Search (74 results, page 1 of 4)

  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  • × type_ss:"x"
  1. Verwer, K.: Freiheit und Verantwortung bei Hans Jonas (2011) 0.44
    0.43703783 = product of:
      1.2237059 = sum of:
        0.094131224 = product of:
          0.28239366 = sum of:
            0.28239366 = weight(_text_:3a in 973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.28239366 = score(doc=973,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.25123185 = queryWeight, product of:
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.029633347 = queryNorm
                1.1240361 = fieldWeight in 973, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=973)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
        0.28239366 = weight(_text_:2f in 973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.28239366 = score(doc=973,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25123185 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            1.1240361 = fieldWeight in 973, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=973)
        0.28239366 = weight(_text_:2f in 973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.28239366 = score(doc=973,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25123185 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            1.1240361 = fieldWeight in 973, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=973)
        0.28239366 = weight(_text_:2f in 973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.28239366 = score(doc=973,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25123185 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            1.1240361 = fieldWeight in 973, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=973)
        0.28239366 = weight(_text_:2f in 973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.28239366 = score(doc=973,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25123185 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            1.1240361 = fieldWeight in 973, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=973)
      0.35714287 = coord(5/14)
    
    Content
    Vgl.: http%3A%2F%2Fcreativechoice.org%2Fdoc%2FHansJonas.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1TM3teaYKgABL5H9yoIifA&opi=89978449.
  2. Huo, W.: Automatic multi-word term extraction and its application to Web-page summarization (2012) 0.36
    0.3649658 = product of:
      0.6386901 = sum of:
        0.041844364 = weight(_text_:web in 563) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041844364 = score(doc=563,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.43268442 = fieldWeight in 563, 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=563)
        0.14119683 = weight(_text_:2f in 563) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14119683 = score(doc=563,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25123185 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 563, 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=563)
        0.14119683 = weight(_text_:2f in 563) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14119683 = score(doc=563,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25123185 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 563, 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=563)
        0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 563) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0060537956 = score(doc=563,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 563, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=563)
        0.01797477 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 563) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01797477 = score(doc=563,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 563, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=563)
        0.14119683 = weight(_text_:2f in 563) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14119683 = score(doc=563,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25123185 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 563, 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=563)
        0.14119683 = weight(_text_:2f in 563) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14119683 = score(doc=563,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25123185 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 563, 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=563)
        0.008029819 = product of:
          0.024089456 = sum of:
            0.024089456 = weight(_text_:22 in 563) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.024089456 = score(doc=563,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.103770934 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.029633347 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 563, 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=563)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.5714286 = coord(8/14)
    
    Abstract
    In this thesis we propose three new word association measures for multi-word term extraction. We combine these association measures with LocalMaxs algorithm in our extraction model and compare the results of different multi-word term extraction methods. Our approach is language and domain independent and requires no training data. It can be applied to such tasks as text summarization, information retrieval, and document classification. We further explore the potential of using multi-word terms as an effective representation for general web-page summarization. We extract multi-word terms from human written summaries in a large collection of web-pages, and generate the summaries by aligning document words with these multi-word terms. Our system applies machine translation technology to learn the aligning process from a training set and focuses on selecting high quality multi-word terms from human written summaries to generate suitable results for web-page summarization.
    Content
    A Thesis presented to The University of Guelph In partial fulfilment of requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Computer Science. Vgl. Unter: http://www.inf.ufrgs.br%2F~ceramisch%2Fdownload_files%2Fpublications%2F2009%2Fp01.pdf.
    Date
    10. 1.2013 19:22:47
  3. Xiong, C.: Knowledge based text representations for information retrieval (2016) 0.30
    0.29962263 = product of:
      0.59924525 = sum of:
        0.031377077 = product of:
          0.094131224 = sum of:
            0.094131224 = weight(_text_:3a in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.094131224 = score(doc=5820,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.25123185 = queryWeight, product of:
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.029633347 = queryNorm
                0.3746787 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
        0.13312165 = weight(_text_:2f in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13312165 = score(doc=5820,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.25123185 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.5298757 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
        0.13312165 = weight(_text_:2f in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13312165 = score(doc=5820,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.25123185 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.5298757 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
        0.011415146 = weight(_text_:information in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011415146 = score(doc=5820,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
        0.023966359 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023966359 = score(doc=5820,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
        0.13312165 = weight(_text_:2f in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13312165 = score(doc=5820,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.25123185 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.5298757 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
        0.13312165 = weight(_text_:2f in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13312165 = score(doc=5820,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.25123185 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.5298757 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
      0.5 = coord(7/14)
    
    Abstract
    The successes of information retrieval (IR) in recent decades were built upon bag-of-words representations. Effective as it is, bag-of-words is only a shallow text understanding; there is a limited amount of information for document ranking in the word space. This dissertation goes beyond words and builds knowledge based text representations, which embed the external and carefully curated information from knowledge bases, and provide richer and structured evidence for more advanced information retrieval systems. This thesis research first builds query representations with entities associated with the query. Entities' descriptions are used by query expansion techniques that enrich the query with explanation terms. Then we present a general framework that represents a query with entities that appear in the query, are retrieved by the query, or frequently show up in the top retrieved documents. A latent space model is developed to jointly learn the connections from query to entities and the ranking of documents, modeling the external evidence from knowledge bases and internal ranking features cooperatively. To further improve the quality of relevant entities, a defining factor of our query representations, we introduce learning to rank to entity search and retrieve better entities from knowledge bases. In the document representation part, this thesis research also moves one step forward with a bag-of-entities model, in which documents are represented by their automatic entity annotations, and the ranking is performed in the entity space.
    This proposal includes plans to improve the quality of relevant entities with a co-learning framework that learns from both entity labels and document labels. We also plan to develop a hybrid ranking system that combines word based and entity based representations together with their uncertainties considered. At last, we plan to enrich the text representations with connections between entities. We propose several ways to infer entity graph representations for texts, and to rank documents using their structure representations. This dissertation overcomes the limitation of word based representations with external and carefully curated information from knowledge bases. We believe this thesis research is a solid start towards the new generation of intelligent, semantic, and structured information retrieval.
    Content
    Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Language and Information Technologies. Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cs.cmu.edu%2F~cx%2Fpapers%2Fknowledge_based_text_representation.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0SaTSvhWLTh__Uz_HtOtl3.
