-
Hotho, A.; Bloehdorn, S.: Data Mining 2004 : Text classification by boosting weak learners based on terms and concepts (2004)
0.22
0.21678177 = product of:
0.2709772 = sum of:
0.03980924 = product of:
0.19904618 = sum of:
0.19904618 = weight(_text_:3a in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.19904618 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
0.35416332 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 562, 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=562)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
0.19904618 = weight(_text_:2f in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.19904618 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
0.35416332 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 562, 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=562)
0.015142222 = weight(_text_:of in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015142222 = score(doc=562,freq=10.0), product of:
0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.23179851 = fieldWeight in 562, 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=562)
0.016979538 = product of:
0.033959076 = sum of:
0.033959076 = weight(_text_:22 in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033959076 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 562, 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=562)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.8 = coord(4/5)
- Abstract
- Document representations for text classification are typically based on the classical Bag-Of-Words paradigm. This approach comes with deficiencies that motivate the integration of features on a higher semantic level than single words. In this paper we propose an enhancement of the classical document representation through concepts extracted from background knowledge. Boosting is used for actual classification. Experimental evaluations on two well known text corpora support our approach through consistent improvement of the results.
- Content
- Vgl.: http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CEAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fciteseerx.ist.psu.edu%2Fviewdoc%2Fdownload%3Fdoi%3D10.1.1.91.4940%26rep%3Drep1%26type%3Dpdf&ei=dOXrUMeIDYHDtQahsIGACg&usg=AFQjCNHFWVh6gNPvnOrOS9R3rkrXCNVD-A&sig2=5I2F5evRfMnsttSgFF9g7Q&bvm=bv.1357316858,d.Yms.
- Date
- 8. 1.2013 10:22:32
- Source
- Proceedings of the 4th IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM 2004), 1-4 November 2004, Brighton, UK
-
Manzi, S.: Classifying philosophy at the Library of the Scuola Normale Superiore (Pisa, Italy) : Part B: evaluation and experience (2009)
0.21
0.21045999 = product of:
0.35076663 = sum of:
0.18860914 = weight(_text_:philosophy in 1858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.18860914 = score(doc=1858,freq=10.0), product of:
0.23055021 = queryWeight, product of:
5.5189433 = idf(docFreq=481, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.8180827 = fieldWeight in 1858, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
5.5189433 = idf(docFreq=481, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1858)
0.02031542 = weight(_text_:of in 1858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02031542 = score(doc=1858,freq=18.0), product of:
0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.3109903 = fieldWeight in 1858, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1858)
0.14184207 = sum of:
0.10788299 = weight(_text_:mind in 1858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10788299 = score(doc=1858,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2607373 = queryWeight, product of:
6.241566 = idf(docFreq=233, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.41376126 = fieldWeight in 1858, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.241566 = idf(docFreq=233, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1858)
0.033959076 = weight(_text_:22 in 1858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033959076 = score(doc=1858,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1858, 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=1858)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- The verification of the functionality of the Philosophy classification schema adopted at the Library of the Scuola Normale Superiore needs to take into account the context: the Library is both a special and a multidisciplinary library; its collections reflect the history of the SNS. The philosophy collection has a specialized and selective nature, as do others within the same Library; the Library is open shelves, and classification is used as a shelving and location device. Bearing in mind the above conditions, the second part of this paper examines the strengths and weaknesses of the schema in order to highlight its suitability to match a coherent classification of documents with the effective fruition by the users.
