trend in the fifties and sixties of the past century away from the use of universal classification systems such as the UDC towards establishing thesauri in special subject fields for the description of the conceptual contents of documents lead documentalists soon to realize that the necessary common tool for a collaboration among centers of similar subject fields was lacking. Therefore compatibility and integration studies began between the different thesauri of such fields, leading often to more comprehensive thesauri, such as macrothesauri. The paper describes this historic development and also the solutions found at the 1995 ISKO-Conference in Warsaw/Poland on Compatibility and Integration as given in its papers, its recommendations and also in the conceptual frame of its comprehensive bibliography on this topic. In conclusion a new solution is presented oriented toward combining the use of a universal classification system with the new developments of ontologies and their problem of interoperability and heterogeneity.

0.008005621 = product of:
  0.04803372 = sum of:
    0.04803372 = weight(_text_:problem in 2460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04803372 = score(doc=2460,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20485485 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04826377 = queryNorm
        0.23447686 = fieldWeight in 2460, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2460)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

In Zeiten, in denen der schnelle und einfache Zugriff auf strukturierte und umfangreiche Datenbestände zunehmend an Bedeutung gewinnt, stellt die Heterogenität eben dieser Bestände ein großes Problem dar. Die meisten Bibliothekskataloge, Datenbanken usw. sind inhaltlich durch unterschiedliche Instrumente erschlossen, was für den Benutzer eine gewisse Einarbeitungszeit in jedes Erschließungsinstrument sowie die Notwendigkeit zur wiederholten und neu formulierten Suche in den unterschiedlich erschlossenen Datenbeständen bedeutet. Als Möglichkeit zur Behandlung der Heterogenitätsproblematik kommen beispielsweise Crosskonkordanzen in Betracht, durch welche semantisch übereinstimmende Schlagwörter, Deskriptoren bzw. Notationen verschiedener Erschließungsinstrumente intellektuell miteinander verbunden werden, so dass mit identischer Suchfrage mehrere unterschiedlich erschlossene Datenbestände durchsucht werden können. In der vorliegenden Arbeit soll die Problematik heterogener Datenbestände sowie die Behandlungsmöglichkeit durch Crosskonkordanzen beschrieben werden. Die konkretisierende Darstellung erfolgt anhand des Projektes CrissCross, einem gemeinschaftlichen Projekt der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek und der Fachhochschule Köln, in dem Crosskonkordanzen zwischen den Erschließungsinstrumenten SWD, DDC sowie LCSH und RAMEAU erstellt werden. Besonderheiten des Projektes CrissCross sind neben der Multilingualität und der Verbindung von verbalen und klassifikatorischen Erschließungsinstrumenten auch eine intellektuelle Gewichtung der Beziehungsstärke zweier verknüpfter Terme, die so genannte Determiniertheit. Neben den integrierten Erschließungsinstrumenten wird auch die konkrete Vorgehensweise ihrer Verbindung erläutert. Des Weiteren werden die Problemfelder des Projektes und im Besonderen denkbare Einsatzmöglichkeiten der Projektergebnisse vorgestellt, die wesentlich zur Lösung der Heterogenitätsproblematik und somit zu einer Verbesserung des Retrievals für den Benutzer beitragen können.

0.008005621 = product of:
  0.04803372 = sum of:
    0.04803372 = weight(_text_:problem in 4321) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04803372 = score(doc=4321,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20485485 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04826377 = queryNorm
        0.23447686 = fieldWeight in 4321, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4321)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Diese These, dass die Versionierung der DDC zu einer verbesserten Suche führt, soll in dieser Arbeit untersucht werden. Es soll geprüft werden, ob die vorgeschlagene Vorgehensweise zu einem besseren Retrievalergebnis führt. Die Arbeit wird zunächst einen Überblick über die theoretischen Hintergründe von inhaltlicher Erschließung und den technischen Methoden liefern, bevor das eigentliche Problem anhand einer Testdatenbank und entsprechender Suchanfragen behandelt wird.

0.008005621 = product of:
  0.04803372 = sum of:
    0.04803372 = weight(_text_:problem in 4801) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04803372 = score(doc=4801,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20485485 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04826377 = queryNorm
        0.23447686 = fieldWeight in 4801, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4801)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Ontology development is considered to be a useful approach to the design and implementation of interoperable systems. This literature review and commentary examines the current state of knowledge in this field with particular reference to processes involved in assuring epistemological adequacy. It takes the perspective of the information systems practitioner keen to adopt a systematic approach to in-house ontology design, taking into consideration previously published work. The study arises from author involvement in an integration/interoperability project on systems that support Scottish Common Housing Registers in which, ultimately, ontological modelling was not deployed. Issues concerning the agreement of meaning, and the implications for the creation of interoperable systems, are discussed. The extent to which those theories, methods and frameworks provide practitioners with a usable set of tools is explored, and examples of practical applications of ontological modelling are noted. The findings from the review of the literature demonstrate a number of difficulties faced by information systems practitioners keen to develop and deploy domain ontologies. A major problem is deciding which broad approach to take: to rely on automatic ontology construction techniques, or to rely on key words and domain experts to develop ontologies.