Search (193 results, page 1 of 10)

0.33729967 = product of:
  0.6071394 = sum of:
    0.046703033 = product of:
      0.14010909 = sum of:
        0.14010909 = weight(_text_:3a in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14010909 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24929643 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = 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)
    0.14010909 = weight(_text_:2f in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14010909 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24929643 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02940506 = 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)
    0.14010909 = weight(_text_:2f in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14010909 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24929643 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02940506 = 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)
    0.14010909 = weight(_text_:2f in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14010909 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24929643 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02940506 = 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)
    0.14010909 = weight(_text_:2f in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14010909 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24929643 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02940506 = 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)
  0.5555556 = coord(5/9)

Content

Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Faclanthology.org%2FD19-5317.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0ZZFyq5wWTtNTvNkrvjlGA.

0.018232105 = product of:
  0.082044475 = sum of:
    0.014680246 = product of:
      0.029360492 = sum of:
        0.029360492 = weight(_text_:web in 2864) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029360492 = score(doc=2864,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.3059541 = fieldWeight in 2864, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2864)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.06736423 = product of:
      0.13472846 = sum of:
        0.13472846 = weight(_text_:bewertung in 2864) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13472846 = score(doc=2864,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.18575147 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.31699 = idf(docFreq=216, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.72531575 = fieldWeight in 2864, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              6.31699 = idf(docFreq=216, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2864)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Der vorliegende Artikel beleuchtet und bewertet Social Tagging als aktuelles Phänomen des Web 2.0 im Kontext bekannter Techniken der semantischen Datenorganisation. Tagging wird in einen Raum verwandter Ordnungs- und Strukturierungsansätze eingeordnet, um die fundamentalen Grundlagen des Social Tagging zu identifizieren und zuzuweisen. Dabei wird Tagging anhand des Inclusive Universal Access Paradigmas bewertet, das technische als auch menschlich-soziale Kriterien für die inklusive und barrierefreie Bereitstellung und Nutzung von Diensten definiert. Anhand dieser Bewertung werden fundamentale Prinzipien des "Inclusive Social Tagging" hergeleitet, die der Charakterisierung und Bewertung gängiger Tagging-Funktionalitäten in verbreiteten Web-2.0-Diensten dienen. Aus der Bewertung werden insbesondere Entwicklungsmöglichkeiten von Social Tagging und unterstützenden Diensten erkennbar.

0.008868592 = product of:
  0.039908662 = sum of:
    0.023972742 = product of:
      0.047945485 = sum of:
        0.047945485 = weight(_text_:web in 3376) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047945485 = score(doc=3376,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.49962097 = fieldWeight in 3376, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3376)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.015935918 = product of:
      0.031871837 = sum of:
        0.031871837 = weight(_text_:22 in 3376) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031871837 = score(doc=3376,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3376, 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=3376)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

This chapter presents ontologies and their role in the creation of the Semantic Web. Ontologies hold special interest, because they are very closely related to the way we understand the world. They provide common understanding, the very first step to successful communication. In following sections, we will present ontologies, how they are created and used. We will describe available tools for specifying and working with ontologies.

Date

31. 7.2010 16:58:22

Theme

Semantic Web

0.007269542 = product of:
  0.03271294 = sum of:
    0.020761002 = product of:
      0.041522004 = sum of:
        0.041522004 = weight(_text_:web in 2418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041522004 = score(doc=2418,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.43268442 = fieldWeight in 2418, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2418)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.011951938 = product of:
      0.023903877 = sum of:
        0.023903877 = weight(_text_:22 in 2418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023903877 = score(doc=2418,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2418, 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=2418)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Integrated digital access to multiple collections is a prominent issue for many Cultural Heritage institutions. The metadata describing diverse collections must be interoperable, which requires aligning the controlled vocabularies that are used to annotate objects from these collections. In this paper, we present an experiment where we match the vocabularies of two collections by applying the Knowledge Representation techniques established in recent Semantic Web research. We discuss the steps that are required for such matching, namely formalising the initial resources using Semantic Web languages, and running ontology mapping tools on the resulting representations. In addition, we present a prototype that enables the user to browse the two collections using the obtained alignment while still providing her with the original vocabulary structures.