- Date
- 9. 1.2010 14:22:20
- Footnote
- Beitrag eines Themenheftes "The philosophy of classifying philosophy"
-
Li, L.; Shang, Y.; Zhang, W.: Improvement of HITS-based algorithms on Web documents
0.20
0.20427395 = product of:
0.34045658 = sum of:
0.03980924 = product of:
0.19904618 = sum of:
0.19904618 = weight(_text_:3a in 2514) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.19904618 = score(doc=2514,freq=2.0), product of:
0.35416332 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 2514, 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=2514)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
0.28149378 = weight(_text_:2f in 2514) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.28149378 = score(doc=2514,freq=4.0), product of:
0.35416332 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.7948135 = fieldWeight in 2514, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2514)
0.019153563 = weight(_text_:of in 2514) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019153563 = score(doc=2514,freq=16.0), product of:
0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.2932045 = fieldWeight in 2514, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2514)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- In this paper, we present two ways to improve the precision of HITS-based algorithms onWeb documents. First, by analyzing the limitations of current HITS-based algorithms, we propose a new weighted HITS-based method that assigns appropriate weights to in-links of root documents. Then, we combine content analysis with HITS-based algorithms and study the effects of four representative relevance scoring methods, VSM, Okapi, TLS, and CDR, using a set of broad topic queries. Our experimental results show that our weighted HITS-based method performs significantly better than Bharat's improved HITS algorithm. When we combine our weighted HITS-based method or Bharat's HITS algorithm with any of the four relevance scoring methods, the combined methods are only marginally better than our weighted HITS-based method. Between the four relevance scoring methods, there is no significant quality difference when they are combined with a HITS-based algorithm.
- Content
- Vgl.: http%3A%2F%2Fdelab.csd.auth.gr%2F~dimitris%2Fcourses%2Fir_spring06%2Fpage_rank_computing%2Fp527-li.pdf. Vgl. auch: http://www2002.org/CDROM/refereed/643/.
- Source
- WWW '02: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on World Wide Web, May 7-11, 2002, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA
-
Dreyfus, H.L.: From micro-worlds to knowledge representation : AI at an impasse (1981)
0.20
0.20308663 = product of:
0.3384777 = sum of:
0.19681333 = weight(_text_:philosophy in 2603) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.19681333 = score(doc=2603,freq=2.0), product of:
0.23055021 = queryWeight, product of:
5.5189433 = idf(docFreq=481, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.853668 = fieldWeight in 2603, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.5189433 = idf(docFreq=481, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2603)
0.015800884 = weight(_text_:of in 2603) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015800884 = score(doc=2603,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.24188137 = fieldWeight in 2603, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2603)
0.12586349 = product of:
0.25172698 = sum of:
0.25172698 = weight(_text_:mind in 2603) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.25172698 = score(doc=2603,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2607373 = queryWeight, product of:
6.241566 = idf(docFreq=233, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.96544296 = fieldWeight in 2603, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.241566 = idf(docFreq=233, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2603)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Imprint
- Cambridge, Mass. : Massachusetts Inst. of Technology Pr.
- Source
- Mind design: philosophy, psychology, artificial intelligence. Ed. by J. Haugeland
-
Popper, K.R.: Three worlds : the Tanner lecture on human values. Deliverd at the University of Michigan, April 7, 1978 (1978)
0.20
0.20046763 = product of:
0.3341127 = sum of:
0.05307898 = product of:
0.2653949 = sum of:
0.2653949 = weight(_text_:3a in 230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.2653949 = score(doc=230,freq=2.0), product of:
0.35416332 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.7493574 = fieldWeight in 230, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=230)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
0.2653949 = weight(_text_:2f in 230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.2653949 = score(doc=230,freq=2.0), product of:
0.35416332 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.7493574 = fieldWeight in 230, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=230)
0.01563882 = weight(_text_:of in 230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01563882 = score(doc=230,freq=6.0), product of:
0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.23940048 = fieldWeight in 230, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=230)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- In this lecture I intend to challenge those who uphold a monist or even a dualist view of the universe; and I will propose, instead, a pluralist view. I will propose a view of the universe that recognizes at least three different but interacting sub-universes.
- Source
- https%3A%2F%2Ftannerlectures.utah.edu%2F_documents%2Fa-to-z%2Fp%2Fpopper80.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3f4QRTEH-OEBmoYr2J_c7H
-
Ishikawa, S.: ¬A final solution to the mind-body problem by quantum language (2017)
0.19
0.19265655 = product of:
0.24082068 = sum of:
0.02231161 = product of:
0.11155804 = sum of:
0.11155804 = weight(_text_:problem in 3666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11155804 = score(doc=3666,freq=10.0), product of:
0.17731056 = queryWeight, product of:
4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.6291675 = fieldWeight in 3666, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3666)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
0.084348574 = weight(_text_:philosophy in 3666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.084348574 = score(doc=3666,freq=2.0), product of:
0.23055021 = queryWeight, product of:
5.5189433 = idf(docFreq=481, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.36585772 = fieldWeight in 3666, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.5189433 = idf(docFreq=481, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3666)
0.013543615 = weight(_text_:of in 3666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013543615 = score(doc=3666,freq=8.0), product of:
0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.20732689 = fieldWeight in 3666, 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=3666)
0.12061687 = product of:
0.24123374 = sum of:
0.24123374 = weight(_text_:mind in 3666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.24123374 = score(doc=3666,freq=10.0), product of:
0.2607373 = queryWeight, product of:
6.241566 = idf(docFreq=233, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.92519844 = fieldWeight in 3666, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
6.241566 = idf(docFreq=233, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3666)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.8 = coord(4/5)
- Abstract
- Recently we proposed "quantum language", which was not only characterized as the metaphysical and linguistic turn of quantum mechanics but also the linguistic turn of Descartes = Kant epistemology. And further we believe that quantum language is the only scientifically successful theory in dualistic idealism. If this turn is regarded as progress in the history of western philosophy (i.e., if "philosophical progress" is defined by "approaching to quantum language"), we should study the linguistic mind-body problem more than the epistemological mind-body problem. In this paper, we show that to solve the mind-body problem and to propose "measurement axiom" in quantum language are equivalent. Since our approach is always within dualistic idealism, we believe that our linguistic answer is the only true solution to the mind-body problem.
- Source
- Journal of quantum information science. 7(2017) no.2, S.48 [http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=76391]
-
Malsburg, C. von der: Concerning the neuronal code (2018)
0.18
0.18329176 = product of:
0.30548626 = sum of:
0.009978054 = product of:
0.04989027 = sum of:
0.04989027 = weight(_text_:problem in 73) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04989027 = score(doc=73,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17731056 = queryWeight, product of:
4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.28137225 = fieldWeight in 73, 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=73)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
0.02031542 = weight(_text_:of in 73) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02031542 = score(doc=73,freq=18.0), product of:
0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.3109903 = fieldWeight in 73, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=73)
0.2751928 = sum of:
0.24123374 = weight(_text_:mind in 73) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.24123374 = score(doc=73,freq=10.0), product of:
0.2607373 = queryWeight, product of:
6.241566 = idf(docFreq=233, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.92519844 = fieldWeight in 73, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
6.241566 = idf(docFreq=233, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=73)
0.033959076 = weight(_text_:22 in 73) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033959076 = score(doc=73,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 73, 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=73)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- The central problem with understanding brain and mind is the neural code issue: understanding the matter of our brain as basis for the phenomena of our mind. The richness with which our mind represents our environment, the parsimony of genetic data, the tremendous efficiency with which the brain learns from scant sensory input and the creativity with which our mind constructs mental worlds all speak in favor of mind as an emergent phenomenon. This raises the further issue of how the neural code supports these processes of organization. The central point of this communication is that the neural code has the form of structured net fragments that are formed by network self-organization, activate and de-activate on the functional time scale, and spontaneously combine to form larger nets with the same basic structure.
