-
Mengel, A.: Thesaurusrelationen, Konsistenz, Inferenz und Interdependenz (1991)
0.06
0.06489451 = product of:
0.16223627 = sum of:
0.004767807 = weight(_text_:a in 4710) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004767807 = score(doc=4710,freq=2.0), product of:
0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 4710, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4710)
0.15746847 = weight(_text_:91 in 4710) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.15746847 = score(doc=4710,freq=4.0), product of:
0.25837386 = queryWeight, product of:
5.5722036 = idf(docFreq=456, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.60945976 = fieldWeight in 4710, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
5.5722036 = idf(docFreq=456, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4710)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Content
- Vgl. unter: http://andreasmengel.de/pubs/thesaurus-atlas-91.pdf.
- Series
- Forschungsbericht Nr. 91-5
-
Dextre Clarke, S.G.: Thesaural relationships (2001)
0.03
0.025825147 = product of:
0.064562865 = sum of:
0.009535614 = weight(_text_:a in 1149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009535614 = score(doc=1149,freq=8.0), product of:
0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 1149, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1149)
0.05502725 = sum of:
0.011051352 = weight(_text_:information in 1149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011051352 = score(doc=1149,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 1149, 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=1149)
0.043975897 = weight(_text_:22 in 1149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043975897 = score(doc=1149,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1149, 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=1149)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- A thesaurus in the controlled vocabulary environment is a tool designed to support effective infonnation retrieval (IR) by guiding indexers and searchers consistently to choose the same terms for expressing a given concept or combination of concepts. Terms in the thesaurus are linked by relationships of three well-known types: equivalence, hierarchical, and associative. The functions and properties of these three basic types and some subcategories are described, as well as some additional relationship types conunonly found in thesauri. Progressive automation of IR processes and the capability for simultaneous searching of vast networked resources are creating some pressures for change in the categorization and consistency of relationships.
- Date
- 22. 9.2007 15:45:57
- Series
- Information science and knowledge management; vol.2
- Type
- a
-
Maniez, J.: Fusion de banques de donnees documentaires at compatibilite des languages d'indexation (1997)
0.02
0.024909604 = product of:
0.06227401 = sum of:
0.008173384 = weight(_text_:a in 2246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008173384 = score(doc=2246,freq=8.0), product of:
0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 2246, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2246)
0.054100625 = sum of:
0.016407004 = weight(_text_:information in 2246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016407004 = score(doc=2246,freq=6.0), product of:
0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 2246, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2246)
0.037693623 = weight(_text_:22 in 2246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.037693623 = score(doc=2246,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2246, 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=2246)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Discusses the apparently unattainable goal of compatibility of information languages. While controlled languages can improve retrieval performance within a single system, they make cooperation across different systems more difficult. The Internet and downloading accentuate this adverse outcome and the acceleration of data exchange aggravates the problem of compatibility. Defines this familiar concept and demonstrates that coherence is just as necessary as it was for indexing languages, the proliferation of which has created confusion in grouped data banks. Describes 2 types of potential solutions, similar to those applied to automatic translation of natural languages: - harmonizing the information languages themselves, both difficult and expensive, or, the more flexible solution involving automatic harmonization of indexing formulae based on pre established concordance tables. However, structural incompatibilities between post coordinated languages and classifications may lead any harmonization tools up a blind alley, while the paths of a universal concordance model are rare and narrow
- Date
- 1. 8.1996 22:01:00
- Footnote
- Übers. d. Titels: Integration of information data banks and compatibility of indexing languages
- Type
- a
-
Ruge, G.: ¬A spreading activation network for automatic generation of thesaurus relationships (1991)
0.02
0.024196828 = product of:
0.06049207 = sum of:
0.01651617 = weight(_text_:a in 4506) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01651617 = score(doc=4506,freq=6.0), product of:
0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.3089162 = fieldWeight in 4506, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4506)
0.043975897 = product of:
0.087951794 = sum of:
0.087951794 = weight(_text_:22 in 4506) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.087951794 = score(doc=4506,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4506, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4506)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Date
- 8.10.2000 11:52:22
- Source
- Library science with a slant to documentation. 28(1991) no.4, S.125-130
- Type
- a
-
Boteram, F.: Semantische Relationen in Dokumentationssprachen : vom Thesaurus zum semantischen Netz (2010)
0.02
0.023918023 = product of:
0.05979506 = sum of:
0.004767807 = weight(_text_:a in 4792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004767807 = score(doc=4792,freq=2.0), product of:
0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 4792, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4792)
0.05502725 = sum of:
0.011051352 = weight(_text_:information in 4792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011051352 = score(doc=4792,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 4792, 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=4792)
0.043975897 = weight(_text_:22 in 4792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043975897 = score(doc=4792,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4792, 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=4792)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Moderne Verfahren des Information Retrieval verlangen nach aussagekräftigen und detailliert relationierten Dokumentationssprachen. Der selektive Transfer einzelner Modellierungsstrategien aus dem Bereich semantischer Technologien für die Gestaltung und Relationierung bestehender Dokumentationssprachen wird diskutiert. In Form einer Taxonomie wird ein hierarchisch strukturiertes Relationeninventar definiert, welches sowohl hinreichend allgemeine als auch zahlreiche spezifische Relationstypen enthält, die eine detaillierte und damit aussagekräftige Relationierung des Vokabulars ermöglichen. Das bringt einen Zugewinn an Übersichtlichkeit und Funktionalität. Im Gegensatz zu anderen Ansätzen und Überlegungen zur Schaffung von Relationeninventaren entwickelt der vorgestellte Vorschlag das Relationeninventar aus der Begriffsmenge eines bestehenden Gegenstandsbereichs heraus.
- Source
- Wissensspeicher in digitalen Räumen: Nachhaltigkeit - Verfügbarkeit - semantische Interoperabilität. Proceedings der 11. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation, Konstanz, 20. bis 22. Februar 2008. Hrsg.: J. Sieglerschmidt u. H.P.Ohly
- Type
- a
-
Mikacic, M.: Statistical system for subject designation (SSSD) for libraries in Croatia (1996)
0.02
0.017990282 = product of:
0.0449757 = sum of:
0.009437811 = weight(_text_:a in 2943) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009437811 = score(doc=2943,freq=6.0), product of:
0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.17652355 = fieldWeight in 2943, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2943)
0.03553789 = product of:
0.07107578 = sum of:
0.07107578 = weight(_text_:22 in 2943) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07107578 = score(doc=2943,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 2943, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2943)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Describes the developments of the Statistical System for Subject Designation (SSSD): a syntactical system for subject designation for libraries in Croatia, based on the construction of subject headings in agreement with the theory of the sentence nature of subject headings. The discussion is preceded by a brief summary of theories underlying basic principles and fundamental rules of the alphabetical subject catalogue
- Date
- 31. 7.2006 14:22:21
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) no.1, S.77-93
- Type
- a
-
Mooers, C.N.: ¬The indexing language of an information retrieval system (1985)
0.02
0.016783621 = product of:
0.04195905 = sum of:
0.00891975 = weight(_text_:a in 3644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.00891975 = score(doc=3644,freq=28.0), product of:
0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.16683382 = fieldWeight in 3644, product of:
5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
28.0 = termFreq=28.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3644)
0.0330393 = sum of:
0.011051352 = weight(_text_:information in 3644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011051352 = score(doc=3644,freq=8.0), product of:
0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 3644, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3644)
0.021987949 = weight(_text_:22 in 3644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021987949 = score(doc=3644,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 3644, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3644)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Calvin Mooers' work toward the resolution of the problem of ambiguity in indexing went unrecognized for years. At the time he introduced the "descriptor" - a term with a very distinct meaning-indexers were, for the most part, taking index terms directly from the document, without either rationalizing them with context or normalizing them with some kind of classification. It is ironic that Mooers' term came to be attached to the popular but unsophisticated indexing methods which he was trying to root out. Simply expressed, what Mooers did was to take the dictionary definitions of terms and redefine them so clearly that they could not be used in any context except that provided by the new definition. He did, at great pains, construct such meanings for over four hundred words; disambiguation and specificity were sought after and found for these words. He proposed that all indexers adopt this method so that when the index supplied a term, it also supplied the exact meaning for that term as used in the indexed document. The same term used differently in another document would be defined differently and possibly renamed to avoid ambiguity. The disambiguation was achieved by using unabridged dictionaries and other sources of defining terminology. In practice, this tends to produce circularity in definition, that is, word A refers to word B which refers to word C which refers to word A. It was necessary, therefore, to break this chain by creating a new, definitive meaning for each word. Eventually, means such as those used by Austin (q.v.) for PRECIS achieved the same purpose, but by much more complex means than just creating a unique definition of each term. Mooers, however, was probably the first to realize how confusing undefined terminology could be. Early automatic indexers dealt with distinct disciplines and, as long as they did not stray beyond disciplinary boundaries, a quick and dirty keyword approach was satisfactory. The trouble came when attempts were made to make a combined index for two or more distinct disciplines. A number of processes have since been developed, mostly involving tagging of some kind or use of strings. Mooers' solution has rarely been considered seriously and probably would be extremely difficult to apply now because of so much interdisciplinarity. But for a specific, weIl defined field, it is still weIl worth considering. Mooers received training in mathematics and physics from the University of Minnesota and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He was the founder of Zator Company, which developed and marketed a coded card information retrieval system, and of Rockford Research, Inc., which engages in research in information science. He is the inventor of the TRAC computer language.
- Footnote
- Original in: Information retrieval today: papers presented at an Institute conducted by the Library School and the Center for Continuation Study, University of Minnesota, Sept. 19-22, 1962. Ed. by Wesley Simonton. Minneapolis, Minn.: The Center, 1963. S.21-36.
- Source
- Theory of subject analysis: a sourcebook. Ed.: L.M. Chan, et al
- Type
- a
-
Schmitz-Esser, W.: Language of general communication and concept compatibility (1996)
0.02
0.015289003 = product of:
0.038222507 = sum of:
0.0068111527 = weight(_text_:a in 6089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0068111527 = score(doc=6089,freq=2.0), product of:
0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 6089, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=6089)
0.031411353 = product of:
0.06282271 = sum of:
0.06282271 = weight(_text_:22 in 6089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06282271 = score(doc=6089,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 6089, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=6089)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Pages
- S.11-22
- Type
- a
-
Degez, D.: Compatibilité des langages d'indexation mariage, cohabitation ou fusion? : Quelques examples concrèts (1998)
0.01
0.010702303 = product of:
0.026755756 = sum of:
0.004767807 = weight(_text_:a in 2245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004767807 = score(doc=2245,freq=2.0), product of:
0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 2245, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2245)
0.021987949 = product of:
0.043975897 = sum of:
0.043975897 = weight(_text_:22 in 2245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043975897 = score(doc=2245,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2245, 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=2245)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Date
- 1. 8.1996 22:01:00
- Type
- a
-
Farradane, J.: Concept organization for information retrieval (1967)
0.01
0.010065834 = product of:
0.025164586 = sum of:
0.009535614 = weight(_text_:a in 35) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009535614 = score(doc=35,freq=2.0), product of:
0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 35, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=35)
0.015628971 = product of:
0.031257942 = sum of:
0.031257942 = weight(_text_:information in 35) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.031257942 = score(doc=35,freq=4.0), product of:
0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.3840108 = fieldWeight in 35, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=35)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Source
- Information storage and retrieval. 3(1967) S.297-314
- Type
- a
-
Fox, E.A.: Lexical relations : enhancing effectiveness of information retrieval systems (1980)
0.01
0.009411185 = product of:
0.023527961 = sum of:
0.010897844 = weight(_text_:a in 5310) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010897844 = score(doc=5310,freq=2.0), product of:
0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 5310, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5310)
0.012630116 = product of:
0.025260232 = sum of:
0.025260232 = weight(_text_:information in 5310) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025260232 = score(doc=5310,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.3103276 = fieldWeight in 5310, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5310)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Type
- a
-
Jia, J.: From data to knowledge : the relationships between vocabularies, linked data and knowledge graphs (2021)
0.01
0.009006732 = product of:
0.02251683 = sum of:
0.0068111527 = weight(_text_:a in 106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0068111527 = score(doc=106,freq=8.0), product of:
0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 106, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=106)
0.015705677 = product of:
0.031411353 = sum of:
0.031411353 = weight(_text_:22 in 106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.031411353 = score(doc=106,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 106, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=106)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Purpose The purpose of this paper is to identify the concepts, component parts and relationships between vocabularies, linked data and knowledge graphs (KGs) from the perspectives of data and knowledge transitions. Design/methodology/approach This paper uses conceptual analysis methods. This study focuses on distinguishing concepts and analyzing composition and intercorrelations to explore data and knowledge transitions. Findings Vocabularies are the cornerstone for accurately building understanding of the meaning of data. Vocabularies provide for a data-sharing model and play an important role in supporting the semantic expression of linked data and defining the schema layer; they are also used for entity recognition, alignment and linkage for KGs. KGs, which consist of a schema layer and a data layer, are presented as cubes that organically combine vocabularies, linked data and big data. Originality/value This paper first describes the composition of vocabularies, linked data and KGs. More importantly, this paper innovatively analyzes and summarizes the interrelatedness of these factors, which comes from frequent interactions between data and knowledge. The three factors empower each other and can ultimately empower the Semantic Web.
- Date
- 22. 1.2021 14:24:32
- Type
- a
-
Melton, J.S.: ¬A use for the techniques of structural linguistics in documentation research (1965)
0.01
0.008292621 = product of:
0.020731552 = sum of:
0.0144164935 = weight(_text_:a in 834) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0144164935 = score(doc=834,freq=14.0), product of:
0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.26964417 = fieldWeight in 834, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=834)
0.006315058 = product of:
0.012630116 = sum of:
0.012630116 = weight(_text_:information in 834) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012630116 = score(doc=834,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 834, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=834)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Index language (the system of symbols for representing subject content after analysis) is considered as a separate component and a variable in an information retrieval system. It is suggested that for purposes of testing, comparing and evaluating index language, the techniques of structural linguistics may provide a descriptive methodology by which all such languages (hierarchical and faceted classification, analytico-synthetic indexing, traditional subject indexing, indexes and classifications based on automatic text analysis, etc.) could be described in term of a linguistic model, and compared on a common basis
- Type
- a
-
Kobrin, R.Y.: On the principles of terminological work in the creation of thesauri for information retrieval systems (1979)
0.01
0.008234787 = product of:
0.020586967 = sum of:
0.009535614 = weight(_text_:a in 2954) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009535614 = score(doc=2954,freq=2.0), product of:
0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 2954, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2954)
0.011051352 = product of:
0.022102704 = sum of:
0.022102704 = weight(_text_:information in 2954) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022102704 = score(doc=2954,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 2954, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2954)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Type
- a
-
Svenonius, E.: Design of controlled vocabularies (1990)
0.01
0.008234787 = product of:
0.020586967 = sum of:
0.009535614 = weight(_text_:a in 1271) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009535614 = score(doc=1271,freq=2.0), product of:
0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 1271, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1271)
0.011051352 = product of:
0.022102704 = sum of:
0.022102704 = weight(_text_:information in 1271) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022102704 = score(doc=1271,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 1271, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1271)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Source
- Encyclopedia of library and information science. Vol.45, [=Suppl.10]
- Type
- a
-
Kuhlen, R.: Linguistische Grundlagen (1980)
0.01
0.008234787 = product of:
0.020586967 = sum of:
0.009535614 = weight(_text_:a in 3829) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009535614 = score(doc=3829,freq=2.0), product of:
0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 3829, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3829)
0.011051352 = product of:
0.022102704 = sum of:
0.022102704 = weight(_text_:information in 3829) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022102704 = score(doc=3829,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 3829, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3829)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Source
- Grundlagen der praktischen Information und Dokumentation: eine Einführung. 2. Aufl
- Type
- a
-
Szostak, R.: Toward a classification of relationships (2012)
0.01
0.007797272 = product of:
0.01949318 = sum of:
0.011678694 = weight(_text_:a in 131) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011678694 = score(doc=131,freq=12.0), product of:
0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.21843673 = fieldWeight in 131, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=131)
0.007814486 = product of:
0.015628971 = sum of:
0.015628971 = weight(_text_:information in 131) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015628971 = score(doc=131,freq=4.0), product of:
0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 131, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=131)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Several attempts have been made to develop a classification of relationships, but none of these have been widely accepted or applied within information science. It would seem that information scientists, while appreciating the potential value of a classification of relationships, have found all previous classifications to be too complicated in application relative to the benefits they provide. This paper begins by reviewing previous attempts and drawing lessons from these. It then surveys a range of sources within and beyond the field of knowledge organization that can together provide the basis for the development of a novel classification of relationships. One critical insight is that relationships governing causation/influence should be accorded priority.