Source

Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 10th European conference, proceedings / ECDL 2006, Alicante, Spain, September 17 - 22, 2006

Theme

Semantic Web

0.0060579525 = product of:
  0.027260786 = sum of:
    0.017300837 = product of:
      0.034601673 = sum of:
        0.034601673 = weight(_text_:web in 2829) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034601673 = score(doc=2829,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.36057037 = fieldWeight in 2829, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2829)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.009959949 = product of:
      0.019919898 = sum of:
        0.019919898 = weight(_text_:22 in 2829) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019919898 = score(doc=2829,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2829, 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=2829)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Knowledge organization faces the challenge of managing the amount of knowledge available on the Web. Published literature in biomedical sciences is a huge source of knowledge, which can only efficiently be managed through automatic methods. The conventional channel for reporting scientific results is Web electronic publishing. Despite its advances, scientific articles are still published in print formats such as portable document format (PDF). Semantic Web and Linked Data technologies provides new opportunities for communicating, sharing, and integrating scientific knowledge that can overcome the limitations of the current print format. Here is proposed a semantic model of scholarly electronic articles in biomedical sciences that can overcome the limitations of traditional flat records formats. Scientific knowledge consists of claims made throughout article texts, especially when semantic elements such as questions, hypotheses and conclusions are stated. These elements, although having different roles, express relationships between phenomena. Once such knowledge units are extracted and represented with technologies such as RDF (Resource Description Framework) and linked data, they may be integrated in reasoning chains. Thereby, the results of scientific research can be published and shared in structured formats, enabling crawling by software agents, semantic retrieval, knowledge reuse, validation of scientific results, and identification of traces of scientific discoveries.

Date

12. 3.2016 13:17:22

0.005918263 = product of:
  0.026632184 = sum of:
    0.014680246 = product of:
      0.029360492 = sum of:
        0.029360492 = weight(_text_:web in 4011) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029360492 = score(doc=4011,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.3059541 = fieldWeight in 4011, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4011)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.011951938 = product of:
      0.023903877 = sum of:
        0.023903877 = weight(_text_:22 in 4011) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023903877 = score(doc=4011,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Das CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model (CRM) ist eine Ontologie für den Bereich des Kulturellen Erbes, die als ISO 21127 standardisiert ist. Inzwischen liegen auch OWL-DL-Implementationen des CRM vor, die ihren Einsatz auch im Semantic Web ermöglicht. OWL-DL ist eine entscheidbare Untermenge der Web Ontology Language, die vom W3C spezifiziert wurde. Lokale Anwendungsontologien, die ebenfalls in OWL-DL modelliert werden, können über Subklassenbeziehungen mit dem CRM als Referenzontologie verbunden werden. Dadurch wird es automatischen Prozessen ermöglicht, autonom heterogene Daten semantisch zu validieren, zueinander in Bezug zu setzen und Anfragen über verschiedene Datenbestände innerhalb der Wissensdomäne zu verarbeiten und zu beantworten.

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

0.005918263 = product of:
  0.026632184 = sum of:
    0.014680246 = product of:
      0.029360492 = sum of:
        0.029360492 = weight(_text_:web in 3387) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029360492 = score(doc=3387,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.3059541 = fieldWeight in 3387, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3387)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.011951938 = product of:
      0.023903877 = sum of:
        0.023903877 = weight(_text_:22 in 3387) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023903877 = score(doc=3387,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3387, 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=3387)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Libraries are the tools we use to learn and to answer our questions. The quality of our work depends, among others, on the quality of the tools we use. Recent research in digital libraries is focused, on one hand on improving the infrastructure of the digital library management systems (DLMS), and on the other on improving the metadata models used to annotate collections of objects maintained by DLMS. The latter includes, among others, the semantic web and social networking technologies. Recently, the semantic web and social networking technologies are being introduced to the digital libraries domain. The expected outcome is that the overall quality of information discovery in digital libraries can be improved by employing social and semantic technologies. In this chapter we present the results of an evaluation of social and semantic end-user information discovery services for the digital libraries.

