Search (113 results, page 1 of 6)

  • × theme_ss:"Wissensrepräsentation"
  1. 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) 0.34 
    0.33914855 = product of:
  0.5935099 = sum of:
    0.059350993 = product of:
      0.17805298 = sum of:
        0.17805298 = weight(_text_:3a in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.17805298 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.31681007 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 400, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=400)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.17805298 = weight(_text_:2f in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17805298 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.31681007 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = 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)
    0.17805298 = weight(_text_:2f in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17805298 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.31681007 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = 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)
    0.17805298 = weight(_text_:2f in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17805298 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.31681007 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = 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)
  0.5714286 = coord(4/7)
    Content
    Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Faclanthology.org%2FD19-5317.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0ZZFyq5wWTtNTvNkrvjlGA.
  2. Xiong, C.: Knowledge based text representations for information retrieval (2016) 0.31 
    0.310387 = product of:
  0.5431772 = sum of:
    0.03956733 = product of:
      0.11870199 = sum of:
        0.11870199 = weight(_text_:3a in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11870199 = score(doc=5820,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.31681007 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.3746787 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.16786996 = weight(_text_:2f in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16786996 = score(doc=5820,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.31681007 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.5298757 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
    0.16786996 = weight(_text_:2f in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16786996 = score(doc=5820,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.31681007 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.5298757 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
    0.16786996 = weight(_text_:2f in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16786996 = score(doc=5820,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.31681007 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.5298757 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
  0.5714286 = coord(4/7)
    Content
    Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Language and Information Technologies. Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cs.cmu.edu%2F~cx%2Fpapers%2Fknowledge_based_text_representation.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0SaTSvhWLTh__Uz_HtOtl3.
  3. Stojanovic, N.: Ontology-based Information Retrieval : methods and tools for cooperative query answering (2005) 0.23 
    0.22609904 = product of:
  0.3956733 = sum of:
    0.03956733 = product of:
      0.11870199 = sum of:
        0.11870199 = weight(_text_:3a in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11870199 = score(doc=701,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.31681007 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.3746787 = fieldWeight in 701, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=701)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.11870199 = weight(_text_:2f in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11870199 = score(doc=701,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.31681007 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.3746787 = fieldWeight in 701, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=701)
    0.11870199 = weight(_text_:2f in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11870199 = score(doc=701,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.31681007 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.3746787 = fieldWeight in 701, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=701)
    0.11870199 = weight(_text_:2f in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11870199 = score(doc=701,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.31681007 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.3746787 = fieldWeight in 701, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=701)
  0.5714286 = coord(4/7)
    Content
    Vgl.: http%3A%2F%2Fdigbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fvolltexte%2Fdocuments%2F1627&ei=tAtYUYrBNoHKtQb3l4GYBw&usg=AFQjCNHeaxKkKU3-u54LWxMNYGXaaDLCGw&sig2=8WykXWQoDKjDSdGtAakH2Q&bvm=bv.44442042,d.Yms.
  4. Priss, U.: Faceted knowledge representation (1999) 0.03 
    0.032156922 = product of:
  0.112549216 = sum of:
    0.09482904 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09482904 = score(doc=2654,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.4430163 = fieldWeight in 2654, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2654)
    0.017720178 = product of:
      0.035440356 = sum of:
        0.035440356 = weight(_text_:22 in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035440356 = score(doc=2654,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2654, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2654)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Abstract
    Faceted Knowledge Representation provides a formalism for implementing knowledge systems. The basic notions of faceted knowledge representation are "unit", "relation", "facet" and "interpretation". Units are atomic elements and can be abstract elements or refer to external objects in an application. Relations are sequences or matrices of 0 and 1's (binary matrices). Facets are relational structures that combine units and relations. Each facet represents an aspect or viewpoint of a knowledge system. Interpretations are mappings that can be used to translate between different representations. This paper introduces the basic notions of faceted knowledge representation. The formalism is applied here to an abstract modeling of a faceted thesaurus as used in information retrieval.