- Date
- 27.12.2020 16:56:22
- Source
- Journal of cognitive science. 19(2018) no.4, S.511-550
-
Vetere, G.; Lenzerini, M.: Models for semantic interoperability in service-oriented architectures (2005)
0.18
0.17974035 = product of:
0.29956725 = sum of:
0.04644411 = product of:
0.23222055 = sum of:
0.23222055 = weight(_text_:3a in 306) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.23222055 = score(doc=306,freq=2.0), product of:
0.35416332 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.65568775 = fieldWeight in 306, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=306)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
0.23222055 = weight(_text_:2f in 306) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.23222055 = score(doc=306,freq=2.0), product of:
0.35416332 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.65568775 = fieldWeight in 306, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=306)
0.020902606 = weight(_text_:of in 306) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020902606 = score(doc=306,freq=14.0), product of:
0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.31997898 = fieldWeight in 306, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=306)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- Although service-oriented architectures go a long way toward providing interoperability in distributed, heterogeneous environments, managing semantic differences in such environments remains a challenge. We give an overview of the issue of semantic interoperability (integration), provide a semantic characterization of services, and discuss the role of ontologies. Then we analyze four basic models of semantic interoperability that differ in respect to their mapping between service descriptions and ontologies and in respect to where the evaluation of the integration logic is performed. We also provide some guidelines for selecting one of the possible interoperability models.
- Content
- Vgl.: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5386707&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D5386707.
-
Bettella, C.; Carrara, M.: Classifications: on philosophers and librarians (2009)
0.18
0.17770977 = product of:
0.22213721 = sum of:
0.009978054 = product of:
0.04989027 = sum of:
0.04989027 = weight(_text_:problem in 3265) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04989027 = score(doc=3265,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17731056 = queryWeight, product of:
4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.28137225 = fieldWeight in 3265, 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=3265)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
0.119286895 = weight(_text_:philosophy in 3265) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.119286895 = score(doc=3265,freq=4.0), product of:
0.23055021 = queryWeight, product of:
5.5189433 = idf(docFreq=481, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.5174009 = fieldWeight in 3265, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
5.5189433 = idf(docFreq=481, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3265)
0.016587472 = weight(_text_:of in 3265) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016587472 = score(doc=3265,freq=12.0), product of:
0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.25392252 = fieldWeight in 3265, 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=3265)
0.0762848 = product of:
0.1525696 = sum of:
0.1525696 = weight(_text_:mind in 3265) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.1525696 = score(doc=3265,freq=4.0), product of:
0.2607373 = queryWeight, product of:
6.241566 = idf(docFreq=233, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.58514684 = fieldWeight in 3265, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
6.241566 = idf(docFreq=233, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3265)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.8 = coord(4/5)
- Abstract
- Consider the following argument: (Premise 1) If a librarian is a classifier and (Premise 2) a librarian classifies (among the other things) the documents of a library, and (Premise 3) to classify documents is equivalent to classifying the objects of a knowledge base, but (Premise 4) to classify the objects of a knowledge base is equivalent to producing an ontology, or is equivalent to doing some ontological engineering, then (Conclusion) a classifier- i.e. a librarian-is an ontologist. The same train of thought can be followed for those disciplinary experts who support librarians in activities like classification. Thus, librarians and experts are classifiers, and if classifiers are ontologists, librarians and experts are ontologists. Here the problem arises: which specific kind of ontology is in the librarian's mind? Which one in the expert's mind? We argue that the librarians' ontology is completely different from the expert's. Experts' ontology is a thematic ontology, librarians' ontology is generalistic. This conclusion is particularly clear in the philosophical case.
- Footnote
- Beitrag eines Themenheftes "The philosophy of classifying philosophy"
-
Jacob, E.K.: ¬The legacy of pragmatism : implications for knowledge organization in a pluralistic universe (2000)
0.17
0.1733235 = product of:
0.28887248 = sum of:
0.098406665 = weight(_text_:philosophy in 119) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.098406665 = score(doc=119,freq=2.0), product of:
0.23055021 = queryWeight, product of:
5.5189433 = idf(docFreq=481, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.426834 = fieldWeight in 119, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.5189433 = idf(docFreq=481, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=119)
0.024983391 = weight(_text_:of in 119) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024983391 = score(doc=119,freq=20.0), product of:
0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.38244802 = fieldWeight in 119, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=119)
0.16548242 = sum of:
0.12586349 = weight(_text_:mind in 119) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.12586349 = score(doc=119,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2607373 = queryWeight, product of:
6.241566 = idf(docFreq=233, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.48272148 = fieldWeight in 119, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.241566 = idf(docFreq=233, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=119)
0.039618924 = weight(_text_:22 in 119) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.039618924 = score(doc=119,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 119, 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=119)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- Although postmodernist philosophy is frequently characterized as unconstrained relativism and radical skepticism, It shares with pragmatism a strong antipathy to modernity's separation of mind and body, of subject and object, of the human and the material. The criticisms raised by postmodernism have significant implications for current understandings of classification theory and practice. The critical tenets of pragmatism provide an epistemological framework for the development of classificatory structures that will address current failings and respond to the demands of an increasingly interdisciplinary store of knowledge
- Pages
- S.16-22
- Source
- Dynamism and stability in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the 6th International ISKO-Conference, 10-13 July 2000, Toronto, Canada. Ed.: C. Beghtol et al
-
Malsburg, C. von der: ¬The correlation theory of brain function (1981)
0.16
0.16360113 = product of:
0.27266854 = sum of:
0.08986723 = product of:
0.22466806 = sum of:
0.16587181 = weight(_text_:3a in 76) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.16587181 = score(doc=76,freq=2.0), product of:
0.35416332 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 76, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=76)
0.058796246 = weight(_text_:problem in 76) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.058796246 = score(doc=76,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17731056 = queryWeight, product of:
4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.33160037 = fieldWeight in 76, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=76)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
0.16587181 = weight(_text_:2f in 76) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.16587181 = score(doc=76,freq=2.0), product of:
0.35416332 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 76, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=76)
0.016929517 = weight(_text_:of in 76) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016929517 = score(doc=76,freq=18.0), product of:
0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.25915858 = fieldWeight in 76, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=76)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- A summary of brain theory is given so far as it is contained within the framework of Localization Theory. Difficulties of this "conventional theory" are traced back to a specific deficiency: there is no way to express relations between active cells (as for instance their representing parts of the same object). A new theory is proposed to cure this deficiency. It introduces a new kind of dynamical control, termed synaptic modulation, according to which synapses switch between a conducting and a non- conducting state. The dynamics of this variable is controlled on a fast time scale by correlations in the temporal fine structure of cellular signals. Furthermore, conventional synaptic plasticity is replaced by a refined version. Synaptic modulation and plasticity form the basis for short-term and long-term memory, respectively. Signal correlations, shaped by the variable network, express structure and relationships within objects. In particular, the figure-ground problem may be solved in this way. Synaptic modulation introduces exibility into cerebral networks which is necessary to solve the invariance problem. Since momentarily useless connections are deactivated, interference between di erent memory traces can be reduced, and memory capacity increased, in comparison with conventional associative memory
- Content
- Originally published July 1981 as Internal Report 81-2, Dept. of Neurobiology, Max-Planck-Institute for Biophysical Chemistry, 3400 Gottingen, W.-Germany.
- Source
- http%3A%2F%2Fcogprints.org%2F1380%2F1%2FvdM_correlation.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0g7DvZbQPb2U7dYb49b9v_
-
Schrodt, R.: Tiefen und Untiefen im wissenschaftlichen Sprachgebrauch (2008)
0.16
0.1592644 = product of:
0.398161 = sum of:
0.13276611 = product of:
0.33191526 = sum of:
0.2653949 = weight(_text_:3a in 140) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.2653949 = score(doc=140,freq=2.0), product of:
0.35416332 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.7493574 = fieldWeight in 140, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=140)
0.066520356 = weight(_text_:problem in 140) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.066520356 = score(doc=140,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17731056 = queryWeight, product of:
4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.375163 = fieldWeight in 140, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=140)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
0.2653949 = weight(_text_:2f in 140) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.2653949 = score(doc=140,freq=2.0), product of:
0.35416332 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.7493574 = fieldWeight in 140, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=140)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- "Wer überhaupt spricht oder schreibt, sollte sich verständlich ausdrücken. Das ist eine auf den ersten Blick einleuchtende Forderung. denn wozu äußert er sich, wenn er nicht verstanden werden will?" (Luhmann 2005, 193) So einfach scheint unser Problem zu sein - doch so einfach ist es nicht.
