Search (10 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × year_i:[1980 TO 1990}
  • × theme_ss:"Automatisches Klassifizieren"
  1. Bock, H.-H.: Datenanalyse zur Strukturierung und Ordnung von Information (1989) 0.01 
    0.008468943 = product of:
  0.063517064 = sum of:
    0.0291276 = weight(_text_:und in 141) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0291276 = score(doc=141,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.4535172 = fieldWeight in 141, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=141)
    0.034389466 = sum of:
      0.00690658 = weight(_text_:information in 141) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.00690658 = score(doc=141,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.028978055 = queryNorm
          0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 141, 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=141)
      0.027482886 = weight(_text_:22 in 141) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.027482886 = score(doc=141,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.101476215 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.028978055 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 141, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=141)
  0.13333334 = coord(2/15)
    Abstract
    Aufgabe der Datenanalyse ist es, Daten zu ordnen, übersichtlich darzustellen, verborgene und natürlich Strukturen zu entdecken, die diesbezüglich wesentlichen Eigenschaften herauszukristallisieren und zweckmäßige Modelle zur Beschreibung von Daten aufzustellen. Es wird ein Einblick in die Methoden und Prinzipien der Datenanalyse vermittelt. Anhand typischer Beispiele wird gezeigt, welche Daten analysiert, welche Strukturen betrachtet, welche Darstellungs- bzw. Ordnungsmethoden verwendet, welche Zielsetzungen verfolgt und welche Bewertungskriterien dabei angewendet werden können. Diskutiert wird auch die angemessene Verwendung der unterschiedlichen Methoden, wobei auf die gefahr und Art von Fehlinterpretationen hingewiesen wird
    Pages
    S.1-22
    Source
    Klassifikation und Ordnung. Tagungsband 12. Jahrestagung der Gesellschaft für Klassifikation, Darmstadt 17.-19.3.1988. Hrsg.: R. Wille
  2. Panyr, J.: Automatische Klassifikation und Information Retrieval : Anwendung und Entwicklung komplexer Verfahren in Information-Retrieval-Systemen und ihre Evaluierung (1986) 0.01 
    0.006399925 = product of:
  0.047999434 = sum of:
    0.037745822 = weight(_text_:und in 32) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.037745822 = score(doc=32,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.58770305 = fieldWeight in 32, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=32)
    0.010253613 = product of:
      0.020507226 = sum of:
        0.020507226 = weight(_text_:information in 32) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020507226 = score(doc=32,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.40312737 = fieldWeight in 32, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=32)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.13333334 = coord(2/15)
    Series
    Sprache und Information; Bd.12
  3. Panyr, J.: Vektorraum-Modell und Clusteranalyse in Information-Retrieval-Systemen (1987) 0.00 
    0.0038171073 = product of:
  0.028628303 = sum of:
    0.02179256 = weight(_text_:und in 2322) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02179256 = score(doc=2322,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.33931053 = fieldWeight in 2322, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2322)
    0.006835742 = product of:
      0.013671484 = sum of:
        0.013671484 = weight(_text_:information in 2322) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013671484 = score(doc=2322,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.2687516 = fieldWeight in 2322, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2322)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.13333334 = coord(2/15)
    Abstract
    Ausgehend von theoretischen Indexierungsansätzen wird das klassische Vektorraum-Modell für automatische Indexierung (mit dem Trennschärfen-Modell) erläutert. Das Clustering in Information-Retrieval-Systemem wird als eine natürliche logische Folge aus diesem Modell aufgefaßt und in allen seinen Ausprägungen (d.h. als Dokumenten-, Term- oder Dokumenten- und Termklassifikation) behandelt. Anschließend werden die Suchstrategien in vorklassifizierten Dokumentenbeständen (Clustersuche) detailliert beschrieben. Zum Schluß wird noch die sinnvolle Anwendung der Clusteranalyse in Information-Retrieval-Systemen kurz diskutiert
  4. Panyr, J.: Automatische Indexierung und Klassifikation (1983) 0.00 
    0.0020546224 = product of:
  0.030819334 = sum of:
    0.030819334 = weight(_text_:und in 7692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030819334 = score(doc=7692,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.47985753 = fieldWeight in 7692, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7692)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    Abstract
    Im Beitrag wird zunächst eine terminologische Klärung und Gliederung für drei Indexierungsmethoden und weitere Begriffe, die Konsistenzprobleme bei intellektueller Indexierung betreffen, unternommen. Zur automatichen Indexierung werden Extraktionsmethoden erläutert und zur Automatischen Klassifikation (Clustering) und Indexierung zwei Anwendungen vorgestellt. Eine enge Kooperation zwischen den Befürwortern der intellektuellen und den Entwicklern von automatischen Indexierungsverfahren wird empfohlen
  5. Greiner, G.: Intellektuelles und automatisches Klassifizieren (1981) 0.00 
    0.0016775922 = product of:
  0.025163881 = sum of:
    0.025163881 = weight(_text_:und in 1103) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025163881 = score(doc=1103,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.39180204 = fieldWeight in 1103, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1103)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
  6. Panyr, J.: Automatische thematische Textklassifikation und ihre Interpretation in der Dokumentengrobrecherche (1980) 0.00 
    0.0014678931 = product of:
  0.022018395 = sum of:
    0.022018395 = weight(_text_:und in 100) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022018395 = score(doc=100,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.34282678 = fieldWeight in 100, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=100)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    Abstract
    Für die automatische Erschließung natürlich-sprachlicher Dokumente in einem Informationssystem wurde ein Verfahren zur automatischen thematischen hierarchischen Klassifikation der Texte entwickelt. Die dabei gewonnene Ordnungsstruktur (Begriffsnetz) wird beim Retrieval als Recherchehilfe engeboten. Die Klassifikation erfolgt in vier Stufen: Textindexierung, Prioritätsklassenbildung, Verknüpfung der begriffe und Vernetzung der Prioritätsklassen miteinander. Die so entstandenen Wichtigkeitsstufen sind die Hierarchieebenen der Klassifikation. Die während des Clusteringverfahrens erzeugten Begriffs- und Dokumenten-Gruppierungen bilden die Knoten des Klassifikationsnetzes. Die Verknüpfung zwischen den Knoten benachbarter Prioritätsklassen repräsentieren die Netzwege in diesem Netz. Die Abbildung der Suchfrage auf dieses Begriffsnetz wird zur Relevanzbeurteilung der wiedergewonnenen Texte benutzt
    Source
    Wissensstrukturen und Ordnungsmuster. Proc. der 4. Fachtagung der Gesellschaft für Klassifikation, Salzburg, 16.-19.4.1980. Red.: W. Dahlberg
  7. Fuhr, N.: Klassifikationsverfahren bei der automatischen Indexierung (1983) 0.00 
    0.0011862369 = product of:
  0.017793551 = sum of:
    0.017793551 = weight(_text_:und in 7697) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017793551 = score(doc=7697,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.27704588 = fieldWeight in 7697, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7697)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    Abstract
    Nach einer kurzen Einführung in die Darmstädter Projekte WAI und AIR werden die folgenden Themen behandelt: Ein Ansatz zur automatischen Klassifikation. Statistische Relationen für die Klassifikation. Indexieren von Dokumenten als Spezialfall der automatischen Klassifikation. Klassifikation von Elementen der Relevanzbeschreibung. Klassifikation zur Verbesserung der Relevanzbeschreibungen. Automatische Dokumentklassifikation und Automatische Indexierung klassifizierter Dokumente. Das Projekt AIR wird in Zusammenarbeit mit der Datenbasis INKA-PHYS des Fachinformationszentrums Energie, Physik, Mathematik in Karlsruhe durchgeführt
  8. Krauth, J.: Evaluation von Verfahren der automatischen Klassifikation (1983) 0.00 
    8.387961E-4 = product of:
  0.012581941 = sum of:
    0.012581941 = weight(_text_:und in 111) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012581941 = score(doc=111,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.19590102 = fieldWeight in 111, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=111)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    Abstract
    Ein wichtiges Problem der automatischen Klassifikation ist die Frage der Bewertung der Ergebnisse von Klassifikationsverfahren. Hierunter fallen die Aspekte der Beurteilung der Güte von Klassifikationen, des Vergleichs von Klassifikationen, der Validität von Klassifikationen und der Stabilität von Klassifikationsverfahren. Es wird ein Überblick über die verschiedenen Ansätze gegeben