    Date
    22. 1.2016 17:30:31
  5. Tudhope, D.; Hodge, G.: Terminology registries (2007) 0.02 
    0.021057816 = product of:
  0.1474047 = sum of:
    0.1474047 = sum of:
      0.09677563 = weight(_text_:anwendung in 539) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.09677563 = score(doc=539,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1809185 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
            0.037368443 = queryNorm
          0.5349128 = fieldWeight in 539, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=539)
      0.05062908 = weight(_text_:22 in 539) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05062908 = score(doc=539,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.037368443 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 539, 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=539)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Date
    26.12.2011 13:22:07
    Theme
    Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
  6. Rindflesch, T.C.; Fizsman, M.: The interaction of domain knowledge and linguistic structure in natural language processing : interpreting hypernymic propositions in biomedical text (2003) 0.02 
    0.019352864 = product of:
  0.13547005 = sum of:
    0.13547005 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 2097) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13547005 = score(doc=2097,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.6328804 = fieldWeight in 2097, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2097)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Abstract
    Interpretation of semantic propositions in free-text documents such as MEDLINE citations would provide valuable support for biomedical applications, and several approaches to semantic interpretation are being pursued in the biomedical informatics community. In this paper, we describe a methodology for interpreting linguistic structures that encode hypernymic propositions, in which a more specific concept is in a taxonomic relationship with a more general concept. In order to effectively process these constructions, we exploit underspecified syntactic analysis and structured domain knowledge from the Unified Medical Language System (UMLS). After introducing the syntactic processing on which our system depends, we focus on the UMLS knowledge that supports interpretation of hypernymic propositions. We first use semantic groups from the Semantic Network to ensure that the two concepts involved are compatible; hierarchical information in the Metathesaurus then determines which concept is more general and which more specific. A preliminary evaluation of a sample based on the semantic group Chemicals and Drugs provides 83% precision. An error analysis was conducted and potential solutions to the problems encountered are presented. The research discussed here serves as a paradigm for investigating the interaction between domain knowledge and linguistic structure in natural language processing, and could also make a contribution to research on automatic processing of discourse structure. Additional implications of the system we present include its integration in advanced semantic interpretation processors for biomedical text and its use for information extraction in specific domains. The approach has the potential to support a range of applications, including information retrieval and ontology engineering.
  7. Gödert, W.: Semantische Wissensrepräsentation und Interoperabilität : Teil 2: Ein formales Modell semantischer Interoperabilität (2010) 0.02 
    0.0154822925 = product of:
  0.10837604 = sum of:
    0.10837604 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 1530) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10837604 = score(doc=1530,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.5063043 = fieldWeight in 1530, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1530)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Abstract
    In diesem zweiten Teil wird ein formales Modell zur semantischen Interoperabilität als Brücke zwischen formaler Modellierung und intellektueller Interpretation vorgestellt, das ein besseres Verständnis der zentralen Begriffe von semantischer Ähnlichkeit und Verschiedenheit von Begriffen und Klassen, sowohl als elementare Inhaltsentitäten von Dokumentationssprachen als auch als synthetische Repräsentationen von Dokumentinhalten, ermöglichen soll.
  8. Boteram, F.: Semantische Relationen in Dokumentationssprachen : vom Thesaurus zum semantischen Netz (2010) 0.01 
    0.014740471 = product of:
  0.10318329 = sum of:
    0.10318329 = sum of:
      0.06774294 = weight(_text_:anwendung in 4792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06774294 = score(doc=4792,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1809185 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
            0.037368443 = queryNorm
          0.37443897 = fieldWeight in 4792, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4792)
      0.035440356 = weight(_text_:22 in 4792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035440356 = score(doc=4792,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.037368443 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4792, 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=4792)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Source
    Wissensspeicher in digitalen Räumen: Nachhaltigkeit - Verfügbarkeit - semantische Interoperabilität. Proceedings der 11. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation, Konstanz, 20. bis 22. Februar 2008. Hrsg.: J. Sieglerschmidt u. H.P.Ohly
    Theme
    Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
  9. Helbig, H.: Wissensverarbeitung und die Semantik der natürlichen Sprache : Wissensrepräsentation mit MultiNet (2008) 0.01 
    0.013684542 = product of:
  0.09579179 = sum of:
    0.09579179 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 2731) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09579179 = score(doc=2731,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.44751403 = fieldWeight in 2731, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2731)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Abstract