Date

1. 8.2010 12:35:22

0.005789892 = product of:
  0.026054513 = sum of:
    0.012110585 = product of:
      0.02422117 = sum of:
        0.02422117 = weight(_text_:web in 3694) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02422117 = score(doc=3694,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.25239927 = fieldWeight in 3694, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3694)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.013943928 = product of:
      0.027887857 = sum of:
        0.027887857 = weight(_text_:22 in 3694) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027887857 = score(doc=3694,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3694, 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=3694)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

A method to develop a prototype domain ontology has been described. The domain selected for the study is Accelerator Driven Systems. This is a multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary subject comprising Nuclear Physics, Nuclear and Reactor Engineering, Reactor Fuels and Radioactive Waste Management. Since Accelerator Driven Systems is a vast topic, select areas in it were singled out for the study. Both qualitative and quantitative methods such as Content analysis, Facet analysis and Clustering were used, to develop the web-based model.

Date

22. 7.2010 19:41:16

0.005789892 = product of:
  0.026054513 = sum of:
    0.012110585 = product of:
      0.02422117 = sum of:
        0.02422117 = weight(_text_:web in 1437) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02422117 = score(doc=1437,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.25239927 = fieldWeight in 1437, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1437)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.013943928 = product of:
      0.027887857 = sum of:
        0.027887857 = weight(_text_:22 in 1437) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027887857 = score(doc=1437,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1437, 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=1437)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

This paper describes to construct faceted ontologies for domain modeling. Building upon the faceted theory of S.R. Ranganathan (1967), the paper intends to address the faceted classification approach applied to build domain ontologies. As classificatory ontologies are employed to represent the relationships of entities and objects on the web, the faceted approach helps to analyze domain representation in an effective way for modeling. Based on this perspective, an ontology of the music domain has been analyzed that would serve as a case study.

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik

0.0056054243 = product of:
  0.05044882 = sum of:
    0.05044882 = product of:
      0.10089764 = sum of:
        0.10089764 = weight(_text_:seite in 3143) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10089764 = score(doc=3143,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16469958 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.601063 = idf(docFreq=443, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.61261624 = fieldWeight in 3143, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.601063 = idf(docFreq=443, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3143)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Abstract

Topic Maps auf der einen Seite und das Programm Concepto auf der anderen Seite werden beschrieben. Mt Topic Maps können Wortnetze und einfache Satzstrukturen dargestellt werden. Concepto dient zur Erfassung, Bearbeitung und Visualisierung von Wortschatz und Strukturen. Es unterstützt ein Wortmodell, bei dem die verschiedenen Lesarten eines Wortes erfasst und einfachen, formalsprachlichen Begriffen zugewiesen werden können. Die Funktionen beider Systeme werden verglichen. Es wird dargestellt, was an Topic Maps und an Concepto ergänzt werden müsste, wenn beide Systeme einen kompatiblen, wechselseitigen Datenaustausch zulassen sollen. Diese Erweiterungen würden die Anwendbarkeit der Systeme noch interessanter machen.

0.005542869 = product of:
  0.024942912 = sum of:
    0.014982964 = product of:
      0.029965928 = sum of:
        0.029965928 = weight(_text_:web in 1434) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029965928 = score(doc=1434,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.3122631 = fieldWeight in 1434, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1434)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.009959949 = product of:
      0.019919898 = sum of:
        0.019919898 = weight(_text_:22 in 1434) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019919898 = score(doc=1434,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1434, 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=1434)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Knowledge organization of large-scale content on the Web requires substantial amounts of semantic metadata that is expensive to generate manually. Recent developments in Web technologies have enabled any user to tag documents and other forms of content thereby generating metadata that could help organize knowledge. However, merely adding one or more tags to a document is highly inadequate to capture the aboutness of the document and thereby to support powerful semantic functions such as automatic classification, question answering or true semantic search and retrieval. This is true even when the tags used are labels from a well-designed classification system such as a thesaurus or taxonomy. There is a strong need to develop a semantic tagging mechanism with sufficient expressive power to capture the aboutness of each part of a document or dataset or multimedia content in order to enable applications that can benefit from knowledge organization on the Web. This article proposes a highly expressive mechanism of using ontology snippets as semantic tags that map portions of a document or a part of a dataset or a segment of a multimedia content to concepts and relations in an ontology of the domain(s) of interest.