- Content
- Vgl. auch: https://studylibde.com/doc/13053640/richard-schrodt. Vgl. auch: http%3A%2F%2Fwww.univie.ac.at%2FGermanistik%2Fschrodt%2Fvorlesung%2Fwissenschaftssprache.doc&usg=AOvVaw1lDLDR6NFf1W0-oC9mEUJf.
-
Mainzer, K.: ¬The emergence of self-conscious systems : from symbolic AI to embodied robotics (2014)
0.16
0.15806854 = product of:
0.19758567 = sum of:
0.008315044 = product of:
0.041575223 = sum of:
0.041575223 = weight(_text_:problem in 3398) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041575223 = score(doc=3398,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17731056 = queryWeight, product of:
4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.23447686 = fieldWeight in 3398, 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=3398)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
0.12174669 = weight(_text_:philosophy in 3398) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.12174669 = score(doc=3398,freq=6.0), product of:
0.23055021 = queryWeight, product of:
5.5189433 = idf(docFreq=481, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.52807015 = fieldWeight in 3398, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
5.5189433 = idf(docFreq=481, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3398)
0.022572692 = weight(_text_:of in 3398) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022572692 = score(doc=3398,freq=32.0), product of:
0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = 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)
0.04495125 = product of:
0.0899025 = sum of:
0.0899025 = weight(_text_:mind in 3398) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0899025 = score(doc=3398,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2607373 = queryWeight, product of:
6.241566 = idf(docFreq=233, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.34480107 = fieldWeight in 3398, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.241566 = idf(docFreq=233, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3398)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.8 = coord(4/5)
- 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
- Source
- Philosophy, computing and information science. Eds.: R. Hagengruber u. U.V. Riss
-
Huth, M.: Symbolic and sub-symbolic knowledge organization in the Computational Theory of Mind (1995)
0.16
0.15612905 = product of:
0.26021507 = sum of:
0.008315044 = product of:
0.041575223 = sum of:
0.041575223 = weight(_text_:problem in 1086) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041575223 = score(doc=1086,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17731056 = queryWeight, product of:
4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.23447686 = fieldWeight in 1086, 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=1086)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
0.022572692 = weight(_text_:of in 1086) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022572692 = score(doc=1086,freq=32.0), product of:
0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.34554482 = fieldWeight in 1086, 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=1086)
0.22932734 = sum of:
0.20102811 = weight(_text_:mind in 1086) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.20102811 = score(doc=1086,freq=10.0), product of:
0.2607373 = queryWeight, product of:
6.241566 = idf(docFreq=233, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.77099866 = fieldWeight in 1086, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
6.241566 = idf(docFreq=233, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1086)
0.028299233 = weight(_text_:22 in 1086) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028299233 = score(doc=1086,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1086, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1086)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- We sketch the historic transformation of culturally grown techniques of symbol manipulation, such as basic arithmetic in the decimal number system, to the full-fledges version of the Computational Theory of Mind. Symbol manipulation systems had been considered by Leibniz as a methodology of inferring knowledge in a secure and purely mechanical fashion. Such 'inference calculi' were considered as mer artefacts which could not possibly encompass als human knowldge acquisition. In Alan Turing's work one notices a crucial shift of perspective. The abstract mathematical states of a Turing machine (a kind of 'calculus universalis' that Leibniz was looking for) are claimed to correspond th equivalent psychological states. Artefacts are turned into faithful models of human cognition. A further step toward the Computational Theory of Mind was the physical symbol system hypothesis, contending to have found a necessary and sifficient criterion for the presence of 'intelligence' in operative mediums. This, together with Chomsky's foundational work on linguistics, led naturally to the Computational Theory of Mind as set out by Jerry Fodor and Zenon Pylshyn. We discuss problematic aspects of this theory. Then we deal with another paradigm of the Computational Theory of Mind based on network automata. This sub-symbolic paradigm seems to avoid problems occuring in symbolic computations, like the proble 'frame problem' and 'graceful degradation'
- Source
- Knowledge organization. 22(1995) no.1, S.10-17
-
Mas, S.; Marleau, Y.: Proposition of a faceted classification model to support corporate information organization and digital records management (2009)
0.15
0.15326574 = product of:
0.2554429 = sum of:
0.03980924 = product of:
0.19904618 = sum of:
0.19904618 = weight(_text_:3a in 2918) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.19904618 = score(doc=2918,freq=2.0), product of:
0.35416332 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 2918, 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=2918)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
0.19904618 = weight(_text_:2f in 2918) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.19904618 = score(doc=2918,freq=2.0), product of:
0.35416332 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 2918, 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=2918)
0.016587472 = weight(_text_:of in 2918) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016587472 = score(doc=2918,freq=12.0), product of:
0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.25392252 = fieldWeight in 2918, 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=2918)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- The employees of an organization often use a personal hierarchical classification scheme to organize digital documents that are stored on their own workstations. As this may make it hard for other employees to retrieve these documents, there is a risk that the organization will lose track of needed documentation. Furthermore, the inherent boundaries of such a hierarchical structure require making arbitrary decisions about which specific criteria the classification will b.e based on (for instance, the administrative activity or the document type, although a document can have several attributes and require classification in several classes).A faceted classification model to support corporate information organization is proposed. Partially based on Ranganathan's facets theory, this model aims not only to standardize the organization of digital documents, but also to simplify the management of a document throughout its life cycle for both individuals and organizations, while ensuring compliance to regulatory and policy requirements.
- Footnote
- Vgl.: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplore/login.jsp?reload=true&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fiel5%2F4755313%2F4755314%2F04755480.pdf%3Farnumber%3D4755480&authDecision=-203.
-
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)
0.15
0.15326574 = product of:
0.2554429 = sum of:
0.03980924 = product of:
0.19904618 = sum of:
0.19904618 = weight(_text_:3a in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.19904618 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
0.35416332 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = 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)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
0.19904618 = weight(_text_:2f in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.19904618 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
0.35416332 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = 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)
0.016587472 = weight(_text_:of in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016587472 = score(doc=400,freq=12.0), product of:
0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = 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)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- 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
-
Noever, D.; Ciolino, M.: ¬The Turing deception (2022)
0.15
0.1523986 = product of:
0.25399765 = sum of:
0.03980924 = product of:
0.19904618 = sum of:
0.19904618 = weight(_text_:3a in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.19904618 = score(doc=862,freq=2.0), product of:
0.35416332 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 862, 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=862)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
0.19904618 = weight(_text_:2f in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.19904618 = score(doc=862,freq=2.0), product of:
0.35416332 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 862, 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=862)
0.015142222 = weight(_text_:of in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015142222 = score(doc=862,freq=10.0), product of:
0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.23179851 = fieldWeight in 862, 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=862)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- This research revisits the classic Turing test and compares recent large language models such as ChatGPT for their abilities to reproduce human-level comprehension and compelling text generation. Two task challenges- summary and question answering- prompt ChatGPT to produce original content (98-99%) from a single text entry and sequential questions initially posed by Turing in 1950. We score the original and generated content against the OpenAI GPT-2 Output Detector from 2019, and establish multiple cases where the generated content proves original and undetectable (98%). The question of a machine fooling a human judge recedes in this work relative to the question of "how would one prove it?" The original contribution of the work presents a metric and simple grammatical set for understanding the writing mechanics of chatbots in evaluating their readability and statistical clarity, engagement, delivery, overall quality, and plagiarism risks. While Turing's original prose scores at least 14% below the machine-generated output, whether an algorithm displays hints of Turing's true initial thoughts (the "Lovelace 2.0" test) remains unanswerable.