    Das Buch gibt eine umfassende Darstellung einer Methodik zur Interpretation und Bedeutungsrepräsentation natürlichsprachlicher Ausdrücke. Diese Methodik der "Mehrschichtigen Erweiterten Semantischen Netze", das sogenannte MultiNet-Paradigma, ist sowohl für theoretische Untersuchungen als auch für die automatische Verarbeitung natürlicher Sprache auf dem Rechner geeignet. Im ersten Teil des zweiteiligen Buches werden grundlegende Probleme der semantischen Repräsentation von Wissen bzw. der semantischen Interpretation natürlichsprachlicher Phänomene behandelt. Der zweite Teil enthält eine systematische Zusammenstellung des gesamten Repertoires von Darstellungsmitteln, die jeweils nach einem einheitlichen Schema beschrieben werden. Er dient als Kompendium der im Buch verwendeten formalen Beschreibungsmittel von MultiNet. Die vorgestellten Ergebnisse sind eingebettet in ein System von Software-Werkzeugen, die eine praktische Nutzung der MultiNet-Darstellungsmittel als Formalismus zur Bedeutungsrepräsentation im Rahmen der automatischen Sprachverarbeitung sichern. Hierzu gehören: eine Werkbank für den Wissensingenieur, ein Übersetzungssystem zur automatischen Gewinnung von Bedeutungsdarstellungen natürlichsprachlicher Sätze und eine Werkbank für den Computerlexikographen. Der Inhalt des Buches beruht auf jahrzehntelanger Forschung auf dem Gebiet der automatischen Sprachverarbeitung und wurde mit Vorlesungen zur Künstlichen Intelligenz und Wissensverarbeitung an der TU Dresden und der FernUniversität Hagen wiederholt in der Hochschullehre eingesetzt. Als Vorkenntnisse werden beim Leser lediglich Grundlagen der traditionellen Grammatik und elementare Kenntnisse der Prädikatenlogik vorausgesetzt.
  10. Burstein, M.; McDermott, D.V.: Ontology translation for interoperability among Semantic Web services (2005) 0.01 
    0.013684542 = product of:
  0.09579179 = sum of:
    0.09579179 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 2661) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09579179 = score(doc=2661,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.44751403 = fieldWeight in 2661, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2661)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Abstract
    Research on semantic web services promises greater interoperability among software agents and web services by enabling content-based automated service discovery and interaction and by utilizing. Although this is to be based on use of shared ontologies published on the semantic web, services produced and described by different developers may well use different, perhaps partly overlapping, sets of ontologies. Interoperability will depend on ontology mappings and architectures supporting the associated translation processes. The question we ask is, does the traditional approach of introducing mediator agents to translate messages between requestors and services work in such an open environment? This article reviews some of the processing assumptions that were made in the development of the semantic web service modeling ontology OWL-S and argues that, as a practical matter, the translation function cannot always be isolated in mediators. Ontology mappings need to be published on the semantic web just as ontologies themselves are. The translation for service discovery, service process model interpretation, task negotiation, service invocation, and response interpretation may then be distributed to various places in the architecture so that translation can be done in the specific goal-oriented informational contexts of the agents performing these processes. We present arguments for assigning translation responsibility to particular agents in the cases of service invocation, response translation, and match- making.
  11. Hohmann, G.: ¬Die Anwendung des CIDOC-CRM für die semantische Wissensrepräsentation in den Kulturwissenschaften (2010) 0.01 
    0.01263469 = product of:
  0.088442825 = sum of:
    0.088442825 = sum of:
      0.058065377 = weight(_text_:anwendung in 4011) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.058065377 = score(doc=4011,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1809185 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
            0.037368443 = queryNorm
          0.3209477 = fieldWeight in 4011, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4011)
      0.030377446 = weight(_text_:22 in 4011) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.030377446 = score(doc=4011,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.037368443 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4011, 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=4011)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Source
    Wissensspeicher in digitalen Räumen: Nachhaltigkeit - Verfügbarkeit - semantische Interoperabilität. Proceedings der 11. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation, Konstanz, 20. bis 22. Februar 2008. Hrsg.: J. Sieglerschmidt u. H.P.Ohly
  12. Peters, I.; Stock, W.G.: Folksonomies in Wissensrepräsentation und Information Retrieval (2008) 0.01 
    0.01161172 = product of:
  0.081282035 = sum of:
    0.081282035 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 1597) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.081282035 = score(doc=1597,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.37972826 = fieldWeight in 1597, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1597)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Abstract
    Die populären Web 2.0-Dienste werden von Prosumern - Produzenten und gleichsam Konsumenten - nicht nur dazu genutzt, Inhalte zu produzieren, sondern auch, um sie inhaltlich zu erschließen. Folksonomies erlauben es dem Nutzer, Dokumente mit eigenen Schlagworten, sog. Tags, zu beschreiben, ohne dabei auf gewisse Regeln oder Vorgaben achten zu müssen. Neben einigen Vorteilen zeigen Folksonomies aber auch zahlreiche Schwächen (u. a. einen Mangel an Präzision). Um diesen Nachteilen größtenteils entgegenzuwirken, schlagen wir eine Interpretation der Tags als natürlichsprachige Wörter vor. Dadurch ist es uns möglich, Methoden des Natural Language Processing (NLP) auf die Tags anzuwenden und so linguistische Probleme der Tags zu beseitigen. Darüber hinaus diskutieren wir Ansätze und weitere Vorschläge (Tagverteilungen, Kollaboration und akteurspezifische Aspekte) hinsichtlich eines Relevance Rankings von getaggten Dokumenten. Neben Vorschlägen auf ähnliche Dokumente ("more like this!") erlauben Folksonomies auch Hinweise auf verwandte Nutzer und damit auf Communities ("more like me!").