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik

0.005542869 = product of:
  0.024942912 = sum of:
    0.014982964 = product of:
      0.029965928 = sum of:
        0.029965928 = weight(_text_:web in 4553) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029965928 = score(doc=4553,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.3122631 = fieldWeight in 4553, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4553)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.009959949 = product of:
      0.019919898 = sum of:
        0.019919898 = weight(_text_:22 in 4553) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019919898 = score(doc=4553,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4553, 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=4553)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Semantic Web knowledge representation standards, and in particular RDF and OWL, often come endowed with a formal semantics which is considered to be of fundamental importance for the field. Reasoning, i.e., the drawing of logical inferences from knowledge expressed in such standards, is traditionally based on logical deductive methods and algorithms which can be proven to be sound and complete and terminating, i.e. correct in a very strong sense. For various reasons, though, in particular the scalability issues arising from the ever increasing amounts of Semantic Web data available and the inability of deductive algorithms to deal with noise in the data, it has been argued that alternative means of reasoning should be investigated which bear high promise for high scalability and better robustness. From this perspective, deductive algorithms can be considered the gold standard regarding correctness against which alternative methods need to be tested. In this paper, we show that it is possible to train a Deep Learning system on RDF knowledge graphs, such that it is able to perform reasoning over new RDF knowledge graphs, with high precision and recall compared to the deductive gold standard.

Date

16.11.2018 14:22:01

Theme

Semantic Web

0.005309254 = product of:
  0.047783285 = sum of:
    0.047783285 = sum of:
      0.012110585 = weight(_text_:web in 6027) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.012110585 = score(doc=6027,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02940506 = queryNorm
          0.12619963 = fieldWeight in 6027, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=6027)
      0.035672702 = weight(_text_:seite in 6027) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035672702 = score(doc=6027,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16469958 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.601063 = idf(docFreq=443, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02940506 = queryNorm
          0.21659255 = fieldWeight in 6027, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.601063 = idf(docFreq=443, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=6027)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Content

"Mit einer semantischen Erweiterung der Software MediaWiki ist es dem Forschungsteam Wissensmanagement des Instituts für Angewandte Informatik und Formale Beschreibungsverfahren (AIFB) der Universität Karlsruhe (TH) gelungen, das Interesse der internationalen Fachwelt auf sich zu ziehen. Die jungen Forscher Denny Vrandecic und Markus Krötzsch aus dem Team von Professor Dr. Rudi Studer machen die Inhalte von Websites, die mit MediaWiki geschrieben sind, für Maschinen besser auswertbar. Ihr Konzept zur besseren Erschließung der Inhalte geht allerdings nur auf, wenn die Wiki-Autoren aktiv mitarbeiten. Die Karlsruher Forscher setzen auf eine Kombination aus sozialer und technischer Lösung: Sie hoffen, dass sich auf der Basis ihrer Wiki-PlugIn-Software "Semantic MediaWiki" eine Art kollektive Indexierung der Wiki-Artikel durch die Autoren entwickelt - und ernten für diese Idee viel Beifall. Semantic MediaWiki wird bereits auf mehreren Websites mit begrenztem Datenvolumen erfolgreich eingesetzt, unter anderen zur Erschließung der Bibel-Inhalte (URLs siehe Kasten). Nun testen die Karlsruher Forscher, ob ihr Programm auch den gigantischen Volumenanforderungen der freien Web-Enzyklopädie Wikipedia gewachsen ist. Die Wikimedia Foundation Inc., Betreiber von Wikipedia, stellt ihnen für den Test rund 50 Gigabyte Inhalt der englischen Wikipedia-Ausgabe zur Verfügung und hat Interesse an einer Zusammenarbeit signalisiert. Semantic MediaWiki steht als Open Source Software (PHP) auf der Website Sourceforge zur Verfügung. Semantic MediaWiki ist ein relativ einfach zu bedienendes Werkzeug, welches auf leistungsstarken semantischen Wissensmanagement-Technologien aufbaut. Die Autoren können mit dem Werkzeug die Querverweise (Links), die sie in ihrem Text als Weiterleitung zu Hintergrundinformationen angeben, bei der Eingabe als Link eines bestimmten Typs kennzeichnen (typed links) und Zahlenangaben und Fakten im Text als Attribute (attributes) markieren. Bei dem Eintrag zu "Ägypten" steht dann zum Bespiel der typisierte Link "[[ist Land von::Afrika]]" / "[[is country of::africa]]", ein Attribut könnte "[[Bevölkerung:=76,000,000]]" / "[[population:=76,000,000]]" sein. Die von den Autoren erzeugten, typisierten Links werden in einer Datenbank als Dreier-Bezugsgruppen (Triple) abgelegt; die gekennzeichneten Attribute als feststehende Werte gespeichert. Die Autoren können die Relationen zur Definition der Beziehungen zwischen den verlinkten Begriffen frei wählen, z.B. "ist ...von' / "is...of", "hat..." /"has ...". Eingeführte Relationen stehen als "bisher genutzte Relationen" den anderen Schreibern für deren Textindexierung zur Verfügung.
Aus den so festgelegten Beziehungen zwischen den verlinkten Begriffen sollen Computer automatisch sinnvolle Antworten auf komplexere Anfragen generieren können; z.B. eine Liste erzeugen, in der alle Länder von Afrika aufgeführt sind. Die Ländernamen führen als Link zurück zu dem Eintrag, in dem sie stehen - dem Artikel zum Land, für das man sich interessiert. Aus informationswissenschaftlicher Sicht ist das Informationsergebnis, das die neue Technologie produziert, relativ simpel. Aus sozialwissenschaftlicher Sicht steckt darin aber ein riesiges Potential zur Verbesserung der Bereitstellung von enzyklopädischer Information und Wissen für Menschen auf der ganzen Welt. Spannend ist auch die durch Semantic MediaWiki gegebene Möglichkeit der automatischen Zusammenführung von Informationen, die in den verschiedenen Wiki-Einträgen verteilt sind, bei einer hohen Konsistenz der Ergebnisse. Durch die feststehenden Beziehungen zwischen den Links enthält die automatisch erzeugte Liste nach Angaben der Karlsruher Forscher immer die gleichen Daten, egal, von welcher Seite aus man sie abruft. Die Suchmaschine holt sich die Bevölkerungszahl von Ägypten immer vom festgelegten Ägypten-Eintrag, so dass keine unterschiedlichen Zahlen in der Wiki-Landschaft kursieren können. Ein mit Semantic MediaWiki erstellter Testeintrag zu Deutschland kann unter http://ontoworld.org/index.php/Germany eingesehen werden. Die Faktenbox im unteren Teil des Eintrags zeigt an, was der "Eintrag" der Suchmaschine an Wissen über Deutschland anbieten kann. Diese Ergebnisse werden auch in dem Datenbeschreibungsstandard RDF angeboten. Mehr als das, was in der Faktenbox steht, kann der Eintrag nicht an die Suchmaschine abgeben."