- Type
- a
-
Miller, U.; Teitelbaum, R.: Pre-coordination and post-coordination : past and future (2002)
0.01
0.0077237748 = product of:
0.019309437 = sum of:
0.008258085 = weight(_text_:a in 1395) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008258085 = score(doc=1395,freq=6.0), product of:
0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.1544581 = fieldWeight in 1395, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1395)
0.011051352 = product of:
0.022102704 = sum of:
0.022102704 = weight(_text_:information in 1395) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022102704 = score(doc=1395,freq=8.0), product of:
0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 1395, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1395)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- This article deals with the meaningful processing of information in relation to two systems of Information processing: pre-coordination and post-coordination. The different approaches are discussed, with emphasis an the need for a controlled vocabulary in information retrieval. Assigned indexing, which employs a controlled vocabulary, is described in detail. Types of indexing language can be divided into two broad groups - those using pre-coordinated terms and those depending an post-coordination. They represent two different basic approaches in processing and Information retrieval. The historical development of these two approaches is described, as well as the two tools that apply to these approaches: thesauri and subject headings.
- Type
- a
-
Vickery, B.B.: Structure and function in retrieval languages (2006)
0.01
0.0073028165 = product of:
0.01825704 = sum of:
0.01155891 = weight(_text_:a in 5584) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01155891 = score(doc=5584,freq=16.0), product of:
0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 5584, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5584)
0.0066981306 = product of:
0.013396261 = sum of:
0.013396261 = weight(_text_:information in 5584) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013396261 = score(doc=5584,freq=4.0), product of:
0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 5584, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5584)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to summarize the varied structural characteristics which may be present in retrieval languages. Design/methodology/approach - The languages serve varied purposes in information systems, and a number of these are identified. The relations between structure and function are discussed and suggestions made as to the most suitable structures needed for various purposes. Findings - A quantitative approach has been developed: a simple measure is the number of separate terms in a retrieval language, but this has to be related to the scope of its subject field. Some ratio of terms to items in the field seems a more suitable measure of the average specificity of the terms. Other aspects can be quantified - for example, the average number of links in hierarchical chains, or the average number of cross-references in a thesaurus. Originality/value - All the approaches to the analysis of retrieval language reported in this paper are of continuing value. Some practical studies of computer information systems undertaken by Aslib Research Department have suggested a further approach.
- Type
- a
-
Evens, M.: Thesaural relations in information retrieval (2002)
0.01
0.0070676133 = product of:
0.017669033 = sum of:
0.007078358 = weight(_text_:a in 1201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.007078358 = score(doc=1201,freq=6.0), product of:
0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 1201, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1201)
0.010590675 = product of:
0.02118135 = sum of:
0.02118135 = weight(_text_:information in 1201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02118135 = score(doc=1201,freq=10.0), product of:
0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.2602176 = fieldWeight in 1201, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1201)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Thesaural relations have long been used in information retrieval to enrich queries; they have sometimes been used to cluster documents as well. Sometimes the first query to an information retrieval system yields no results at all, or, what can be even more disconcerting, many thousands of hits. One solution is to rephrase the query, improving the choice of query terms by using related terms of different types. A collection of related terms is often called a thesaurus. This chapter describes the lexical-semantic relations that have been used in building thesauri and summarizes some of the effects of using these relational thesauri in information retrieval experiments
- Series
- Information science and knowledge management; vol.3
- Type
- a