  13. Becker, H.-G.; Förster, F.: Vernetztes Wissen : Ereignisse in der bibliografischen Dokumentation (2010) 0.01 
    0.01161172 = product of:
  0.081282035 = sum of:
    0.081282035 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 3494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.081282035 = score(doc=3494,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.37972826 = fieldWeight in 3494, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3494)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Abstract
    Innerhalb der Gedächtnisinstitutionen Bibliothek, Museum und Archiv gibt es je eigene Beschreibungsmodelle der beherbergten Objekte und Materialien. Für eine genauere bibliografische Erschließung wurde im Bibliotheksbereich das von Benutzerbedürfnissen ausgehende, statische Modell "Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records" (FRBR) geschaffen, dessen ungenauer »Werk«-Begriff ebenso thematisiert wird wie die schwer zu realisierende Übertragbarkeit des Modells auf Nicht-Buchmaterialien. Die Museumswelt orientiert die Darstellung ihrer Bestände am CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model (CRM), das sich hinsichtlich der Beschreibung heterogener Museumsobjekte, also Artefakten künstlerischer und intellektueller Gestaltung, als hilfreich erwiesen hat. In gegenseitigem Austausch zwischen IFLA und ICOM wurde FRBR mit CRM harmonisiert. Das Ergebnis, FRBRoo (objektorientiertes FRBR), zeigt seine Vorzüge zum einen in einer strengeren Interpretation der Entitäten der Gruppe 1 des FRBR-Modells und zum anderen in einer genaueren Abbildung von Prozessen bzw. Ereignissen. Beispiele zum Anwendungsbezug von FRBRoo zeigen dessen Zugewinn für die wissenschaftliche Erschließung hand-, druck- und online-schriftlicher Quellen, Werken der Darstellenden Kunst, Landkarten und Musikalien innerhalb einer CRM-basierten Datenbank.
  14. Koutsomitropoulos, D.A.; Solomou, G.D.; Alexopoulos, A.D.; Papatheodorou, T.S.: Semantic metadata interoperability and inference-based querying in digital repositories (2009) 0.01 
    0.01161172 = product of:
  0.081282035 = sum of:
    0.081282035 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 3731) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.081282035 = score(doc=3731,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.37972826 = fieldWeight in 3731, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3731)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Abstract
    Metadata applications have evolved in time into highly structured "islands of information" about digital resources, often bearing a strong semantic interpretation. Scarcely however are these semantics being communicated in machine readable and understandable ways. At the same time, the process for transforming the implied metadata knowledge into explicit Semantic Web descriptions can be problematic and is not always evident. In this article we take upon the well-established Dublin Core metadata standard as well as other metadata schemata, which often appear in digital repositories set-ups, and suggest a proper Semantic Web OWL ontology. In this process the authors cope with discrepancies and incompatibilities, indicative of such attempts, in novel ways. Moreover, we show the potential and necessity of this approach by demonstrating inferences on the resulting ontology, instantiated with actual metadata records. The authors conclude by presenting a working prototype that provides for inference-based querying on top of digital repositories.