0.004962764 = product of:
  0.02233244 = sum of:
    0.010380501 = product of:
      0.020761002 = sum of:
        0.020761002 = weight(_text_:web in 4095) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020761002 = score(doc=4095,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 4095, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4095)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.011951938 = product of:
      0.023903877 = sum of:
        0.023903877 = weight(_text_:22 in 4095) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023903877 = score(doc=4095,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4095, 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=4095)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Das Konzept des Semantic Web befindet sich gegenwärtig auf dem Weg von der Vision zur Realisierung und ist "noch gestaltbar", ebenso wie eine seiner Grundkonzeptionen, die Ontologie. Trotz der stetig wachsenden Anzahl der Forschungsarbeiten werden Ontologien primär aus der Sicht semantischer Technologien untersucht, Probleme der Ontologie als Begriffssystem werden in der Ontologieforschung nur partiell angetastet - für die praktische Arbeit erweist sich dieses als bedeutender Mangel. In diesem Bericht wird die Notwendigkeit, eine Ontologie aus der Sicht der Dokumentationssprache zu erforschen, als Fragestellung formuliert, außerdem werden einige schon erarbeitete theoretische Ansätze skizzenhaft dargestellt. Als Beispiel aus der Praxis wird das Material des von der DFG geförderten und am Hermann von Helmholtz-Zentrum für Kulturtechnik der Humboldt Universität zu Berlin durchgeführten Projektes "Entwicklung einer Ontologie der Wissenschaftsdisziplinen" einbezogen.

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

0.004962764 = product of:
  0.02233244 = sum of:
    0.010380501 = product of:
      0.020761002 = sum of:
        0.020761002 = weight(_text_:web in 2024) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020761002 = score(doc=2024,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 2024, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2024)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.011951938 = product of:
      0.023903877 = sum of:
        0.023903877 = weight(_text_:22 in 2024) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023903877 = score(doc=2024,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2024, 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=2024)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Source

Bulletin of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 41(2015) no.4, S.18-22

Theme

Semantic Web

0.0046789395 = product of:
  0.021055227 = sum of:
    0.009786831 = product of:
      0.019573662 = sum of:
        0.019573662 = weight(_text_:web in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019573662 = score(doc=2654,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.2039694 = fieldWeight in 2654, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2654)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.011268396 = product of:
      0.022536792 = sum of:
        0.022536792 = weight(_text_:22 in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022536792 = score(doc=2654,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.21886435 = fieldWeight in 2654, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2654)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

In order to transfer the Chinese Classified Thesaurus (CCT) into a machine-processable format and provide CCT-based Web services, a pilot study has been conducted in which a variety of selected CCT classes and mapped thesaurus entries are encoded with SKOS. OWL and RDFS are also used to encode the same contents for the purposes of feasibility and cost-benefit comparison. CCT is a collected effort led by the National Library of China. It is an integration of the national standards Chinese Library Classification (CLC) 4th edition and Chinese Thesaurus (CT). As a manually created mapping product, CCT provides for each of the classes the corresponding thesaurus terms, and vice versa. The coverage of CCT includes four major clusters: philosophy, social sciences and humanities, natural sciences and technologies, and general works. There are 22 main-classes, 52,992 sub-classes and divisions, 110,837 preferred thesaurus terms, 35,690 entry terms (non-preferred terms), and 59,738 pre-coordinated headings (Chinese Classified Thesaurus, 2005) Major challenges of encoding this large vocabulary comes from its integrated structure. CCT is a result of the combination of two structures (illustrated in Figure 1): a thesaurus that uses ISO-2788 standardized structure and a classification scheme that is basically enumerative, but provides some flexibility for several kinds of synthetic mechanisms Other challenges include the complex relationships caused by differences of granularities of two original schemes and their presentation with various levels of SKOS elements; as well as the diverse coordination of entries due to the use of auxiliary tables and pre-coordinated headings derived from combining classes, subdivisions, and thesaurus terms, which do not correspond to existing unique identifiers. The poster reports the progress, shares the sample SKOS entries, and summarizes problems identified during the SKOS encoding process. Although OWL Lite and OWL Full provide richer expressiveness, the cost-benefit issues and the final purposes of encoding CCT raise questions of using such approaches.

Source

Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas

Theme

Semantic Web

0.004135637 = product of:
  0.018610368 = sum of:
    0.008650418 = product of:
      0.017300837 = sum of:
        0.017300837 = weight(_text_:web in 106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017300837 = score(doc=106,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 106, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=106)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.009959949 = product of:
      0.019919898 = sum of:
        0.019919898 = weight(_text_:22 in 106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019919898 = score(doc=106,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 106, 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=106)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to identify the concepts, component parts and relationships between vocabularies, linked data and knowledge graphs (KGs) from the perspectives of data and knowledge transitions. Design/methodology/approach This paper uses conceptual analysis methods. This study focuses on distinguishing concepts and analyzing composition and intercorrelations to explore data and knowledge transitions. Findings Vocabularies are the cornerstone for accurately building understanding of the meaning of data. Vocabularies provide for a data-sharing model and play an important role in supporting the semantic expression of linked data and defining the schema layer; they are also used for entity recognition, alignment and linkage for KGs. KGs, which consist of a schema layer and a data layer, are presented as cubes that organically combine vocabularies, linked data and big data. Originality/value This paper first describes the composition of vocabularies, linked data and KGs. More importantly, this paper innovatively analyzes and summarizes the interrelatedness of these factors, which comes from frequent interactions between data and knowledge. The three factors empower each other and can ultimately empower the Semantic Web.

Date

22. 1.2021 14:24:32

0.0040368615 = product of:
  0.036331754 = sum of:
    0.036331754 = product of:
      0.07266351 = sum of:
        0.07266351 = weight(_text_:web in 4061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07266351 = score(doc=4061,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.75719774 = fieldWeight in 4061, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4061)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Abstract

Dieser Artikel gibt einen Einblick in die aktuelle Verschmelzung von Web 2.0-und Semantic Web-Ansätzen, die als Social Semantic Web beschrieben werden kann. Die Grundidee des Social Semantic Web wird beschrieben und einzelne erste Anwendungsbeispiele vorgestellt. Ein wesentlicher Schwerpunkt dieser Entwicklung besteht in der Umsetzung neuer Methoden und Herangehensweisen im Bereich der Wissensrepräsentation. Dieser Artikel stellt vier Schwerpunkte vor, in denen sich die Wissensrepräsentationsmethoden im Social Semantic Web weiterentwickeln müssen und geht dabei jeweils auf den aktuellen Stand ein.

Object

Web 2.0

Source

Semantic web & linked data: Elemente zukünftiger Informationsinfrastrukturen ; 1. DGI-Konferenz ; 62. Jahrestagung der DGI ; Frankfurt am Main, 7. - 9. Oktober 2010 ; Proceedings / Deutsche Gesellschaft für Informationswissenschaft und Informationspraxis. Hrsg.: M. Ockenfeld

Theme

Semantic Web

0.0040368615 = product of:
  0.036331754 = sum of:
    0.036331754 = product of:
      0.07266351 = sum of:
        0.07266351 = weight(_text_:web in 3939) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07266351 = score(doc=3939,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.75719774 = fieldWeight in 3939, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3939)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Abstract

The Semantic Web has attracted much attention, both from academia and industry. An important role in research towards the Semantic Web is played by formalisms and technologies for handling uncertainty and/or vagueness. In this paper, I first provide some motivating examples for handling uncertainty and/or vagueness in the Semantic Web. I then give an overview of some own formalisms for handling uncertainty and/or vagueness in the Semantic Web.

Series

Lecture Notes in Computer Scienc;10370) (Information Systems and Applications, incl. Internet/Web, and HCI

Source

Reasoning Web: Semantic Interoperability on the Web, 13th International Summer School 2017, London, UK, July 7-11, 2017, Tutorial Lectures. Eds.: Ianni, G. et al

Theme

Semantic Web

0.003945509 = product of:
  0.01775479 = sum of:
    0.009786831 = product of:
      0.019573662 = sum of:
        0.019573662 = weight(_text_:web in 1634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019573662 = score(doc=1634,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.2039694 = fieldWeight in 1634, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1634)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.007967959 = product of:
      0.015935918 = sum of:
        0.015935918 = weight(_text_:22 in 1634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015935918 = score(doc=1634,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1634, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1634)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Purpose - Ontologies are prone to wide semantic variability due to subjective points of view of their composers. The purpose of this paper is to propose a new approach for maximal unification of diverse ontologies for controversial domains by their relations. Design/methodology/approach - Effective matching or unification of multiple ontologies for a specific domain is crucial for the success of many semantic web applications, such as semantic information retrieval and organization, document tagging, summarization and search. To this end, numerous automatic and semi-automatic techniques were proposed in the past decade that attempt to identify similar entities, mostly classes, in diverse ontologies for similar domains. Apparently, matching individual entities cannot result in full integration of ontologies' semantics without matching their inter-relations with all other-related classes (and instances). However, semantic matching of ontological relations still constitutes a major research challenge. Therefore, in this paper the authors propose a new paradigm for assessment of maximal possible matching and unification of ontological relations. To this end, several unification rules for ontological relations were devised based on ontological reference rules, and lexical and textual entailment. These rules were semi-automatically implemented to extend a given ontology with semantically matching relations from another ontology for a similar domain. Then, the ontologies were unified through these similar pairs of relations. The authors observe that these rules can be also facilitated to reveal the contradictory relations in different ontologies. Findings - To assess the feasibility of the approach two experiments were conducted with different sets of multiple personal ontologies on controversial domains constructed by trained subjects. The results for about 50 distinct ontology pairs demonstrate a good potential of the methodology for increasing inter-ontology agreement. Furthermore, the authors show that the presented methodology can lead to a complete unification of multiple semantically heterogeneous ontologies. Research limitations/implications - This is a conceptual study that presents a new approach for semantic unification of ontologies by a devised set of rules along with the initial experimental evidence of its feasibility and effectiveness. However, this methodology has to be fully automatically implemented and tested on a larger dataset in future research. Practical implications - This result has implication for semantic search, since a richer ontology, comprised of multiple aspects and viewpoints of the domain of knowledge, enhances discoverability and improves search results. Originality/value - To the best of the knowledge, this is the first study to examine and assess the maximal level of semantic relation-based ontology unification.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

Theme

Semantic Web