  9. Meder, N.: Artificial intelligence as a tool of classification, or: the network of language games as cognitive paradigm (1985) 0.00 
    2.3021935E-4 = product of:
  0.00345329 = sum of:
    0.00345329 = product of:
      0.00690658 = sum of:
        0.00690658 = weight(_text_:information in 7694) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00690658 = score(doc=7694,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 7694, 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=7694)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    Abstract
    It is shown that the cognitive paradigm may be an orientation mark for automatic classification. On the basis of research in Artificial Intelligence, the cognitive paradigm - as opposed to the behavioristic paradigm - was developed as a multiplicity of competitive world-views. This is the thesis of DeMey in his book "The cognitive paradigm". Multiplicity in a loosely-coupled network of cognitive knots is also the principle of dynamic restlessness. In competititon with cognitive views, a classification system that follows various models may learn by concrete information retrieval. During his actions the user builds implicitly a new classification order
  10. Borko, H.: Research in computer based classification systems (1985) 0.00 
    1.1510967E-4 = product of:
  0.001726645 = sum of:
    0.001726645 = product of:
      0.00345329 = sum of:
        0.00345329 = weight(_text_:information in 3647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00345329 = score(doc=3647,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.06788416 = fieldWeight in 3647, 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=3647)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    Abstract
    The selection in this reader by R. M. Needham and K. Sparck Jones reports an early approach to automatic classification that was taken in England. The following selection reviews various approaches that were being pursued in the United States at about the same time. It then discusses a particular approach initiated in the early 1960s by Harold Borko, at that time Head of the Language Processing and Retrieval Research Staff at the System Development Corporation, Santa Monica, California and, since 1966, a member of the faculty at the Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of California, Los Angeles. As was described earlier, there are two steps in automatic classification, the first being to identify pairs of terms that are similar by virtue of co-occurring as index terms in the same documents, and the second being to form equivalence classes of intersubstitutable terms. To compute similarities, Borko and his associates used a standard correlation formula; to derive classification categories, where Needham and Sparck Jones used clumping, the Borko team used the statistical technique of factor analysis. The fact that documents can be classified automatically, and in any number of ways, is worthy of passing notice. Worthy of serious attention would be a demonstra tion that a computer-based classification system was effective in the organization and retrieval of documents. One reason for the inclusion of the following selection in the reader is that it addresses the question of evaluation. To evaluate the effectiveness of their automatically derived classification, Borko and his team asked three questions. The first was Is the classification reliable? in other words, could the categories derived from one sample of texts be used to classify other texts? Reliability was assessed by a case-study comparison of the classes derived from three different samples of abstracts. The notso-surprising conclusion reached was that automatically derived classes were reliable only to the extent that the sample from which they were derived was representative of the total document collection. The second evaluation question asked whether the classification was reasonable, in the sense of adequately describing the content of the document collection. The answer was sought by comparing the automatically derived categories with categories in a related classification system that was manually constructed. Here the conclusion was that the automatic method yielded categories that fairly accurately reflected the major area of interest in the sample collection of texts; however, since there were only eleven such categories and they were quite broad, they could not be regarded as suitable for use in a university or any large general library. The third evaluation question asked whether automatic classification was accurate, in the sense of producing results similar to those obtainabie by human cIassifiers. When using human classification as a criterion, automatic classification was found to be 50 percent accurate.

Authors

Languages

Types