  4. Farazi, M.: Faceted lightweight ontologies : a formalization and some experiments (2010) 0.27
    0.27360526 = product of:
      0.5472105 = sum of:
        0.039221346 = product of:
          0.11766403 = sum of:
            0.11766403 = weight(_text_:3a in 4997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.11766403 = score(doc=4997,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.25123185 = queryWeight, product of:
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.029633347 = queryNorm
                0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 4997, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4997)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
        0.03019857 = weight(_text_:web in 4997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03019857 = score(doc=4997,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.3122631 = fieldWeight in 4997, 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=4997)
        0.11766403 = weight(_text_:2f in 4997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11766403 = score(doc=4997,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25123185 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 4997, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4997)
        0.11766403 = weight(_text_:2f in 4997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11766403 = score(doc=4997,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25123185 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 4997, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4997)
        0.0071344664 = weight(_text_:information in 4997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0071344664 = score(doc=4997,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 4997, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4997)
        0.11766403 = weight(_text_:2f in 4997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11766403 = score(doc=4997,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25123185 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 4997, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4997)
        0.11766403 = weight(_text_:2f in 4997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11766403 = score(doc=4997,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25123185 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 4997, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4997)
      0.5 = coord(7/14)
    
    Abstract
    While classifications are heavily used to categorize web content, the evolution of the web foresees a more formal structure - ontology - which can serve this purpose. Ontologies are core artifacts of the Semantic Web which enable machines to use inference rules to conduct automated reasoning on data. Lightweight ontologies bridge the gap between classifications and ontologies. A lightweight ontology (LO) is an ontology representing a backbone taxonomy where the concept of the child node is more specific than the concept of the parent node. Formal lightweight ontologies can be generated from their informal ones. The key applications of formal lightweight ontologies are document classification, semantic search, and data integration. However, these applications suffer from the following problems: the disambiguation accuracy of the state of the art NLP tools used in generating formal lightweight ontologies from their informal ones; the lack of background knowledge needed for the formal lightweight ontologies; and the limitation of ontology reuse. In this dissertation, we propose a novel solution to these problems in formal lightweight ontologies; namely, faceted lightweight ontology (FLO). FLO is a lightweight ontology in which terms, present in each node label, and their concepts, are available in the background knowledge (BK), which is organized as a set of facets. A facet can be defined as a distinctive property of the groups of concepts that can help in differentiating one group from another. Background knowledge can be defined as a subset of a knowledge base, such as WordNet, and often represents a specific domain.
    Content
    PhD Dissertation at International Doctorate School in Information and Communication Technology. Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Fcore.ac.uk%2Fdownload%2Fpdf%2F150083013.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2n-qisNagpyT0lli_6QbAQ.
    Imprint
    Trento : University / Department of information engineering and computer science
  5. Shala, E.: ¬Die Autonomie des Menschen und der Maschine : gegenwärtige Definitionen von Autonomie zwischen philosophischem Hintergrund und technologischer Umsetzbarkeit (2014) 0.23
    0.22599113 = product of:
      0.52731264 = sum of:
        0.039221346 = product of:
          0.11766403 = sum of:
            0.11766403 = weight(_text_:3a in 4388) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.11766403 = score(doc=4388,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.25123185 = queryWeight, product of:
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.029633347 = queryNorm
                0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 4388, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4388)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
        0.017435152 = weight(_text_:web in 4388) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017435152 = score(doc=4388,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 4388, 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=4388)
        0.11766403 = weight(_text_:2f in 4388) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11766403 = score(doc=4388,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25123185 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 4388, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4388)
        0.11766403 = weight(_text_:2f in 4388) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11766403 = score(doc=4388,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25123185 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 4388, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4388)
        0.11766403 = weight(_text_:2f in 4388) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11766403 = score(doc=4388,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25123185 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 4388, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4388)
        0.11766403 = weight(_text_:2f in 4388) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11766403 = score(doc=4388,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25123185 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 4388, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4388)
      0.42857143 = coord(6/14)
    
    Footnote
    Vgl. unter: https://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwizweHljdbcAhVS16QKHXcFD9QQFjABegQICRAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Fpublication%2F271200105_Die_Autonomie_des_Menschen_und_der_Maschine_-_gegenwartige_Definitionen_von_Autonomie_zwischen_philosophischem_Hintergrund_und_technologischer_Umsetzbarkeit_Redigierte_Version_der_Magisterarbeit_Karls&usg=AOvVaw06orrdJmFF2xbCCp_hL26q.
  6. Piros, A.: Az ETO-jelzetek automatikus interpretálásának és elemzésének kérdései (2018) 0.18
    0.18209912 = product of:
      0.5098775 = sum of:
        0.039221346 = product of:
          0.11766403 = sum of:
            0.11766403 = weight(_text_:3a in 855) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.11766403 = score(doc=855,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.25123185 = queryWeight, product of:
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.029633347 = queryNorm
                0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 855, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=855)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
        0.11766403 = weight(_text_:2f in 855) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11766403 = score(doc=855,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25123185 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 855, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=855)
        0.11766403 = weight(_text_:2f in 855) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11766403 = score(doc=855,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25123185 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 855, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=855)
        0.11766403 = weight(_text_:2f in 855) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11766403 = score(doc=855,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25123185 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 855, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=855)
        0.11766403 = weight(_text_:2f in 855) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11766403 = score(doc=855,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25123185 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 855, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=855)
      0.35714287 = coord(5/14)
    
    Content
    Vgl. auch: New automatic interpreter for complex UDC numbers. Unter: <https%3A%2F%2Fudcc.org%2Ffiles%2FAttilaPiros_EC_36-37_2014-2015.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3kc9CwDDCWP7aArpfjrs5b>
  7. Woitas, K.: Bibliografische Daten, Normdaten und Metadaten im Semantic Web : Konzepte der bibliografischen Kontrolle im Wandel (2010) 0.03
    0.028334448 = product of:
      0.13222742 = sum of:
        0.045449268 = weight(_text_:wide in 115) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045449268 = score(doc=115,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1312982 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.34615302 = fieldWeight in 115, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=115)
        0.038986187 = weight(_text_:web in 115) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038986187 = score(doc=115,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.40312994 = fieldWeight in 115, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=115)
        0.047791965 = weight(_text_:bibliothek in 115) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047791965 = score(doc=115,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.121660605 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1055303 = idf(docFreq=1980, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.39283025 = fieldWeight in 115, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.1055303 = idf(docFreq=1980, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=115)
      0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    
    Abstract
    Bibliografische Daten, Normdaten und Metadaten im Semantic Web - Konzepte der Bibliografischen Kontrolle im Wandel. Der Titel dieser Arbeit zielt in ein essentielles Feld der Bibliotheks- und Informationswissenschaft, die Bibliografische Kontrolle. Als zweites zentrales Konzept wird der in der Weiterentwicklung des World Wide Webs (WWW) bedeutsame Begriff des Semantic Webs genannt. Auf den ersten Blick handelt es sich hier um einen ungleichen Wettstreit. Auf der einen Seite die Bibliografische Kontrolle, welche die Methoden und Mittel zur Erschließung von bibliothekarischen Objekten umfasst und traditionell in Form von formal-inhaltlichen Surrogaten in Katalogen daherkommt. Auf der anderen Seite das Buzzword Semantic Web mit seinen hochtrabenden Konnotationen eines durch Selbstreferenzialität "bedeutungstragenden", wenn nicht sogar "intelligenten" Webs. Wie kamen also eine wissenschaftliche Bibliothekarin und ein Mitglied des World Wide Web Consortiums 2007 dazu, gemeinsam einen Aufsatz zu publizieren und darin zu behaupten, das semantische Netz würde ein "bibliothekarischeres" Netz sein? Um sich dieser Frage zu nähern, soll zunächst kurz die historische Entwicklung der beiden Informationssphären Bibliothek und WWW gemeinsam betrachtet werden. Denn so oft - und völlig zurecht - die informationelle Revolution durch das Internet beschworen wird, so taucht auch immer wieder das Analogon einer weltweiten, virtuellen Bibliothek auf. Genauer gesagt, nahmen die theoretischen Überlegungen, die später zur Entwicklung des Internets führen sollten, ihren Ausgangspunkt (neben Kybernetik und entstehender Computertechnik) beim Konzept des Informationsspeichers Bibliothek.