- Source
- https%3A%2F%2Farxiv.org%2Fabs%2F2212.06721&usg=AOvVaw3i_9pZm9y_dQWoHi6uv0EN
-
Robinson, L.; Bawden, D.: Mind the gap : transitions between concepts of information in varied domains (2014)
0.15
0.1500192 = product of:
0.25003198 = sum of:
0.14058095 = weight(_text_:philosophy in 1315) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.14058095 = score(doc=1315,freq=2.0), product of:
0.23055021 = queryWeight, product of:
5.5189433 = idf(docFreq=481, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.60976285 = fieldWeight in 1315, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.5189433 = idf(docFreq=481, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1315)
0.019548526 = weight(_text_:of in 1315) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019548526 = score(doc=1315,freq=6.0), product of:
0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.2992506 = fieldWeight in 1315, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1315)
0.0899025 = product of:
0.179805 = sum of:
0.179805 = weight(_text_:mind in 1315) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.179805 = score(doc=1315,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2607373 = queryWeight, product of:
6.241566 = idf(docFreq=233, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.68960214 = fieldWeight in 1315, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.241566 = idf(docFreq=233, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1315)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Series
- Studies in history and philosophy of science ; 34
- Source
- Theories of information, communication and knowledge : a multidisciplinary approach. Eds.: F. Ibekwe-SanJuan u. T.M. Dousa
-
Robinson, G.: Time out of mind : a critical consideration of Table 1g (2000)
0.14
0.14132427 = product of:
0.35331064 = sum of:
0.022345824 = weight(_text_:of in 369) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022345824 = score(doc=369,freq=4.0), product of:
0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.34207192 = fieldWeight in 369, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=369)
0.33096483 = sum of:
0.25172698 = weight(_text_:mind in 369) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.25172698 = score(doc=369,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2607373 = queryWeight, product of:
6.241566 = idf(docFreq=233, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.96544296 = fieldWeight in 369, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.241566 = idf(docFreq=233, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=369)
0.07923785 = weight(_text_:22 in 369) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07923785 = score(doc=369,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 369, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=369)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Source
- Extensions and corrections to the UDC. 22(2000), S.28-31
-
Thornley, C.; Gibb, F.: Meaning in philosophy and meaning in information retrieval (IR) (2009)
0.13
0.13443762 = product of:
0.2240627 = sum of:
0.18597113 = weight(_text_:philosophy in 2682) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.18597113 = score(doc=2682,freq=14.0), product of:
0.23055021 = queryWeight, product of:
5.5189433 = idf(docFreq=481, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.80664045 = fieldWeight in 2682, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
5.5189433 = idf(docFreq=481, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2682)
0.023941955 = weight(_text_:of in 2682) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023941955 = score(doc=2682,freq=36.0), product of:
0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.36650562 = fieldWeight in 2682, product of:
6.0 = tf(freq=36.0), with freq of:
36.0 = termFreq=36.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2682)
0.0141496165 = product of:
0.028299233 = sum of:
0.028299233 = weight(_text_:22 in 2682) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028299233 = score(doc=2682,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04177434 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2682, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2682)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to explore the question of whether the differences between meaning in philosophy and meaning in information retrieval (IR) have implications for the use of philosophy in supporting research in IR. Design/methodology/approach - The approach takes the form of a conceptual analysis and literature review. Findings - There are some differences in the role of meaning in terms of purpose, content and use which should be clarified in order to assist a productive relationship between the philosophy of language and IR. Research limitations/implications - This provides some new theoretical insights into the philosophical context of IR. It suggests that further productive work on the central concepts within IR could be achieved through the use of a methodology which analyses how exactly these concepts are discussed in other disciplines and the implications of any differences in the way in which they may operate in IR. Originality/value - The paper suggests a new perspective on the relationship between philosophy and IR by exploring the role of meaning in these respective disciplines and highlighting differences, as well as similarities, with particular reference to the role of information as well as meaning in IR. This contributes to an understanding of two of the central concepts in IR, meaning and information, and the ways in which they are related. There is a history of work in IR and information science (IS) examining dilemmas and the paper builds on this work by relating it to some similar dilemmas in philosophy. Thus it develops the theory and conceptual understanding of IR by suggesting that philosophy could be used as a way of exploring intractable dilemmas in IR.
- Date
- 23. 2.2009 17:22:29
- Source
- Journal of documentation. 65(2009) no.1, S.133-150
