Search (381 results, page 1 of 20)

  • × type_ss:"el"
  • × language_ss:"e"
  1. Kleineberg, M.: Context analysis and context indexing : formal pragmatics in knowledge organization (2014) 0.69
    0.68613327 = product of:
      1.0291998 = sum of:
        0.07783839 = product of:
          0.23351516 = sum of:
            0.23351516 = weight(_text_:3a in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.23351516 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.24929643 = queryWeight, product of:
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.93669677 = fieldWeight in 1826, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1826)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
        0.23351516 = weight(_text_:2f in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.23351516 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24929643 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.93669677 = fieldWeight in 1826, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1826)
        0.017300837 = product of:
          0.034601673 = sum of:
            0.034601673 = weight(_text_:web in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.034601673 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.36057037 = fieldWeight in 1826, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1826)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.23351516 = weight(_text_:2f in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.23351516 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24929643 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.93669677 = fieldWeight in 1826, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1826)
        0.23351516 = weight(_text_:2f in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.23351516 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24929643 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.93669677 = fieldWeight in 1826, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1826)
        0.23351516 = weight(_text_:2f in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.23351516 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24929643 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = queryNorm
            0.93669677 = fieldWeight in 1826, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1826)
      0.6666667 = coord(6/9)
    
    Source
    http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CDQQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdigbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fvolltexte%2Fdocuments%2F3131107&ei=HzFWVYvGMsiNsgGTyoFI&usg=AFQjCNE2FHUeR9oQTQlNC4TPedv4Mo3DaQ&sig2=Rlzpr7a3BLZZkqZCXXN_IA&bvm=bv.93564037,d.bGg&cad=rja
  2. Popper, K.R.: Three worlds : the Tanner lecture on human values. Deliverd at the University of Michigan, April 7, 1978 (1978) 0.45
    0.4497329 = product of:
      0.8095192 = sum of:
        0.06227071 = product of:
          0.18681212 = sum of:
            0.18681212 = weight(_text_:3a in 230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.18681212 = score(doc=230,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.24929643 = queryWeight, product of:
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = 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)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
        0.18681212 = weight(_text_:2f in 230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18681212 = score(doc=230,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24929643 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = 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)
        0.18681212 = weight(_text_:2f in 230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18681212 = score(doc=230,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24929643 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = 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)
        0.18681212 = weight(_text_:2f in 230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18681212 = score(doc=230,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24929643 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = 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)
        0.18681212 = weight(_text_:2f in 230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18681212 = score(doc=230,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24929643 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02940506 = 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)
      0.5555556 = coord(5/9)
    
    Source
    https%3A%2F%2Ftannerlectures.utah.edu%2F_documents%2Fa-to-z%2Fp%2Fpopper80.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3f4QRTEH-OEBmoYr2J_c7H
  3. Dextre Clarke, S.G.: Challenges and opportunities for KOS standards (2007) 0.01
    0.011579784 = product of:
      0.052109025 = sum of:
        0.02422117 = product of:
          0.04844234 = sum of:
            0.04844234 = weight(_text_:web in 4643) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04844234 = score(doc=4643,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.50479853 = fieldWeight in 4643, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4643)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.027887857 = product of:
          0.055775713 = sum of:
            0.055775713 = weight(_text_:22 in 4643) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.055775713 = score(doc=4643,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4643, 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=4643)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Date
    22. 9.2007 15:41:14
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  4. Mitchell, J.S.: DDC 22 : an introduction (2003) 0.01
    0.010734784 = product of:
      0.04830653 = sum of:
        0.017126955 = product of:
          0.03425391 = sum of:
            0.03425391 = weight(_text_:web in 1936) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03425391 = score(doc=1936,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.35694647 = fieldWeight in 1936, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1936)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.031179573 = product of:
          0.062359147 = sum of:
            0.062359147 = weight(_text_:22 in 1936) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.062359147 = score(doc=1936,freq=10.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.6055961 = fieldWeight in 1936, product of:
                  3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                    10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1936)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    Dewey Decimal Classification and Relative Index, Edition 22 (DDC 22) will be issued simultaneously in print and web versions in July 2003. The new edition is the first full print update to the Dewey Decimal Classification system in seven years-it includes several significant updates and many new numbers and topics. DDC 22 also features some fundamental structural changes that have been introduced with the goals of promoting classifier efficiency and improving the DDC for use in a variety of applications in the web environment. Most importantly, the content of the new edition has been shaped by the needs and recommendations of Dewey users around the world. The worldwide user community has an important role in shaping the future of the DDC.
    Object
    DDC-22
  5. OWL Web Ontology Language Test Cases (2004) 0.01
    0.0104188 = product of:
      0.046884596 = sum of:
        0.030948678 = product of:
          0.061897356 = sum of:
            0.061897356 = weight(_text_:web in 4685) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.061897356 = score(doc=4685,freq=10.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.6450079 = fieldWeight in 4685, product of:
                  3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                    10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4685)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.015935918 = product of:
          0.031871837 = sum of:
            0.031871837 = weight(_text_:22 in 4685) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031871837 = score(doc=4685,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4685, 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=4685)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    This document contains and presents test cases for the Web Ontology Language (OWL) approved by the Web Ontology Working Group. Many of the test cases illustrate the correct usage of the Web Ontology Language (OWL), and the formal meaning of its constructs. Other test cases illustrate the resolution of issues considered by the Working Group. Conformance for OWL documents and OWL document checkers is specified.
    Date
    14. 8.2011 13:33:22
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  6. Broughton, V.: Automatic metadata generation : Digital resource description without human intervention (2007) 0.01
    0.009925528 = product of:
      0.04466488 = sum of:
        0.020761002 = product of:
          0.041522004 = sum of:
            0.041522004 = weight(_text_:web in 6048) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.041522004 = score(doc=6048,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.43268442 = fieldWeight in 6048, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6048)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.023903877 = product of:
          0.047807753 = sum of:
            0.047807753 = weight(_text_:22 in 6048) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.047807753 = score(doc=6048,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6048, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6048)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Date
    22. 9.2007 15:41:14
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  7. Tudhope, D.: Knowledge Organization System Services : brief review of NKOS activities and possibility of KOS registries (2007) 0.01
    0.009925528 = product of:
      0.04466488 = sum of:
        0.020761002 = product of:
          0.041522004 = sum of:
            0.041522004 = weight(_text_:web in 100) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.041522004 = score(doc=100,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.43268442 = fieldWeight in 100, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=100)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.023903877 = product of:
          0.047807753 = sum of:
            0.047807753 = weight(_text_:22 in 100) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.047807753 = score(doc=100,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 100, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=100)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Date
    22. 9.2007 15:41:14
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  8. Mayfield, J.; Finin, T.: Information retrieval on the Semantic Web : integrating inference and retrieval 0.01
    0.009690818 = product of:
      0.043608684 = sum of:
        0.029664757 = product of:
          0.059329513 = sum of:
            0.059329513 = weight(_text_:web in 4330) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.059329513 = score(doc=4330,freq=12.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.6182494 = fieldWeight in 4330, product of:
                  3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                    12.0 = termFreq=12.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4330)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.013943928 = product of:
          0.027887857 = sum of:
            0.027887857 = weight(_text_:22 in 4330) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.027887857 = score(doc=4330,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4330, 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=4330)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    One vision of the Semantic Web is that it will be much like the Web we know today, except that documents will be enriched by annotations in machine understandable markup. These annotations will provide metadata about the documents as well as machine interpretable statements capturing some of the meaning of document content. We discuss how the information retrieval paradigm might be recast in such an environment. We suggest that retrieval can be tightly bound to inference. Doing so makes today's Web search engines useful to Semantic Web inference engines, and causes improvements in either retrieval or inference to lead directly to improvements in the other.
    Date
    12. 2.2011 17:35:22
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  9. Hollink, L.; Assem, M. van: Estimating the relevance of search results in the Culture-Web : a study of semantic distance measures (2010) 0.01
    0.009576321 = product of:
      0.043093443 = sum of:
        0.031141505 = product of:
          0.06228301 = sum of:
            0.06228301 = weight(_text_:web in 4649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06228301 = score(doc=4649,freq=18.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.64902663 = fieldWeight in 4649, product of:
                  4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                    18.0 = termFreq=18.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4649)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.011951938 = product of:
          0.023903877 = sum of:
            0.023903877 = weight(_text_:22 in 4649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.023903877 = score(doc=4649,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4649, 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=4649)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    More and more cultural heritage institutions publish their collections, vocabularies and metadata on the Web. The resulting Web of linked cultural data opens up exciting new possibilities for searching and browsing through these cultural heritage collections. We report on ongoing work in which we investigate the estimation of relevance in this Web of Culture. We study existing measures of semantic distance and how they apply to two use cases. The use cases relate to the structured, multilingual and multimodal nature of the Culture Web. We distinguish between measures using the Web, such as Google distance and PMI, and measures using the Linked Data Web, i.e. the semantic structure of metadata vocabularies. We perform a small study in which we compare these semantic distance measures to human judgements of relevance. Although it is too early to draw any definitive conclusions, the study provides new insights into the applicability of semantic distance measures to the Web of Culture, and clear starting points for further research.