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  8. Nagelschmidt, M.: Integration und Anwendung von "Semantic Web"-Technologien im betrieblichen Wissensmanagement (2012) 0.02
    0.023531388 = product of:
      0.08235986 = sum of:
        0.032137483 = weight(_text_:wide in 11) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032137483 = score(doc=11,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1312982 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.24476713 = fieldWeight in 11, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=11)
        0.03019857 = weight(_text_:web in 11) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03019857 = score(doc=11,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.3122631 = fieldWeight in 11, 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=11)
        0.0050448296 = weight(_text_:information in 11) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0050448296 = score(doc=11,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 11, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=11)
        0.014978974 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 11) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014978974 = score(doc=11,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 11, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=11)
      0.2857143 = coord(4/14)
    
    Abstract
    Das Wissensmanagement ist ein Themenkomplex mit zahlreichen fachlichen Bezügen, insbesondere zur Wirtschaftsinformatik und der Management-, Personal- und Organisationslehre als Teilbereiche der Betriebswirtschaftslehre. In einem weiter gefassten Verständnis bestehen aber auch Bezüge zur Organisationspsychologie, zur Informatik und zur Informationswissenschaft. Von den Entwicklungen in diesen Bezugsdisziplinen können deshalb auch Impulse für die Konzepte, Methodiken und Technologien des Wissensmanagements ausgehen. Die aus der Informatik stammende Idee, das World Wide Web (WWW) zu einem semantischen Netz auszubauen, kann als eine solche impulsgebende Entwicklung gesehen werden. Im Verlauf der vergangenen Dekade hat diese Idee einen hinreichenden Reifegrad erreicht, so dass eine potenzielle Relevanz auch für das Wissensmanagement unterstellt werden darf. Im Rahmen dieser Arbeit soll anhand eines konkreten, konzeptionellen Ansatzes demonstriert werden, wie dieser technologische Impuls für das Wissensmanagement nutzenbringend kanalisiert werden kann. Ein derartiges Erkenntnisinteresse erfordert zunächst die Erarbeitung eines operationalen Verständnisses von Wissensmanagement, auf dem die weiteren Betrachtungen aufbauen können. Es werden außerdem die Architektur und die Funktionsweise eines "Semantic Web" sowie XML und die Ontologiesprachen RDF/RDFS und OWL als maßgebliche Werkzeuge für eine ontologiebasierte Wissensrepräsentation eingeführt. Anschließend wird zur Integration und Anwendung dieser semantischen Technologien in das Wissensmanagement ein Ansatz vorgestellt, der eine weitgehend automatisierte Wissensmodellierung und daran anschließende, semantische Informationserschließung der betrieblichen Datenbasis beschreibt. Zur Veranschaulichung wird dazu auf eine fiktive Beispielwelt aus der Fertigungsindustrie zurückgegriffen. Schließlich soll der Nutzen dieser Vorgehensweise durch Anwendungsszenarien des Information Retrieval (IR) im Kontext von Geschäftsprozessen illustriert werden.
  9. Li, Z.: ¬A domain specific search engine with explicit document relations (2013) 0.02
    0.01962373 = product of:
      0.09157741 = sum of:
        0.032137483 = weight(_text_:wide in 1210) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032137483 = score(doc=1210,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1312982 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.24476713 = fieldWeight in 1210, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1210)
        0.052305456 = weight(_text_:web in 1210) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.052305456 = score(doc=1210,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.5408555 = fieldWeight in 1210, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1210)
        0.0071344664 = weight(_text_:information in 1210) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0071344664 = score(doc=1210,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 1210, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1210)
      0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    
    Abstract
    The current web consists of documents that are highly heterogeneous and hard for machines to understand. The Semantic Web is a progressive movement of the Word Wide Web, aiming at converting the current web of unstructured documents to the web of data. In the Semantic Web, web documents are annotated with metadata using standardized ontology language. These annotated documents are directly processable by machines and it highly improves their usability and usefulness. In Ericsson, similar problems occur. There are massive documents being created with well-defined structures. Though these documents are about domain specific knowledge and can have rich relations, they are currently managed by a traditional search engine, which ignores the rich domain specific information and presents few data to users. Motivated by the Semantic Web, we aim to find standard ways to process these documents, extract rich domain specific information and annotate these data to documents with formal markup languages. We propose this project to develop a domain specific search engine for processing different documents and building explicit relations for them. This research project consists of the three main focuses: examining different domain specific documents and finding ways to extract their metadata; integrating a text search engine with an ontology server; exploring novel ways to build relations for documents. We implement this system and demonstrate its functions. As a prototype, the system provides required features and will be extended in the future.
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  10. Vocht, L. De: Exploring semantic relationships in the Web of Data : Semantische relaties verkennen in data op het web (2017) 0.02
    0.018600633 = product of:
      0.06510221 = sum of:
        0.016068742 = weight(_text_:wide in 4232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016068742 = score(doc=4232,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1312982 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.122383565 = fieldWeight in 4232, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=4232)
        0.034870304 = weight(_text_:web in 4232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034870304 = score(doc=4232,freq=32.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.36057037 = fieldWeight in 4232, product of:
              5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
                32.0 = termFreq=32.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=4232)
        0.006673682 = weight(_text_:information in 4232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006673682 = score(doc=4232,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.128289 = fieldWeight in 4232, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=4232)
        0.007489487 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007489487 = score(doc=4232,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.08355226 = fieldWeight in 4232, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=4232)
      0.2857143 = coord(4/14)
    
    Abstract
    After the launch of the World Wide Web, it became clear that searching documentson the Web would not be trivial. Well-known engines to search the web, like Google, focus on search in web documents using keywords. The documents are structured and indexed to ensure keywords match documents as accurately as possible. However, searching by keywords does not always suice. It is oen the case that users do not know exactly how to formulate the search query or which keywords guarantee retrieving the most relevant documents. Besides that, it occurs that users rather want to browse information than looking up something specific. It turned out that there is need for systems that enable more interactivity and facilitate the gradual refinement of search queries to explore the Web. Users expect more from the Web because the short keyword-based queries they pose during search, do not suffice for all cases. On top of that, the Web is changing structurally. The Web comprises, apart from a collection of documents, more and more linked data, pieces of information structured so they can be processed by machines. The consequently applied semantics allow users to exactly indicate machines their search intentions. This is made possible by describing data following controlled vocabularies, concept lists composed by experts, published uniquely identifiable on the Web. Even so, it is still not trivial to explore data on the Web. There is a large variety of vocabularies and various data sources use different terms to identify the same concepts.
    This PhD-thesis describes how to effectively explore linked data on the Web. The main focus is on scenarios where users want to discover relationships between resources rather than finding out more about something specific. Searching for a specific document or piece of information fits in the theoretical framework of information retrieval and is associated with exploratory search. Exploratory search goes beyond 'looking up something' when users are seeking more detailed understanding, further investigation or navigation of the initial search results. The ideas behind exploratory search and querying linked data merge when it comes to the way knowledge is represented and indexed by machines - how data is structured and stored for optimal searchability. Queries and information should be aligned to facilitate that searches also reveal connections between results. This implies that they take into account the same semantic entities, relevant at that moment. To realize this, we research three techniques that are evaluated one by one in an experimental set-up to assess how well they succeed in their goals. In the end, the techniques are applied to a practical use case that focuses on forming a bridge between the Web and the use of digital libraries in scientific research. Our first technique focuses on the interactive visualization of search results. Linked data resources can be brought in relation with each other at will. This leads to complex and diverse graphs structures. Our technique facilitates navigation and supports a workflow starting from a broad overview on the data and allows narrowing down until the desired level of detail to then broaden again. To validate the flow, two visualizations where implemented and presented to test-users. The users judged the usability of the visualizations, how the visualizations fit in the workflow and to which degree their features seemed useful for the exploration of linked data.
    The ideas behind exploratory search and querying linked data merge when it comes to the way knowledge is represented and indexed by machines - how data is structured and stored for optimal searchability. eries and information should be aligned to facilitate that searches also reveal connections between results. This implies that they take into account the same semantic entities, relevant at that moment. To realize this, we research three techniques that are evaluated one by one in an experimental set-up to assess how well they succeed in their goals. In the end, the techniques are applied to a practical use case that focuses on forming a bridge between the Web and the use of digital libraries in scientific research.
    When we speak about finding relationships between resources, it is necessary to dive deeper in the structure. The graph structure of linked data where the semantics give meaning to the relationships between resources enable the execution of pathfinding algorithms. The assigned weights and heuristics are base components of such algorithms and ultimately define (the order) which resources are included in a path. These paths explain indirect connections between resources. Our third technique proposes an algorithm that optimizes the choice of resources in terms of serendipity. Some optimizations guard the consistence of candidate-paths where the coherence of consecutive connections is maximized to avoid trivial and too arbitrary paths. The implementation uses the A* algorithm, the de-facto reference when it comes to heuristically optimized minimal cost paths. The effectiveness of paths was measured based on common automatic metrics and surveys where the users could indicate their preference for paths, generated each time in a different way. Finally, all our techniques are applied to a use case about publications in digital libraries where they are aligned with information about scientific conferences and researchers. The application to this use case is a practical example because the different aspects of exploratory search come together. In fact, the techniques also evolved from the experiences when implementing the use case. Practical details about the semantic model are explained and the implementation of the search system is clarified module by module. The evaluation positions the result, a prototype of a tool to explore scientific publications, researchers and conferences next to some important alternatives.
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  11. Hannech, A.: Système de recherche d'information étendue basé sur une projection multi-espaces (2018) 0.02
    0.016166067 = product of:
      0.05658123 = sum of:
        0.018179707 = weight(_text_:wide in 4472) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018179707 = score(doc=4472,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1312982 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.1384612 = fieldWeight in 4472, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=4472)
        0.019725623 = weight(_text_:web in 4472) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019725623 = score(doc=4472,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.2039694 = fieldWeight in 4472, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=4472)
        0.0066927224 = weight(_text_:information in 4472) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0066927224 = score(doc=4472,freq=22.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.12865502 = fieldWeight in 4472, product of:
              4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
                22.0 = termFreq=22.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=4472)
        0.0119831795 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4472) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0119831795 = score(doc=4472,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.13368362 = fieldWeight in 4472, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=4472)
      0.2857143 = coord(4/14)
    
    Abstract
    Depuis son apparition au début des années 90, le World Wide Web (WWW ou Web) a offert un accès universel aux connaissances et le monde de l'information a été principalement témoin d'une grande révolution (la révolution numérique). Il est devenu rapidement très populaire, ce qui a fait de lui la plus grande et vaste base de données et de connaissances existantes grâce à la quantité et la diversité des données qu'il contient. Cependant, l'augmentation et l'évolution considérables de ces données soulèvent d'importants problèmes pour les utilisateurs notamment pour l'accès aux documents les plus pertinents à leurs requêtes de recherche. Afin de faire face à cette explosion exponentielle du volume de données et faciliter leur accès par les utilisateurs, différents modèles sont proposés par les systèmes de recherche d'information (SRIs) pour la représentation et la recherche des documents web. Les SRIs traditionnels utilisent, pour indexer et récupérer ces documents, des mots-clés simples qui ne sont pas sémantiquement liés. Cela engendre des limites en termes de la pertinence et de la facilité d'exploration des résultats. Pour surmonter ces limites, les techniques existantes enrichissent les documents en intégrant des mots-clés externes provenant de différentes sources. Cependant, ces systèmes souffrent encore de limitations qui sont liées aux techniques d'exploitation de ces sources d'enrichissement. Lorsque les différentes sources sont utilisées de telle sorte qu'elles ne peuvent être distinguées par le système, cela limite la flexibilité des modèles d'exploration qui peuvent être appliqués aux résultats de recherche retournés par ce système. Les utilisateurs se sentent alors perdus devant ces résultats, et se retrouvent dans l'obligation de les filtrer manuellement pour sélectionner l'information pertinente. S'ils veulent aller plus loin, ils doivent reformuler et cibler encore plus leurs requêtes de recherche jusqu'à parvenir aux documents qui répondent le mieux à leurs attentes. De cette façon, même si les systèmes parviennent à retrouver davantage des résultats pertinents, leur présentation reste problématique. Afin de cibler la recherche à des besoins d'information plus spécifiques de l'utilisateur et améliorer la pertinence et l'exploration de ses résultats de recherche, les SRIs avancés adoptent différentes techniques de personnalisation de données qui supposent que la recherche actuelle d'un utilisateur est directement liée à son profil et/ou à ses expériences de navigation/recherche antérieures. Cependant, cette hypothèse ne tient pas dans tous les cas, les besoins de l'utilisateur évoluent au fil du temps et peuvent s'éloigner de ses intérêts antérieurs stockés dans son profil.
