Search (94 results, page 2 of 5)

0.0028568096 = product of:
  0.028568096 = sum of:
    0.028568096 = weight(_text_:web in 2912) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028568096 = score(doc=2912,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.3059541 = fieldWeight in 2912, 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=2912)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Abstract

This paper illustrates the changing role of thesauri interlinked with overall changes of modern information infrastructure services, referring to "STW Thesaurus for Economics" as a case study. It starts with an overview of the history and development of the STW and describes the far-reaching changes brought about by its publication on the Web, with regard to subject indexing, retrieval and new uses for Linked Open Data. It argues that only the most recent technological developments help thesauri to exploit their full potential which is why they more than ever have a place in current information retrieval and infrastructure.

0.0028568096 = product of:
  0.028568096 = sum of:
    0.028568096 = weight(_text_:web in 254) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028568096 = score(doc=254,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.3059541 = fieldWeight in 254, 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=254)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Abstract

Objetivo: Este estudo tem como objetivo compreender como o modelo de dados Simple Knowledge Organization System e seus modelos de extensão tem sido utilizado para promover a interoperabilidade com outros vocabulários e refinar as relações semânticas em tesauros na web. Metodologia: Utiliza a pesquisa documental nos guias de referência dos modelos de dados utilizados para representar os tesauros na web. Resultados: os modelos de dados têm sido utilizados para representar os termos e suas variações linguísticas, os relacionamentos entre grupos e subgrupos de conceitos, numa perspectiva intra-vocabulários, e os relacionamentos entre conceitos de vocabulários distintos, numa perspectiva inter-vocabulários. Conclusões: O uso do Simple Knowledge Organization System, e dos seus modelos de extensão contribuem para uma melhor estruturação dos conceitos em tesauros. Os modelos de extensão são apropriados para a representação dos relacionamentos de equivalência compostos, ou para a estruturação de grupos e subgrupos de conceitos em tesauros.

0.0026349241 = product of:
  0.02634924 = sum of:
    0.02634924 = weight(_text_:web in 772) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02634924 = score(doc=772,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.28219095 = fieldWeight in 772, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=772)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Content

"Interoperabilität bedeutet, dass zwei oder mehrere Systeme oder Systemkomponenten Informationen austauschen und nutzen können. Diese Fähigkeit ist von grundsätzlicher Bedeutung für Informationsnetzwerke, auf die wir alle angewiesen sind, und mehr noch für die Entwicklung des Semantischen Web. Bei Thesauri gibt es zwei Ebenen der Interoperabilität: 1. Erstellung des Thesaurus in einer standardisierten Form, um den Import und die Nutzung des Thesaurus in anderen Systemen zu gewährleisten (dies wurde in ISO 25964-1 behandelt und 2011 publiziert). 2. Ergänzende Nutzung von weiteren Vokabularien und zwar durch die Erstellung von Mappings zwischen den Begriffen eines Thesaurus und denen eines anderen Vokabulars (Thema von ISO 25964-2). Nur wenn Mappings mit der empfohlenen Sorgfalt von ISO 25964-2 durchgeführt werden, kann sichergestellt werden, dass die auf ihnen basierenden Verknüpfungen im Semantic Web den nichtsahnenden Netzsurfer nicht zu irreführenden Ergebnissen führen.
Im Fall von Ontologien, Terminologien und Synonymringen ist das Mapping in oder aus einem Thesaurus nicht immer nützlich. Hier sind andere Formen sich gegenseitig befruchtender Nutzung zu empfehlen. Dies gilt besonders für Ontologien, die im Kontext des Semantischen Web kombiniert mit Thesauri eingesetzt werden können. ISO 25964-2 zeigt die Unterschiede zwischen Thesauri und Ontologien auf und gibt Beispiele für die Möglichkeiten interoperabler Funktionen. Praktische Implementation und weiterführende Arbeiten Und was bedeutet dies für SKOS, dem W3C-Standard für die Veröffentlichung von Simple Knowledge Organization Systems im Web? Die Arbeitsgruppen von SKOS und ISO 25964 haben glücklicherweise eng zusammengearbeitet, was sich in einer guten Kompatibilität der beiden Standards äußert. Gemeinsam haben sie eine Tabelle erarbeitet, die die Übereinstimmungen zwischen den Datenmodellen von ISO 25964 und SKOS/SKOS-XL aufzeigt und nun beim ISO 25964-Sekretariat unter http://www.niso.org/schemas/iso25964/frei zugänglich ist. Die Tabelle ist formal kein Bestandteil der beiden Standards, aber von beiden abhängig. Das macht sie zu einem Beispiel für die Entwicklung praktischer Tools für das sich erweiternde Semantische Web durch die Gemeinschaft seiner Nutzer."

0.0023567479 = product of:
  0.023567477 = sum of:
    0.023567477 = weight(_text_:web in 6773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023567477 = score(doc=6773,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.25239927 = fieldWeight in 6773, 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=6773)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Abstract

Members offer comments and suggest resources on programs for creating, maintaining, and publishing thesauri. Formerly a tool for writers and indexers, the thesaurus has taken on a new role as an essential component of the corporate information infrastructure. Many people are using word processor or database programs to create and maintain thesauri, while others are using specialized tools that perform consistency checks and offer special reporting capabilities. Some also use thesaurus modules integrated into another application, such as web publishing, content management, or e-commerce. This article includes material comes from our own experience, email responses from members, and comments from participants in our seminars and roundtables. There's also an introduction to thesauri in a corporate information management system

0.0023567479 = product of:
  0.023567477 = sum of:
    0.023567477 = weight(_text_:web in 4455) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023567477 = score(doc=4455,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.25239927 = fieldWeight in 4455, 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=4455)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Abstract

The amount of work to be done in rendering the digital information space more efficient and effective has attracted a wide range of disciplines which, in turn, has given rise to a degree of confusion in the terminology applied to information problems. This note seeks to shed some light on the three terms thesauri, taxonomies and ontologies as they are currently being used by, among others, information scientists, AI practitioners, and those working on the foundations of the semantic Web. The paper is not a review of the techniques themselves.

0.0023567479 = product of:
  0.023567477 = sum of:
    0.023567477 = weight(_text_:web in 604) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023567477 = score(doc=604,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.25239927 = fieldWeight in 604, 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=604)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Source

Proceedings of the Sixth Workshop on Scripting and Development for the Semantic Web, Crete, Greece, May 31, 2010, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, SFSW - http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-699/Paper2.pdf

0.0023325754 = product of:
  0.023325754 = sum of:
    0.023325754 = weight(_text_:web in 132) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023325754 = score(doc=132,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.24981049 = fieldWeight in 132, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=132)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Abstract

Die Komplexizität medizinischer Fragestellungen und des medizinischen Informationsmanagements war seit den Anfängen der Informatik immer ein besonders wichtiges Thema. Trotz des Scheiterns der Künstlichen Intelligenz in den 80er Jahren des vorigen Jahrhunderts haben deren Kernideen Früchte getragen. Durch kongruente Entwicklung einer Reihe anderer Wissenschaftsdisziplinen und der exponentiellen Entwicklung im Bereich Computerhardware konnten die gestellten, hohen Anforderungen bei der medizinischen Informationssuche doch noch erfüllt werden. Die programmatische Forderung von Tim Berners-Lee betreffend "Semantic Web" im Jahr 2000 hat dem Thema Ontologien für maschinenlesbare Repositorien in Allgemein- und Fachsprache breitere Aufmerksamkeit gewonnen. Da in der Medizin (PubMed) mit dem von NLM schon vor 20 Jahren entwickelten Unified Medical Language System (UMLS) eine funktionierende Ontologie in Form eines semantischen Netzes in Betrieb ist, ist es auch für Medizinbibliothekare und Medizindokumentare hoch an der Zeit, sich damit zu beschäftigen. Ontologien können im Wesen, trotz der informatisch vernebelnden Terminologie, als Werkzeuge der Klassifikation verstanden werden. Hier sind von seiten der Bibliotheks- und Dokumentationswissenschaft wesentliche Beiträge möglich. Der vorliegende Bericht bietet einen Einstieg in das Thema, erklärt wesentliche Elemente des UMLS und schließt mit einer kommentierten Anmerkungs- und Literaturliste für die weitere Beschäftigung mit Ontologien.

Content

Dieser Aufsatz ist kein Abgesang auf MeSH (= Medical Subject Headings in Medline/PubMed), wie man/frau vielleicht vermuten könnte. Vielmehr wird - ohne informatiklastiges Fachchinesisch - an Hand des von der National Library of Medicine entwickelten Unified Medical Language System erklärt, worin die Anforderungen an Ontologien bestehen, die im Zusammenhang mit dem Semantic Web allerorten eingefordert und herbeigewünscht werden. Eine Lektüre für Einsteigerinnen, die zum Vertiefen der gewonnenen Begriffssicherheit an Hand der weiterführenden Literaturhinweise anregt. Da das UMLS hier vor allem als Beispiel verwendet wird, werden auch Bibliothekarlnnen, Dokumentarlnnen und Informationsspezialistinnen anderer Fachbereiche den Aufsatz mit Gewinn lesen - und erfahren, dass unser Fachwissen aus der Sacherschließung und der Verwendung und Mitgestaltung von Normdateien und Thesauri bei der Entwicklung von Ontologien gefragt ist! (Eveline Pipp, Universitätsbibliothek Innsbruck). - Die elektronische Version dieses Artikels ist verfügbar unter: http://www.egms.de/en/journals/mbi/2006-6/mbi000049.shtml.

Theme

Semantic Web

0.0020200694 = product of:
  0.020200694 = sum of:
    0.020200694 = weight(_text_:web in 3243) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020200694 = score(doc=3243,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 3243, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3243)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Content

Enthält u.a. folgende Aussage von J. Aitchison u. S. Dextre Clarke: "We face a paradox. Ostensibly, the need and the opportunity to apply thesauri to information retrieval are greater than ever before. On the other hand, users resist most efforts to persuade them to apply one. The drive for interoperability of systems means we must design our vocabularies for easy integration into downstream applications such as content management systems, indexing/metatagging interfaces, search engines, and portals. Summarizing the search for vocabularies that work more intuitively, we see that there are trends working in opposite directions. In the hugely popular taxonomies an the one hand, relationships between terms are more loosely defined than in thesauri. In the ontologies that will support computer-to-computer communications in AI applications such as the Semantic Web, we see the need for much more precisely defined term relationships."
Enthält die Beiträge: Spiteri, L.F.: Word association testing and thesaurus construction: a pilot study. Aitchison, J., S.G. Dextre-Clarke: The Thesaurus: a historical viewpoint, with a look to the future. Thomas, A.R.: Teach yourself thesaurus: exercises, reading, resources. Shearer, J.R.: A practical exercise in building a thesaurus. Nielsen, M.L.: Thesaurus construction: key issues and selected readings. Riesland, M.A.: Tools of the trade: vocabulary management software. Will, L.: Thesaurus consultancy. Owens, L.A., P.A. Cochrane: Thesaurus evaluation. Greenberg, J.: User comprehension and application of information retrieval thesauri. Johnson, E.H.: Distributed thesaurus Web services. Thomas, A.R., S.K. Roe: An interview with Dr. Amy J. Warner. Landry, P.: Multilingual subject access: the linking approach of MACS.

Footnote

Rez. in: KO 32(2005) no.2, S.95-97 (A. Gilchrist):"It might be thought unfortunate that the word thesaurus is assonant with prehistoric beasts but as this book clearly demonstrates, the thesaurus is undergoing a notable revival, and we can remind ourselves that the word comes from the Greek thesaurus, meaning a treasury. This is a useful and timely source book, bringing together ten chapters, following an Editorial introduction and culminating in an interview with a member of the team responsible for revising the NISO Standard Guidelines for the construction, format and management of monolingual thesauri; formal proof of the thesaural renaissance. Though predominantly an American publication, it is good to see four English authors as well as one from Canada and one from Denmark; and with a good balance of academics and practitioners. This has helped to widen the net in the citing of useful references. While the techniques of thesaurus construction are still basically sound, the Editors, in their introduction, point out that the thesaurus, in its sense of an information retrieval tool is almost exactly 50 years old, and that the information environment of today is radically different. They claim three purposes for the compilation: "to acquaint or remind the Library and Information Science community of the history of the development of the thesaurus and standards for thesaurus construction. to provide bibliographies and tutorials from which any reader can become more grounded in her or his understanding of thesaurus construction, use and evaluation. to address topics related to thesauri but that are unique to the current digital environment, or network of networks." This last purpose, understandably, tends to be the slightly more tentative part of the book, but as Rosenfeld and Morville said in their book Information architecture for the World Wide Web "thesauri [will] become a key tool for dealing with the growing size and importance of web sites and intranets". The evidence supporting their belief has been growing steadily in the seven years since the first edition was published.

0.0020200694 = product of:
  0.020200694 = sum of:
    0.020200694 = weight(_text_:web in 4724) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020200694 = score(doc=4724,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 4724, 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=4724)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Abstract

Purpose - With the growing recognition that thesauri aid information retrieval, organisations are beginning to adopt, and in many cases, create thesauri. This paper offers some guidance on the construction process. Design/methodology/approach - An opinion piece with a practical focus, based on recent experiences gleaned from consultancy work. Findings - A number of steps can be taken to ensure any thesaurus under construction is fit for purpose. Due consideration is therefore given to aspects such as term selection, structure and notation, thesauri standards, software and Web display issues, thesauri evaluation and maintenance. This paper also notes that creating new subject schemes from scratch, however attractive, contributes to the plethora of terminologies currently in existence and can limit user searching within particular contexts. The decision to create a "new" thesaurus should therefore be taken carefully and observance of standards is paramount. Practical implications - This paper offers advice to assist practitioners in the development of thesauri. Originality/value - Useful guidance for those practitioners new to the area of thesaurus construction is provided, together with an overview of selected key processes involved in the construction of a thesaurus.

0.0020200694 = product of:
  0.020200694 = sum of:
    0.020200694 = weight(_text_:web in 5009) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020200694 = score(doc=5009,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 5009, 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=5009)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Abstract

The MACS (Multilingual access to subjects) project is one of the many projects that are currently exploring solutions to multilingual subject access to online catalogs. Its strategy is to develop a Web based link and search interface through which equivalents between three Subject Heading Languages: SWD/RSWK (Schlagwortnormdatei/Regeln für den Schlagwortkatalog) for German, RAMEAU (Repertoire d'Autorite-Matière Encyclopedique et Alphabetique Unifie) for French and LCSH (Library of Congress Subject Headings) for English can be created and maintained, and by which users can access online databases in the language of their choice. Factors that have lead to this approach will be examined and the MACS linking strategy will be explained. The trend to using mapping or linking strategies between different controlled vocabularies to create multilingual access challenges the traditional view of the multilingual thesaurus.

0.0020200694 = product of:
  0.020200694 = sum of:
    0.020200694 = weight(_text_:web in 2203) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020200694 = score(doc=2203,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 2203, 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=2203)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Abstract

This paper gives an overview of the history, development, and structure of the electronic thesauri produced and maintained by the Getty Research Institute (GRI). We describe the evolution of the Art & Architecture Thesaurus (AAT®), the Getty Thesaurus of Geographic Names (TGN®), and the Union List of Artist Names (ULAN®) as multilingual, cross-cultural knowledge organization systems (KOS); the factors that make them unique; and their potential, when expressed as Linked Open Data (LOD) to play a key role in the Semantic Web.

0.0020200694 = product of:
  0.020200694 = sum of:
    0.020200694 = weight(_text_:web in 2908) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020200694 = score(doc=2908,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 2908, 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=2908)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Abstract

The recent ISKO-UK conference considered the question of whether the traditional thesaurus has any place in modern information retrieval. This note is intended to continue in the spirit of that good-natured debate, arguing that there is indeed a role today and highlighting some recent work showing the continued relevance of the thesaurus, particularly in the linked data area. Key functionality that a thesaurus makes possible is discussed. A brief outline is provided of prominent work hat employs thesauri in three key areas of infrastructure underpinning advanced retrieval functionality today: metadata enrichment,vocabulary mapping and web services.

0.0020200694 = product of:
  0.020200694 = sum of:
    0.020200694 = weight(_text_:web in 3485) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020200694 = score(doc=3485,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 3485, 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=3485)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Series

Information Systems and Applications, incl. Internet/Web, and HCI; 10151

0.0019045398 = product of:
  0.019045398 = sum of:
    0.019045398 = weight(_text_:web in 3391) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019045398 = score(doc=3391,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.2039694 = fieldWeight in 3391, 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=3391)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Abstract

For the sake of national security, very large volumes of data and information are generated and gathered daily. Much of this data and information is written in different languages, stored in different locations, and may be seemingly unconnected. Crosslingual semantic interoperability is a major challenge to generate an overview of this disparate data and information so that it can be analyzed, shared, searched, and summarized. The recent terrorist attacks and the tragic events of September 11, 2001 have prompted increased attention an national security and criminal analysis. Many Asian countries and cities, such as Japan, Taiwan, and Singapore, have been advised that they may become the next targets of terrorist attacks. Semantic interoperability has been a focus in digital library research. Traditional information retrieval (IR) approaches normally require a document to share some common keywords with the query. Generating the associations for the related terms between the two term spaces of users and documents is an important issue. The problem can be viewed as the creation of a thesaurus. Apart from this, terrorists and criminals may communicate through letters, e-mails, and faxes in languages other than English. The translation ambiguity significantly exacerbates the retrieval problem. The problem is expanded to crosslingual semantic interoperability. In this paper, we focus an the English/Chinese crosslingual semantic interoperability problem. However, the developed techniques are not limited to English and Chinese languages but can be applied to many other languages. English and Chinese are popular languages in the Asian region. Much information about national security or crime is communicated in these languages. An efficient automatically generated thesaurus between these languages is important to crosslingual information retrieval between English and Chinese languages. To facilitate crosslingual information retrieval, a corpus-based approach uses the term co-occurrence statistics in parallel or comparable corpora to construct a statistical translation model to cross the language boundary. In this paper, the text based approach to align English/Chinese Hong Kong Police press release documents from the Web is first presented. We also introduce an algorithmic approach to generate a robust knowledge base based an statistical correlation analysis of the semantics (knowledge) embedded in the bilingual press release corpus. The research output consisted of a thesaurus-like, semantic network knowledge base, which can aid in semanticsbased crosslingual information management and retrieval.

0.0019045398 = product of:
  0.019045398 = sum of:
    0.019045398 = weight(_text_:web in 4800) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019045398 = score(doc=4800,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.2039694 = fieldWeight in 4800, 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=4800)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Abstract

The usefulness of online geological maps is hindered by linguistic barriers. Multilingual geoscience thesauri alleviate linguistic barriers of geological maps. However, the benefits of multilingual geoscience thesauri for online geological maps are less studied. In this regard, we developed a multilingual thesaurus of geological time scale (GTS) to alleviate linguistic barriers of GTS records among online geological maps. We extended the Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS) model to represent the ordinal hierarchical structure of GTS terms. We collected GTS terms in seven languages and encoded them into a thesaurus by using the extended SKOS model. We implemented methods of characteristic-oriented term retrieval in JavaScript programs for accessing Web Map Services (WMS), recognizing GTS terms, and making translations. With the developed thesaurus and programs, we set up a pilot system to test recognitions and translations of GTS terms in online geological maps. Results of this pilot system proved the accuracy of the developed thesaurus and the functionality of the developed programs. Therefore, with proper deployments, SKOS-based multilingual geoscience thesauri can be functional for alleviating linguistic barriers among online geological maps and, thus, improving their interoperability.

Content

Article Outline 1. Introduction 2. SKOS-based multilingual thesaurus of geological time scale 2.1. Addressing the insufficiency of SKOS in the context of the Semantic Web 2.2. Addressing semantics and syntax/lexicon in multilingual GTS terms 2.3. Extending SKOS model to capture GTS structure 2.4. Summary of building the SKOS-based MLTGTS 3. Recognizing and translating GTS terms retrieved from WMS 4. Pilot system, results, and evaluation 5. Discussion 6. Conclusions Vgl. unter: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=MiamiImageURL&_cid=271720&_user=3865853&_pii=S0098300411000744&_check=y&_origin=&_coverDate=31-Oct-2011&view=c&wchp=dGLbVlt-zSkzS&_valck=1&md5=e2c1daf53df72d034d22278212578f42&ie=/sdarticle.pdf.

0.0018254347 = product of:
  0.018254347 = sum of:
    0.018254347 = product of:
      0.054763038 = sum of:
        0.054763038 = weight(_text_:29 in 4713) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054763038 = score(doc=4713,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10064617 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028611459 = queryNorm
            0.5441145 = fieldWeight in 4713, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4713)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Source

Information processing and management. 29(1993) no.3, S.345-358

0.0018090137 = product of:
  0.018090136 = sum of:
    0.018090136 = product of:
      0.05427041 = sum of:
        0.05427041 = weight(_text_:22 in 4199) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05427041 = score(doc=4199,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10019246 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028611459 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4199, 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=4199)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Source

Mitteilungen der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Parlaments- und Behördenbibliotheken. 1989, H.67, S.1-22

0.0016833913 = product of:
  0.016833913 = sum of:
    0.016833913 = weight(_text_:web in 2583) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016833913 = score(doc=2583,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 2583, 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=2583)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Abstract

Purpose - Seeks to share with digital library practitioners the development process of an online image collection that integrates the syndetic structure of a controlled vocabulary to improve end-user search and browse functionality. Design/methodology/approach - Surveys controlled vocabulary structures and their utility for catalogers and end-users. Reviews research literature and usability findings that informed the specifications for integration of the controlled vocabulary structure into search and browse functionality. Discusses database functions facilitating query expansion using a controlled vocabulary structure, and web application handling of user queries and results display. Concludes with a discussion of open-source alternatives and reuse of database and application components in other environments. Findings - Affirms that structured forms of browse and search can be successfully integrated into digital collections to significantly improve the user's discovery experience. Establishes ways in which the technologies used in implementing enhanced search and browse functionality can be abstracted to work in other digital collection environments. Originality/value - Significant amounts of research on integrating thesauri structures into search and browse functionalities exist, but examples of online resources that have implemented this approach are few in comparison. The online image collection surveyed in this paper can serve as a model to other designers of digital library resources for integrating controlled vocabularies and metadata structures into more dynamic search and browse functionality for end-users.

0.0016833913 = product of:
  0.016833913 = sum of:
    0.016833913 = weight(_text_:web in 2036) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016833913 = score(doc=2036,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 2036, 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=2036)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Abstract

Thesauri and other types of controlled vocabularies are increasingly re-engineered into ontologies described using the Web Ontology Language (OWL), particularly in the life sciences. This has led to the perception by some that thesauri are ontologies once they are described by using the syntax of OWL while others have emphasized the need to re-engineer a vocabulary to use it as ontology. This confusion is rooted in different perceptions of what ontologies are and how they differ from other types of vocabularies. In this article, we rigorously examine the structural differences and similarities between thesauri and meaning-defining ontologies described in OWL. Specifically, we conduct (a) a conceptual comparison of thesauri and ontologies, and (b) a comparison of a specific thesaurus and a specific ontology in the same subject field. Our results show that thesauri and ontologies need to be treated as 2 orthogonal kinds of models with superficially similar structures. An ontology is not a good thesaurus, nor is a thesaurus a good ontology. A thesaurus requires significant structural and other content changes to become an ontology, and vice versa.

0.0016833913 = product of:
  0.016833913 = sum of:
    0.016833913 = weight(_text_:web in 2913) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016833913 = score(doc=2913,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 2913, 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=2913)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Abstract

The information retrieval thesaurus emerged in the 1950s, settled down to a more-or-less standard format in the 1970s and has continued to evolve marginally since then. Throughout its whole lifetime, doubts have been expressed about its efficacy with emphasis latterly on cost-effectiveness. Prolonged testing of different styles of index language in the 1970s failed to settle the doubts. The arena occupied by the debate has moved from small isolated databases in the post-war era to diverse situations nowadays with the whole Internet at one extreme and small in-house collections at the other. Sophisticated statistical techniques now dominate the retrieval landscape on the Internet but leave opportunities for the thesaurus and other knowledge organization techniques in niches such as image libraries and corporate intranets. The promise of an ontology-driven semantic web with linked data resources opens another opportunity. Thus much scope remains for research to establish the usefulness of the thesaurus in these places and to inspire its continuing evolution.