    Date
    26.12.2011 13:40:22
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  10. Heflin, J.; Hendler, J.: Semantic interoperability on the Web (2000) 0.01
    0.007760017 = product of:
      0.034920078 = sum of:
        0.02097615 = product of:
          0.0419523 = sum of:
            0.0419523 = weight(_text_:web in 759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0419523 = score(doc=759,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.43716836 = fieldWeight in 759, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=759)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.013943928 = product of:
          0.027887857 = sum of:
            0.027887857 = weight(_text_:22 in 759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.027887857 = score(doc=759,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 759, 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=759)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    XML will have a profound impact on the way data is exchanged on the Internet. An important feature of this language is the separation of content from presentation, which makes it easier to select and/or reformat the data. However, due to the likelihood of numerous industry and domain specific DTDs, those who wish to integrate information will still be faced with the problem of semantic interoperability. In this paper we discuss why this problem is not solved by XML, and then discuss why the Resource Description Framework is only a partial solution. We then present the SHOE language, which we feel has many of the features necessary to enable a semantic web, and describe an existing set of tools that make it easy to use the language.
    Date
    11. 5.2013 19:22:18
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  11. Tay, A.: ¬The next generation discovery citation indexes : a review of the landscape in 2020 (2020) 0.01
    0.006904641 = product of:
      0.031070884 = sum of:
        0.017126955 = product of:
          0.03425391 = sum of:
            0.03425391 = weight(_text_:web in 40) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03425391 = score(doc=40,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.35694647 = fieldWeight in 40, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=40)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.013943928 = product of:
          0.027887857 = sum of:
            0.027887857 = weight(_text_:22 in 40) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.027887857 = score(doc=40,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 40, 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=40)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    Conclusion There is a reason why Google Scholar and Web of Science/Scopus are kings of the hills in their various arenas. They have strong brand recogniton, a head start in development and a mass of eyeballs and users that leads to an almost virtious cycle of improvement. Competing against such well established competitors is not easy even when one has deep pockets (Microsoft) or a killer idea (scite). It will be interesting to see how the landscape will look like in 2030. Stay tuned for part II where I review each particular index.
    Date
    17.11.2020 12:22:59
    Object
    Web of Science
  12. Panzer, M.: Designing identifiers for the DDC (2007) 0.01
    0.00623176 = product of:
      0.02804292 = sum of:
        0.014680246 = product of:
          0.029360492 = sum of:
            0.029360492 = weight(_text_:web in 1752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.029360492 = score(doc=1752,freq=16.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.3059541 = fieldWeight in 1752, product of:
                  4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                    16.0 = termFreq=16.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1752)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.013362675 = product of:
          0.02672535 = sum of:
            0.02672535 = weight(_text_:22 in 1752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02672535 = score(doc=1752,freq=10.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.2595412 = fieldWeight in 1752, product of:
                  3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                    10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1752)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Content
    "Although the Dewey Decimal Classification is currently available on the web to subscribers as WebDewey and Abridged WebDewey in the OCLC Connexion service and in an XML version to licensees, OCLC does not provide any "web services" based on the DDC. By web services, we mean presentation of the DDC to other machines (not humans) for uses such as searching, browsing, classifying, mapping, harvesting, and alerting. In order to build web-accessible services based on the DDC, several elements have to be considered. One of these elements is the design of an appropriate Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) structure for Dewey. The design goals of mapping the entity model of the DDC into an identifier space can be summarized as follows: * Common locator for Dewey concepts and associated resources for use in web services and web applications * Use-case-driven, but not directly related to and outlasting a specific use case (persistency) * Retraceable path to a concept rather than an abstract identification, reusing a means of identification that is already present in the DDC and available in existing metadata. We have been working closely with our colleagues in the OCLC Office of Research (especially Andy Houghton as well as Eric Childress, Diane Vizine-Goetz, and Stu Weibel) on a preliminary identifier syntax. The basic identifier format we are currently exploring is: http://dewey.info/{aspect}/{object}/{locale}/{type}/{version}/{resource} where * {aspect} is the aspect associated with an {object}-the current value set of aspect contains "concept", "scheme", and "index"; additional ones are under exploration * {object} is a type of {aspect} * {locale} identifies a Dewey translation * {type} identifies a Dewey edition type and contains, at a minimum, the values "edn" for the full edition or "abr" for the abridged edition * {version} identifies a Dewey edition version * {resource} identifies a resource associated with an {object} in the context of {locale}, {type}, and {version}
    Some examples of identifiers for concepts follow: <http://dewey.info/concept/338.4/en/edn/22/> This identifier is used to retrieve or identify the 338.4 concept in the English-language version of Edition 22. <http://dewey.info/concept/338.4/de/edn/22/> This identifier is used to retrieve or identify the 338.4 concept in the German-language version of Edition 22. <http://dewey.info/concept/333.7-333.9/> This identifier is used to retrieve or identify the 333.7-333.9 concept across all editions and language versions. <http://dewey.info/concept/333.7-333.9/about.skos> This identifier is used to retrieve a SKOS representation of the 333.7-333.9 concept (using the "resource" element). There are several open issues at this preliminary stage of development: Use cases: URIs need to represent the range of statements or questions that could be submitted to a Dewey web service. Therefore, it seems that some general questions have to be answered first: What information does an agent have when coming to a Dewey web service? What kind of questions will such an agent ask? Placement of the {locale} component: It is still an open question if the {locale} component should be placed after the {version} component instead (<http://dewey.info/concept/338.4/edn/22/en>) to emphasize that the most important instantiation of a Dewey class is its edition, not its language version. From a services point of view, however, it could make more sense to keep the current arrangement, because users are more likely to come to the service with a present understanding of the language version they are seeking without knowing the specifics of a certain edition in which they are trying to find topics. Identification of other Dewey entities: The goal is to create a locator that does not answer all, but a lot of questions that could be asked about the DDC. Which entities are missing but should be surfaced for services or user agents? How will those services or agents interact with them? Should some entities be rendered in a different way as presented? For example, (how) should the DDC Summaries be retrievable? Would it be necessary to make the DDC Manual accessible through this identifier structure?"
  13. Mitchell, J.S.; Zeng, M.L.; Zumer, M.: Modeling classification systems in multicultural and multilingual contexts (2012) 0.01
    0.0060629104 = product of:
      0.027283097 = sum of:
        0.010380501 = product of:
          0.020761002 = sum of:
            0.020761002 = weight(_text_:web in 1967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.020761002 = score(doc=1967,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 1967, 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=1967)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.016902596 = product of:
          0.03380519 = sum of:
            0.03380519 = weight(_text_:22 in 1967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03380519 = score(doc=1967,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 1967, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1967)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    This paper reports on the second part of an initiative of the authors on researching classification systems with the conceptual model defined by the Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD) final report. In an earlier study, the authors explored whether the FRSAD conceptual model could be extended beyond subject authority data to model classification data. The focus of the current study is to determine if classification data modeled using FRSAD can be used to solve real-world discovery problems in multicultural and multilingual contexts. The paper discusses the relationships between entities (same type or different types) in the context of classification systems that involve multiple translations and /or multicultural implementations. Results of two case studies are presented in detail: (a) two instances of the DDC (DDC 22 in English, and the Swedish-English mixed translation of DDC 22), and (b) Chinese Library Classification. The use cases of conceptual models in practice are also discussed.
    Source
    Beyond libraries - subject metadata in the digital environment and semantic web. IFLA Satellite Post-Conference, 17-18 August 2012, Tallinn
  14. Danowski, P.: Authority files and Web 2.0 : Wikipedia and the PND. An Example (2007) 0.01
    0.0060579525 = product of:
      0.027260786 = sum of:
        0.017300837 = product of:
          0.034601673 = sum of:
            0.034601673 = weight(_text_:web in 1291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.034601673 = score(doc=1291,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.36057037 = fieldWeight in 1291, 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=1291)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.009959949 = product of:
          0.019919898 = sum of:
            0.019919898 = weight(_text_:22 in 1291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.019919898 = score(doc=1291,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1291, 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=1291)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    More and more users index everything on their own in the web 2.0. There are services for links, videos, pictures, books, encyclopaedic articles and scientific articles. All these services are library independent. But must that really be? Can't libraries help with their experience and tools to make user indexing better? On the experience of a project from German language Wikipedia together with the German person authority files (Personen Namen Datei - PND) located at German National Library (Deutsche Nationalbibliothek) I would like to show what is possible. How users can and will use the authority files, if we let them. We will take a look how the project worked and what we can learn for future projects. Conclusions - Authority files can have a role in the web 2.0 - there must be an open interface/ service for retrieval - everything that is indexed on the net with authority files can be easy integrated in a federated search - O'Reilly: You have to found ways that your data get more important that more it will be used
    Content
    Vortrag anlässlich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".
    Object
    Web 2.0
  15. Blosser, J.; Michaelson, R.; Routh. R.; Xia, P.: Defining the landscape of Web resources : Concluding Report of the BAER Web Resources Sub-Group (2000) 0.01
    0.005839432 = product of:
      0.026277445 = sum of:
        0.018309485 = product of:
          0.03661897 = sum of:
            0.03661897 = weight(_text_:web in 1447) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03661897 = score(doc=1447,freq=14.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.38159183 = fieldWeight in 1447, product of:
                  3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                    14.0 = termFreq=14.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1447)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.007967959 = product of:
          0.015935918 = sum of:
            0.015935918 = weight(_text_:22 in 1447) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.015935918 = score(doc=1447,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1447, 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=1447)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    The BAER Web Resources Group was charged in October 1999 with defining and describing the parameters of electronic resources that do not clearly belong to the categories being defined by the BAER Digital Group or the BAER Electronic Journals Group. After some difficulty identifying precisely which resources fell under the Group's charge, we finally named the following types of resources for our consideration: web sites, electronic texts, indexes, databases and abstracts, online reference resources, and networked and non-networked CD-ROMs. Electronic resources are a vast and growing collection that touch nearly every department within the Library. It is unrealistic to think one department can effectively administer all aspects of the collection. The Group then began to focus on the concern of bibliographic access to these varied resources, and to define parameters for handling or processing them within the Library. Some key elements became evident as the work progressed. * Selection process of resources to be acquired for the collection * Duplication of effort * Use of CORC * Resource Finder design * Maintenance of Resource Finder * CD-ROMs not networked * Communications * Voyager search limitations. An unexpected collaboration with the Web Development Committee on the Resource Finder helped to steer the Group to more detailed descriptions of bibliographic access. This collaboration included development of data elements for the Resource Finder database, and some discussions on Library staff processing of the resources. The Web Resources Group invited expert testimony to help the Group broaden its view to envision public use of the resources and discuss concerns related to technical services processing. The first testimony came from members of the Resource Finder Committee. Some background information on the Web Development Resource Finder Committee was shared. The second testimony was from librarians who select electronic texts. Three main themes were addressed: accessing CD-ROMs; the issue of including non-networked CD-ROMs in the Resource Finder; and, some special concerns about electronic texts. The third testimony came from librarians who select indexes and abstracts and also provide Reference services. Appendices to this report include minutes of the meetings with the experts (Appendix A), a list of proposed data elements to be used in the Resource Finder (Appendix B), and recommendations made to the Resource Finder Committee (Appendix C). Below are summaries of the key elements.
    Date
    21. 4.2002 10:22:31
  16. Monireh, E.; Sarker, M.K.; Bianchi, F.; Hitzler, P.; Doran, D.; Xie, N.: Reasoning over RDF knowledge bases using deep learning (2018) 0.01
    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
  17. Boldi, P.; Santini, M.; Vigna, S.: PageRank as a function of the damping factor (2005) 0.00
    0.004931886 = product of:
      0.022193488 = sum of:
        0.012233539 = product of:
          0.024467077 = sum of:
            0.024467077 = weight(_text_:web in 2564) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.024467077 = score(doc=2564,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.25496176 = fieldWeight in 2564, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2564)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.009959949 = product of:
          0.019919898 = sum of:
            0.019919898 = weight(_text_:22 in 2564) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.019919898 = score(doc=2564,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2564, 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=2564)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    PageRank is defined as the stationary state of a Markov chain. The chain is obtained by perturbing the transition matrix induced by a web graph with a damping factor alpha that spreads uniformly part of the rank. The choice of alpha is eminently empirical, and in most cases the original suggestion alpha=0.85 by Brin and Page is still used. Recently, however, the behaviour of PageRank with respect to changes in alpha was discovered to be useful in link-spam detection. Moreover, an analytical justification of the value chosen for alpha is still missing. In this paper, we give the first mathematical analysis of PageRank when alpha changes. In particular, we show that, contrarily to popular belief, for real-world graphs values of alpha close to 1 do not give a more meaningful ranking. Then, we give closed-form formulae for PageRank derivatives of any order, and an extension of the Power Method that approximates them with convergence O(t**k*alpha**t) for the k-th derivative. Finally, we show a tight connection between iterated computation and analytical behaviour by proving that the k-th iteration of the Power Method gives exactly the PageRank value obtained using a Maclaurin polynomial of degree k. The latter result paves the way towards the application of analytical methods to the study of PageRank.
    Date
    16. 1.2016 10:22:28
    Source
    http://vigna.di.unimi.it/ftp/papers/PageRankAsFunction.pdf [Proceedings of the ACM World Wide Web Conference (WWW), 2005]
  18. Roy, W.; Gray, C.: Preparing existing metadata for repository batch import : a recipe for a fickle food (2018) 0.00
    0.004931886 = product of:
      0.022193488 = sum of:
        0.012233539 = product of:
          0.024467077 = sum of:
            0.024467077 = weight(_text_:web in 4550) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.024467077 = score(doc=4550,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.25496176 = fieldWeight in 4550, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4550)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.009959949 = product of:
          0.019919898 = sum of:
            0.019919898 = weight(_text_:22 in 4550) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.019919898 = score(doc=4550,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4550, 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=4550)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    In 2016, the University of Waterloo began offering a mediated copyright review and deposit service to support the growth of our institutional repository UWSpace. This resulted in the need to batch import large lists of published works into the institutional repository quickly and accurately. A range of methods have been proposed for harvesting publications metadata en masse, but many technological solutions can easily become detached from a workflow that is both reproducible for support staff and applicable to a range of situations. Many repositories offer the capacity for batch upload via CSV, so our method provides a template Python script that leverages the Habanero library for populating CSV files with existing metadata retrieved from the CrossRef API. In our case, we have combined this with useful metadata contained in a TSV file downloaded from Web of Science in order to enrich our metadata as well. The appeal of this 'low-maintenance' method is that it provides more robust options for gathering metadata semi-automatically, and only requires the user's ability to access Web of Science and the Python program, while still remaining flexible enough for local customizations.
    Date
    10.11.2018 16:27:22
  19. Faceted classification today : International UDC Seminar 2017, 14.-15. Spetember, London, UK. (2017) 0.00
    0.004529867 = product of:
      0.040768802 = sum of:
        0.040768802 = product of:
          0.081537604 = sum of:
            0.081537604 = weight(_text_:seite in 3773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.081537604 = score(doc=3773,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16469958 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.601063 = idf(docFreq=443, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.49506867 = fieldWeight in 3773, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.601063 = idf(docFreq=443, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3773)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Content
    Die angegebene Seite enthält das Programm mit den Titeln der Beiträge und den Vortragenden. Vgl. auch die Mail von Jiri Pika vom 06.09.2017 an Inetbib.
  20. Aslam, S.; Sonkar, S.K.: Semantic Web : an overview (2019) 0.00
    0.004349703 = product of:
      0.039147325 = sum of:
        0.039147325 = product of:
          0.07829465 = sum of:
            0.07829465 = weight(_text_:web in 54) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07829465 = score(doc=54,freq=16.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.8158776 = fieldWeight in 54, product of:
                  4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                    16.0 = termFreq=16.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=54)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    This paper presents the semantic web, web writing content, web technology, goals of semantic and obligation for the expansion of web 3.0. This paper also shows the different components of semantic web and such as HTTP, HTML, XML, XML Schema, URI, RDF, Taxonomy and OWL. To provide valuable information services semantic web execute the benefits of library functions and also to be the best use of library collection are mention here.
    Theme
    Semantic Web

Years

Types

  • a 163
  • n 12
  • s 9
  • r 6
  • x 5
  • i 2
  • m 1
  • p 1
  • More… Less…