    Dans d'autres cas, le profil de l'utilisateur peut être mal exploité pour extraire ou inférer ses nouveaux besoins en information. Ce problème est beaucoup plus accentué avec les requêtes ambigües. Lorsque plusieurs centres d'intérêt auxquels est liée une requête ambiguë sont identifiés dans le profil de l'utilisateur, le système se voit incapable de sélectionner les données pertinentes depuis ce profil pour répondre à la requête. Ceci a un impact direct sur la qualité des résultats fournis à cet utilisateur. Afin de remédier à quelques-unes de ces limitations, nous nous sommes intéressés dans ce cadre de cette thèse de recherche au développement de techniques destinées principalement à l'amélioration de la pertinence des résultats des SRIs actuels et à faciliter l'exploration de grandes collections de documents. Pour ce faire, nous proposons une solution basée sur un nouveau concept d'indexation et de recherche d'information appelé la projection multi-espaces. Cette proposition repose sur l'exploitation de différentes catégories d'information sémantiques et sociales qui permettent d'enrichir l'univers de représentation des documents et des requêtes de recherche en plusieurs dimensions d'interprétations. L'originalité de cette représentation est de pouvoir distinguer entre les différentes interprétations utilisées pour la description et la recherche des documents. Ceci donne une meilleure visibilité sur les résultats retournés et aide à apporter une meilleure flexibilité de recherche et d'exploration, en donnant à l'utilisateur la possibilité de naviguer une ou plusieurs vues de données qui l'intéressent le plus. En outre, les univers multidimensionnels de représentation proposés pour la description des documents et l'interprétation des requêtes de recherche aident à améliorer la pertinence des résultats de l'utilisateur en offrant une diversité de recherche/exploration qui aide à répondre à ses différents besoins et à ceux des autres différents utilisateurs. Cette étude exploite différents aspects liés à la recherche personnalisée et vise à résoudre les problèmes engendrés par l'évolution des besoins en information de l'utilisateur. Ainsi, lorsque le profil de cet utilisateur est utilisé par notre système, une technique est proposée et employée pour identifier les intérêts les plus représentatifs de ses besoins actuels dans son profil. Cette technique se base sur la combinaison de trois facteurs influents, notamment le facteur contextuel, fréquentiel et temporel des données. La capacité des utilisateurs à interagir, à échanger des idées et d'opinions, et à former des réseaux sociaux sur le Web, a amené les systèmes à s'intéresser aux types d'interactions de ces utilisateurs, au niveau d'interaction entre eux ainsi qu'à leurs rôles sociaux dans le système. Ces informations sociales sont abordées et intégrées dans ce travail de recherche. L'impact et la manière de leur intégration dans le processus de RI sont étudiés pour améliorer la pertinence des résultats.
    Since its appearance in the early 90's, the World Wide Web (WWW or Web) has provided universal access to knowledge and the world of information has been primarily witness to a great revolution (the digital revolution). It quickly became very popular, making it the largest and most comprehensive database and knowledge base thanks to the amount and diversity of data it contains. However, the considerable increase and evolution of these data raises important problems for users, in particular for accessing the documents most relevant to their search queries. In order to cope with this exponential explosion of data volume and facilitate their access by users, various models are offered by information retrieval systems (IRS) for the representation and retrieval of web documents. Traditional SRIs use simple keywords that are not semantically linked to index and retrieve these documents. This creates limitations in terms of the relevance and ease of exploration of results. To overcome these limitations, existing techniques enrich documents by integrating external keywords from different sources. However, these systems still suffer from limitations that are related to the exploitation techniques of these sources of enrichment. When the different sources are used so that they cannot be distinguished by the system, this limits the flexibility of the exploration models that can be applied to the results returned by this system. Users then feel lost to these results, and find themselves forced to filter them manually to select the relevant information. If they want to go further, they must reformulate and target their search queries even more until they reach the documents that best meet their expectations. In this way, even if the systems manage to find more relevant results, their presentation remains problematic. In order to target research to more user-specific information needs and improve the relevance and exploration of its research findings, advanced SRIs adopt different data personalization techniques that assume that current research of user is directly related to his profile and / or previous browsing / search experiences.
    However, this assumption does not hold in all cases, the needs of the user evolve over time and can move away from his previous interests stored in his profile. In other cases, the user's profile may be misused to extract or infer new information needs. This problem is much more accentuated with ambiguous queries. When multiple POIs linked to a search query are identified in the user's profile, the system is unable to select the relevant data from that profile to respond to that request. This has a direct impact on the quality of the results provided to this user. In order to overcome some of these limitations, in this research thesis, we have been interested in the development of techniques aimed mainly at improving the relevance of the results of current SRIs and facilitating the exploration of major collections of documents. To do this, we propose a solution based on a new concept and model of indexing and information retrieval called multi-spaces projection. This proposal is based on the exploitation of different categories of semantic and social information that enrich the universe of document representation and search queries in several dimensions of interpretations. The originality of this representation is to be able to distinguish between the different interpretations used for the description and the search for documents. This gives a better visibility on the results returned and helps to provide a greater flexibility of search and exploration, giving the user the ability to navigate one or more views of data that interest him the most. In addition, the proposed multidimensional representation universes for document description and search query interpretation help to improve the relevance of the user's results by providing a diversity of research / exploration that helps meet his diverse needs and those of other different users. This study exploits different aspects that are related to the personalized search and aims to solve the problems caused by the evolution of the information needs of the user. Thus, when the profile of this user is used by our system, a technique is proposed and used to identify the interests most representative of his current needs in his profile. This technique is based on the combination of three influential factors, including the contextual, frequency and temporal factor of the data. The ability of users to interact, exchange ideas and opinions, and form social networks on the Web, has led systems to focus on the types of interactions these users have at the level of interaction between them as well as their social roles in the system. This social information is discussed and integrated into this research work. The impact and how they are integrated into the IR process are studied to improve the relevance of the results.
    Theme
    Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
  12. Kara, S.: ¬An ontology-based retrieval system using semantic indexing (2012) 0.01
    0.01478128 = product of:
      0.06897931 = sum of:
        0.020922182 = weight(_text_:web in 3829) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020922182 = score(doc=3829,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 3829, 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=3829)
        0.012107591 = weight(_text_:information in 3829) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012107591 = score(doc=3829,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 3829, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3829)
        0.03594954 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3829) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03594954 = score(doc=3829,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.40105087 = fieldWeight in 3829, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3829)
      0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    
    Abstract
    In this thesis, we present an ontology-based information extraction and retrieval system and its application to soccer domain. In general, we deal with three issues in semantic search, namely, usability, scalability and retrieval performance. We propose a keyword-based semantic retrieval approach. The performance of the system is improved considerably using domain-specific information extraction, inference and rules. Scalability is achieved by adapting a semantic indexing approach. The system is implemented using the state-of-the-art technologies in SemanticWeb and its performance is evaluated against traditional systems as well as the query expansion methods. Furthermore, a detailed evaluation is provided to observe the performance gain due to domain-specific information extraction and inference. Finally, we show how we use semantic indexing to solve simple structural ambiguities.
    Source
    Information Systems. 37(2012) no. 4, S.294-305
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  13. Líska, M.: Evaluation of mathematics retrieval (2013) 0.01
    0.014527298 = product of:
      0.067794055 = sum of:
        0.024409214 = weight(_text_:web in 1653) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024409214 = score(doc=1653,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.25239927 = fieldWeight in 1653, 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=1653)
        0.0070627616 = weight(_text_:information in 1653) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0070627616 = score(doc=1653,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 1653, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1653)
        0.036322083 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1653) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.036322083 = score(doc=1653,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.40520695 = fieldWeight in 1653, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1653)
      0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    
    Abstract
    The thesis deals with the evaluation of mathematics information retrieval (IR). It gives an overview of the history of regular IR evaluation, initiatives that are engaged in this field of research as well as most common methods and measures used for evaluation. The findings are applied to the specifics of mathematics retrieval. This thesis also summarizes the state-of-the-art of MIaS math search system, which is already being used in an international web portal. Latest developments aiming towards the second version of the system are described. In addition to participating in the international evaluation conference and workshop, MIaS is tested for effectiveness and efficiency in this work. Measured performance indicators are evaluated and future work is suggested accordingly.
  14. Effenberger, C.: ¬Die Dewey Dezimalklassifikation als Erschließungsinstrument : optimiertes Retrieval durch eine Versionierung der DDC (2011) 0.01
    0.012652667 = product of:
      0.05904578 = sum of:
        0.039021976 = weight(_text_:bibliothek in 4321) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039021976 = score(doc=4321,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.121660605 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1055303 = idf(docFreq=1980, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.32074454 = fieldWeight in 4321, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.1055303 = idf(docFreq=1980, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4321)
        0.0050448296 = weight(_text_:information in 4321) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0050448296 = score(doc=4321,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 4321, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4321)
        0.014978974 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4321) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014978974 = score(doc=4321,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 4321, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4321)
      0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    
    Abstract
    Unsere Welt ist voller Informationen. Diese werden seit jeher in eine systematische Ordnung gebracht. In der Geschichte der Wissensreprasentation spielen Bibliotheken und Bibliothekare eine grose Rolle. Bereits in der Antike gab es Kataloge. In der Bibliothek der Ptolemaer in Alexandria erarbeitete der Bibliothekar Kallimachos (ca. 305 . ca. 240 v.Chr.) die .Pinakes_g (Pinax: altgriechisch fur Tafel und Verzeichnis), die sehr wahrscheinlich gleichzeitig einen systematischen Katalog und eine Bibliographie verkorperten. Zusatzlich wurden die Dokumente rudimentar mittels eines vorgegebenen Ordnungssystems erschlossen und der Inhalt ruckte in den Mittelpunkt. Auch Philosophen hatten ihren Anteil an den Grundlagen der Wissensreprasentation. Aristoteles (384_]322 v.Chr.) arbeitete Kriterien aus, nach denen Begriffe voneinander zu differenzieren sind und nach denen Begriffe in eine hierarchische Ordnung gebracht werden. Das waren die Grundlagen fur Klassifikationen. Eine methodische Revolution erleben Klassifikationsforschung und .praxis mit der .Decimal Classification_g (1876) des amerikanischen Bibliothekars Melvil Dewey (1851_]1931). Die Grundidee der Klassifikation war einfach. Das Wissen wurde in maximal zehn Unterbegriffe unterteilt und durch Dezimalzeichen dargestellt. Die Aufstellung der Bucher in der Bibliothek folgte der Klassifikation, so dass thematisch verwandte Werke dicht beieinander standen. Die Dewey Dezimalklassifikation (DDC) wird auch heute noch haufig fur die inhaltliche Erschliesung genutzt und im Umkehrschluss um Dokumente aus einer Fulle von Informationen herausfinden zu konnen.
    Content
    Masterarbeit im Studiengang Information Science & Engineering / Informationswissenschaft
  15. Knitel, M.: ¬The application of linked data principles to library data : opportunities and challenges (2012) 0.01
    0.012151523 = product of:
      0.056707103 = sum of:
        0.032137483 = weight(_text_:wide in 599) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032137483 = score(doc=599,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1312982 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.24476713 = fieldWeight in 599, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=599)
        0.017435152 = weight(_text_:web in 599) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017435152 = score(doc=599,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 599, 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=599)
        0.0071344664 = weight(_text_:information in 599) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0071344664 = score(doc=599,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 599, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=599)
      0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    
    Abstract
    Linked Data hat sich im Laufe der letzten Jahre zu einem vorherrschenden Thema der Bibliothekswissenschaft entwickelt. Als ein Standard für Erfassung und Austausch von Daten, bestehen zahlreiche Berührungspunkte mit traditionellen bibliothekarischen Techniken. Diese Arbeit stellt in einem ersten Teil die grundlegenden Technologien dieses neuen Paradigmas vor, um sodann deren Anwendung auf bibliothekarische Daten zu untersuchen. Den zentralen Prinzipien der Linked Data Initiative folgend, werden dabei die Adressierung von Entitäten durch URIs, die Anwendung des RDF Datenmodells und die Verknüpfung von heterogenen Datenbeständen näher beleuchtet. Den dabei zu Tage tretenden Herausforderungen der Sicherstellung von qualitativ hochwertiger Information, der permanenten Adressierung von Inhalten im World Wide Web sowie Problemen der Interoperabilität von Metadatenstandards wird dabei besondere Aufmerksamkeit geschenkt. Der letzte Teil der Arbeit skizziert ein Programm, welches eine mögliche Erweiterung der Suchmaschine des österreichischen Bibliothekenverbundes darstellt. Dessen prototypische Umsetzung erlaubt eine realistische Einschätzung der derzeitigen Möglichkeiten von Linked Data und unterstreicht viele der vorher theoretisch erarbeiteten Themengebiete. Es zeigt sich, dass für den voll produktiven Einsatz von Linked Data noch viele Hürden zu überwinden sind. Insbesondere befinden sich viele Projekte derzeit noch in einem frühen Reifegrad. Andererseits sind die Möglichkeiten, die aus einem konsequenten Einsatz von RDF resultieren würden, vielversprechend. RDF qualifiziert sich somit als Kandidat für den Ersatz von auslaufenden bibliographischen Datenformaten wie MAB oder MARC.
    Footnote
    Wien, Univ., Lehrgang Library and Information Studies, Master-Thesis, 2012.
  16. Pfeiffer, S.: Entwicklung einer Ontologie für die wissensbasierte Erschließung des ISDC-Repository und die Visualisierung kontextrelevanter semantischer Zusammenhänge (2010) 0.01
    0.011983432 = product of:
      0.05592268 = sum of:
        0.022496238 = weight(_text_:wide in 4658) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022496238 = score(doc=4658,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1312982 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.171337 = fieldWeight in 4658, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4658)
        0.02989506 = weight(_text_:web in 4658) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02989506 = score(doc=4658,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.3091247 = fieldWeight in 4658, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4658)
        0.0035313808 = weight(_text_:information in 4658) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0035313808 = score(doc=4658,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.06788416 = fieldWeight in 4658, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4658)
      0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    
    Abstract
    In der heutigen Zeit sind Informationen jeglicher Art über das World Wide Web (WWW) für eine breite Bevölkerungsschicht zugänglich. Dabei ist es jedoch schwierig die existierenden Dokumente auch so aufzubereiten, dass die Inhalte für Maschinen inhaltlich interpretierbar sind. Das Semantic Web, eine Weiterentwicklung des WWWs, möchte dies ändern, indem es Webinhalte in maschinenverständlichen Formaten anbietet. Dadurch können Automatisierungsprozesse für die Suchanfragenoptimierung und für die Wissensbasenvernetzung eingesetzt werden. Die Web Ontology Language (OWL) ist eine mögliche Sprache, in der Wissen beschrieben und gespeichert werden kann (siehe Kapitel 4 OWL). Das Softwareprodukt Protégé unterstützt den Standard OWL, weshalb ein Großteil der Modellierungsarbeiten in Protégé durchgeführt wurde. Momentan erhält der Nutzer in den meisten Fällen bei der Informationsfindung im Internet lediglich Unterstützung durch eine von Suchmaschinenbetreibern vorgenommene Verschlagwortung des Dokumentinhaltes, d.h. Dokumente können nur nach einem bestimmten Wort oder einer bestimmten Wortgruppe durchsucht werden. Die Ausgabeliste der Suchergebnisse muss dann durch den Nutzer selbst gesichtet und nach Relevanz geordnet werden. Das kann ein sehr zeit- und arbeitsintensiver Prozess sein. Genau hier kann das Semantic Web einen erheblichen Beitrag in der Informationsaufbereitung für den Nutzer leisten, da die Ausgabe der Suchergebnisse bereits einer semantischen Überprüfung und Verknüpfung unterliegt. Deshalb fallen hier nicht relevante Informationsquellen von vornherein bei der Ausgabe heraus, was das Finden von gesuchten Dokumenten und Informationen in einem bestimmten Wissensbereich beschleunigt.
    Um die Vernetzung von Daten, Informationen und Wissen imWWWzu verbessern, werden verschiedene Ansätze verfolgt. Neben dem Semantic Web mit seinen verschiedenen Ausprägungen gibt es auch andere Ideen und Konzepte, welche die Verknüpfung von Wissen unterstützen. Foren, soziale Netzwerke und Wikis sind eine Möglichkeit des Wissensaustausches. In Wikis wird Wissen in Form von Artikeln gebündelt, um es so einer breiten Masse zur Verfügung zu stellen. Hier angebotene Informationen sollten jedoch kritisch hinterfragt werden, da die Autoren der Artikel in den meisten Fällen keine Verantwortung für die dort veröffentlichten Inhalte übernehmen müssen. Ein anderer Weg Wissen zu vernetzen bietet das Web of Linked Data. Hierbei werden strukturierte Daten des WWWs durch Verweise auf andere Datenquellen miteinander verbunden. Der Nutzer wird so im Zuge der Suche auf themenverwandte und verlinkte Datenquellen verwiesen. Die geowissenschaftlichen Metadaten mit ihren Inhalten und Beziehungen untereinander, die beim GFZ unter anderem im Information System and Data Center (ISDC) gespeichert sind, sollen als Ontologie in dieser Arbeit mit den Sprachkonstrukten von OWL modelliert werden. Diese Ontologie soll die Repräsentation und Suche von ISDC-spezifischem Domänenwissen durch die semantische Vernetzung persistenter ISDC-Metadaten entscheidend verbessern. Die in dieser Arbeit aufgezeigten Modellierungsmöglichkeiten, zunächst mit der Extensible Markup Language (XML) und später mit OWL, bilden die existierenden Metadatenbestände auf einer semantischen Ebene ab (siehe Abbildung 2). Durch die definierte Nutzung der Semantik, die in OWL vorhanden ist, kann mittels Maschinen ein Mehrwert aus den Metadaten gewonnen und dem Nutzer zur Verfügung gestellt werden. Geowissenschaftliche Informationen, Daten und Wissen können in semantische Zusammenhänge gebracht und verständlich repräsentiert werden. Unterstützende Informationen können ebenfalls problemlos in die Ontologie eingebunden werden. Dazu gehören z.B. Bilder zu den im ISDC gespeicherten Instrumenten, Plattformen oder Personen. Suchanfragen bezüglich geowissenschaftlicher Phänomene können auch ohne Expertenwissen über Zusammenhänge und Begriffe gestellt und beantwortet werden. Die Informationsrecherche und -aufbereitung gewinnt an Qualität und nutzt die existierenden Ressourcen im vollen Umfang.
  17. Siever, C.M.: Multimodale Kommunikation im Social Web : Forschungsansätze und Analysen zu Text-Bild-Relationen (2015) 0.01
    0.010918611 = product of:
      0.07643027 = sum of:
        0.02465703 = weight(_text_:web in 4056) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02465703 = score(doc=4056,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.25496176 = fieldWeight in 4056, 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=4056)
        0.05177324 = weight(_text_:elektronische in 4056) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05177324 = score(doc=4056,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14013545 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.728978 = idf(docFreq=1061, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.3694514 = fieldWeight in 4056, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.728978 = idf(docFreq=1061, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4056)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    Multimodalität ist ein typisches Merkmal der Kommunikation im Social Web. Der Fokus dieses Bandes liegt auf der Kommunikation in Foto-Communitys, insbesondere auf den beiden kommunikativen Praktiken des Social Taggings und des Verfassens von Notizen innerhalb von Bildern. Bei den Tags stehen semantische Text-Bild-Relationen im Vordergrund: Tags dienen der Wissensrepräsentation, eine adäquate Versprachlichung der Bilder ist folglich unabdingbar. Notizen-Bild-Relationen sind aus pragmatischer Perspektive von Interesse: Die Informationen eines Kommunikats werden komplementär auf Text und Bild verteilt, was sich in verschiedenen sprachlichen Phänomenen niederschlägt. Ein diachroner Vergleich mit der Postkartenkommunikation sowie ein Exkurs zur Kommunikation mit Emojis runden das Buch ab.
    BK
    05.38 Neue elektronische Medien Kommunikationswissenschaft
    Classification
    05.38 Neue elektronische Medien Kommunikationswissenschaft
  18. Fischer, M.: Sacherschliessung - quo vadis? : Die Neuausrichtung der Sacherschliessung im deutschsprachigen Raum (2015) 0.01
    0.010806834 = product of:
      0.07564784 = sum of:
        0.045449268 = weight(_text_:wide in 2029) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045449268 = score(doc=2029,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1312982 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.34615302 = fieldWeight in 2029, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2029)
        0.03019857 = weight(_text_:web in 2029) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03019857 = score(doc=2029,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.3122631 = fieldWeight in 2029, 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=2029)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    Informationen werden heute von den meisten Menschen vor allem im World Wide Web gesucht. Bibliothekskataloge und damit die in den wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken gepflegte intellektuelle Sacherschliessung konkurrieren dabei mit einfach und intuitiv zu benutzenden Suchmaschinen. Die Anforderungen an die thematische Recherche hat sich in den letzten Jahren durch die rasante Entwicklung der Informationstechnologie grundlegend verändert. Darüber hinaus sehen sich die Bibliotheken heute mit dem Problem konfrontiert, dass die zunehmende Flut an elektronischen Publikationen bei gleichzeitig abnehmenden Ressourcen intellektuell nicht mehr bewältigt werden kann. Vor diesem Hintergrund hat die Expertengruppe Sacherschliessung - eine Arbeitsgruppe innerhalb der Arbeitsstelle für Standardisierung der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek (DNB), in welcher Vertreterinnen und Vertreter der deutschsprachigen Bibliotheksverbünde repräsentiert sind - 2013 damit begonnen, sich mit der Neuausrichtung der verbalen Sacherschliessung zu befassen. Bei der aktuellen Überarbeitung der Regeln für den Schlagwortkatalog (RSWK) sollen die verbale und klassifikatorische Sacherschliessung, ebenso wie die intellektuelle und automatische Indexierung in einem Zusammenhang betrachtet werden. Neben der neuen Suchmaschinentechnologie und den automatischen Indexierungsmethoden gewinnt dabei vor allem die Vernetzung der Bibliothekskataloge mit anderen Ressourcen im World Wide Web immer mehr an Bedeutung. Ausgehend von einer Analyse der grundlegenden Prinzipien der international verbreiteten Normen und Standards (FRBR, FRSAD und RDA) beschäftige ich mich in meiner Masterarbeit mit der in der Expertengruppe Sacherschliessung geführten Debatte über die aktuelle Überarbeitung der RSWK. Dabei stellt sich insbesondere die Frage, welche Auswirkungen die rasante Entwicklung der Informationstechnologie auf die zukünftige Neuausrichtung der intellektuellen Sacherschliessung haben wird? Welche Rolle spielen in Zukunft die Suchmaschinen und Discovery Systeme, die automatischen Indexierungsverfahren und das Semantic Web bzw. Linked Open Data bei der inhaltlichen Erschliessung von bibliografischen Ressourcen?
  19. Schmolz, H.: Anaphora resolution and text retrieval : a lnguistic analysis of hypertexts (2015) 0.01
    0.009451089 = product of:
      0.066157624 = sum of:
        0.014268933 = weight(_text_:information in 1172) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014268933 = score(doc=1172,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.27429342 = fieldWeight in 1172, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1172)
        0.05188869 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1172) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05188869 = score(doc=1172,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.5788671 = fieldWeight in 1172, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1172)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    RSWK
    Englisch / Anapher <Syntax> / Hypertext / Information Retrieval / Korpus <Linguistik>
    Subject
    Englisch / Anapher <Syntax> / Hypertext / Information Retrieval / Korpus <Linguistik>
  20. Kiren, T.: ¬A clustering based indexing technique of modularized ontologies for information retrieval (2017) 0.01
    0.009335049 = product of:
      0.043563563 = sum of:
        0.011415146 = weight(_text_:information in 4399) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011415146 = score(doc=4399,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 4399, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4399)
        0.026795205 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4399) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026795205 = score(doc=4399,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.29892567 = fieldWeight in 4399, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4399)
        0.0053532133 = product of:
          0.016059639 = sum of:
            0.016059639 = weight(_text_:22 in 4399) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.016059639 = score(doc=4399,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.103770934 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.029633347 = queryNorm
                0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 4399, 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=4399)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    
    Abstract
    Indexing plays a vital role in Information Retrieval. With the availability of huge volume of information, it has become necessary to index the information in such a way to make easier for the end users to find the information they want efficiently and accurately. Keyword-based indexing uses words as indexing terms. It is not capable of capturing the implicit relation among terms or the semantics of the words in the document. To eliminate this limitation, ontology-based indexing came into existence, which allows semantic based indexing to solve complex and indirect user queries. Ontologies are used for document indexing which allows semantic based information retrieval. Existing ontologies or the ones constructed from scratch are used presently for indexing. Constructing ontologies from scratch is a labor-intensive task and requires extensive domain knowledge whereas use of an existing ontology may leave some important concepts in documents un-annotated. Using multiple ontologies can overcome the problem of missing out concepts to a great extent, but it is difficult to manage (changes in ontologies over time by their developers) multiple ontologies and ontology heterogeneity also arises due to ontologies constructed by different ontology developers. One possible solution to managing multiple ontologies and build from scratch is to use modular ontologies for indexing.
    Modular ontologies are built in modular manner by combining modules from multiple relevant ontologies. Ontology heterogeneity also arises during modular ontology construction because multiple ontologies are being dealt with, during this process. Ontologies need to be aligned before using them for modular ontology construction. The existing approaches for ontology alignment compare all the concepts of each ontology to be aligned, hence not optimized in terms of time and search space utilization. A new indexing technique is proposed based on modular ontology. An efficient ontology alignment technique is proposed to solve the heterogeneity problem during the construction of modular ontology. Results are satisfactory as Precision and Recall are improved by (8%) and (10%) respectively. The value of Pearsons Correlation Coefficient for degree of similarity, time, search space requirement, precision and recall are close to 1 which shows that the results are significant. Further research can be carried out for using modular ontology based indexing technique for Multimedia Information Retrieval and Bio-Medical information retrieval.
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22

Languages

  • d 50
  • e 19
  • a 1
  • f 1
  • hu 1
  • pt 1
  • More… Less…

Types