  15. Starostenko, O.; Rodríguez-Asomoza, J.; Sénchez-López, S.E.; Chévez-Aragón, J.A.: Shape indexing and retrieval : a hybrid approach using ontological description (2008) 0.01 
    0.01161172 = product of:
  0.081282035 = sum of:
    0.081282035 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 4318) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.081282035 = score(doc=4318,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.37972826 = fieldWeight in 4318, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4318)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Abstract
    This paper presents a novel hybrid approach for visual information retrieval (VIR) that combines shape analysis of objects in image with their indexing by textual descriptions. The principal goal of presented technique is applying Two Segments Turning Function (2STF) proposed by authors for efficient invariant to spatial variations shape processing and implementation of semantic Web approaches for ontology-based user-oriented annotations of multimedia information. In the proposed approach the user's textual queries are converted to image features, which are used for images searching, indexing, interpretation, and retrieval. A decision about similarity between retrieved image and user's query is taken computing the shape convergence to 2STF combining it with matching the ontological annotations of objects in image and providing in this way automatic definition of the machine-understandable semantics. In order to evaluate the proposed approach the Image Retrieval by Ontological Description of Shapes system has been designed and tested using some standard image domains.
  16. Uren, V.; Cimiano, P.; Iria, J.; Handschuh, S.; Vargas-Vera, M.; Motta, E.; Ciravegnac, F.: Semantic annotation for knowledge management : requirements and a survey of the state of the art (2006) 0.01 
    0.01161172 = product of:
  0.081282035 = sum of:
    0.081282035 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 229) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.081282035 = score(doc=229,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.37972826 = fieldWeight in 229, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=229)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Abstract
    While much of a company's knowledge can be found in text repositories, current content management systems have limited capabilities for structuring and interpreting documents. In the emerging Semantic Web, search, interpretation and aggregation can be addressed by ontology-based semantic mark-up. In this paper, we examine semantic annotation, identify a number of requirements, and review the current generation of semantic annotation systems. This analysis shows that, while there is still some way to go before semantic annotation tools will be able to address fully all the knowledge management needs, research in the area is active and making good progress.
  17. Wunner, T.; Buitelaar, P.; O'Riain, S.: Semantic, terminological and linguistic interpretation of XBRL (2010) 0.01 
    0.01161172 = product of:
  0.081282035 = sum of:
    0.081282035 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 1122) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.081282035 = score(doc=1122,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.37972826 = fieldWeight in 1122, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1122)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
  18. Tzitzikas, Y.; Spyratos, N.; Constantopoulos, P.; Analyti, A.: Extended faceted ontologies (2002) 0.01 
    0.01161172 = product of:
  0.081282035 = sum of:
    0.081282035 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 2280) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.081282035 = score(doc=2280,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.37972826 = fieldWeight in 2280, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2280)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Abstract
    A faceted ontology consists of a set of facets, where each facet consists of a predefined set of terms structured by a subsumption relation. We propose two extensions of faceted ontologies, which allow inferring conjunctions of terms that are valid in the underlying domain. We give a model-theoretic interpretation to these extended faceted ontologies and we provide mechanisms for inferring the valid conjunctions of terms. This inference service can be exploited for preventing errors during the indexing process and for deriving navigation trees that are suitable for browsing. The proposed scheme has several advantages by comparison to the hierarchical classification schemes that are currently used, namely: conceptual clarity: it is easier to understand, compactness: it takes less space, and scalability: the update operations can be formulated easier and be performed more efficiently.
  19. Müller, T.: Wissensrepräsentation mit semantischen Netzen im Bereich Luftfahrt (2006) 0.01 
    0.010528908 = product of:
  0.07370235 = sum of:
    0.07370235 = sum of:
      0.048387814 = weight(_text_:anwendung in 1670) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.048387814 = score(doc=1670,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1809185 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
            0.037368443 = queryNorm
          0.2674564 = fieldWeight in 1670, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1670)
      0.02531454 = weight(_text_:22 in 1670) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02531454 = score(doc=1670,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.037368443 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1670, 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=1670)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Date
    26. 9.2006 21:00:22
    Theme
    Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
  20. Will, L.D.: UML model : as given in British Standard Draft for Development DD8723-5:2008 (2008) 0.01 
    0.009677563 = product of:
  0.06774294 = sum of:
    0.06774294 = product of:
      0.13548587 = sum of:
        0.13548587 = weight(_text_:anwendung in 7636) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13548587 = score(doc=7636,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1809185 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.74887794 = fieldWeight in 7636, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=7636)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Theme
    Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 74
  • d 34
  • f 1
  • pt 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 77
  • el 28
  • x 12
  • m 8
  • r 4
  • n 2
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications