Search (572 results, page 1 of 29)

  • × theme_ss:"Wissensrepräsentation"
  1. Nguyen, P.H.P.; Kaneiwa, K.; Nguyen, M.-Q.: Ontology inferencing rules and operations in conceptual structure theory (2010) 0.08 
    0.08177496 = product of:
  0.10903328 = sum of:
    0.0077214893 = weight(_text_:a in 4421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0077214893 = score(doc=4421,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 4421, 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=4421)
    0.09614516 = weight(_text_:70 in 4421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09614516 = score(doc=4421,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27085114 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.35497418 = fieldWeight in 4421, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4421)
    0.0051666284 = product of:
      0.010333257 = sum of:
        0.010333257 = weight(_text_:information in 4421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010333257 = score(doc=4421,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05058132 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4421, 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=4421)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    This paper describes in detail the inferencing rules and operations concerning an ontology formalism previously proposed under Conceptual Structure Theory. The ontology consists of hierarchies of concept, relation and meta-relation types, and formal relationships between them, in particular between arguments of relation and meta-relation types. Inferencing rules are described as well as operations to maintain the ontology in a semantically consistent state at all times. The main aim of the paper is to provide a blue print for the implementation of ontologies in the future Semantic Web.
    Footnote
    Preprint. To be published as Vol 122 in the Conferences in Research and Practice in Information Technology Series by the Australian Computer Society Inc. http://crpit.com/.
    Pages
    S.61-70
    Type
    a
  2. Zeng, Q.; Yu, M.; Yu, W.; Xiong, J.; Shi, Y.; Jiang, M.: Faceted hierarchy : a new graph type to organize scientific concepts and a construction method (2019) 0.08 
    0.07618255 = product of:
  0.10157674 = sum of:
    0.08033655 = product of:
      0.24100964 = sum of:
        0.24100964 = weight(_text_:3a in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.24100964 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.428829 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05058132 = queryNorm
            0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 400, 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=400)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.01607356 = weight(_text_:a in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01607356 = score(doc=400,freq=26.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.27559727 = fieldWeight in 400, product of:
          5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
            26.0 = termFreq=26.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=400)
    0.0051666284 = product of:
      0.010333257 = sum of:
        0.010333257 = weight(_text_:information in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010333257 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05058132 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 400, 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=400)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    On a scientific concept hierarchy, a parent concept may have a few attributes, each of which has multiple values being a group of child concepts. We call these attributes facets: classification has a few facets such as application (e.g., face recognition), model (e.g., svm, knn), and metric (e.g., precision). In this work, we aim at building faceted concept hierarchies from scientific literature. Hierarchy construction methods heavily rely on hypernym detection, however, the faceted relations are parent-to-child links but the hypernym relation is a multi-hop, i.e., ancestor-to-descendent link with a specific facet "type-of". We use information extraction techniques to find synonyms, sibling concepts, and ancestor-descendent relations from a data science corpus. And we propose a hierarchy growth algorithm to infer the parent-child links from the three types of relationships. It resolves conflicts by maintaining the acyclic structure of a hierarchy.
    Content
    Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Faclanthology.org%2FD19-5317.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0ZZFyq5wWTtNTvNkrvjlGA.
    Type
    a
  3. Frické, M.: Logic and the organization of information (2012) 0.06 
    0.060191106 = product of:
  0.08025481 = sum of:
    0.011032996 = weight(_text_:a in 1782) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011032996 = score(doc=1782,freq=36.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.18917176 = fieldWeight in 1782, product of:
          6.0 = tf(freq=36.0), with freq of:
            36.0 = termFreq=36.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1782)
    0.056084674 = weight(_text_:70 in 1782) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056084674 = score(doc=1782,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27085114 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.20706826 = fieldWeight in 1782, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.354766 = idf(docFreq=567, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1782)
    0.013137138 = product of:
      0.026274277 = sum of:
        0.026274277 = weight(_text_:information in 1782) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026274277 = score(doc=1782,freq=38.0), product of:
            0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05058132 = queryNorm
            0.29590017 = fieldWeight in 1782, product of:
              6.164414 = tf(freq=38.0), with freq of:
                38.0 = termFreq=38.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1782)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    Logic and the Organization of Information closely examines the historical and contemporary methodologies used to catalogue information objects-books, ebooks, journals, articles, web pages, images, emails, podcasts and more-in the digital era. This book provides an in-depth technical background for digital librarianship, and covers a broad range of theoretical and practical topics including: classification theory, topic annotation, automatic clustering, generalized synonymy and concept indexing, distributed libraries, semantic web ontologies and Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS). It also analyzes the challenges facing today's information architects, and outlines a series of techniques for overcoming them. Logic and the Organization of Information is intended for practitioners and professionals working at a design level as a reference book for digital librarianship. Advanced-level students, researchers and academics studying information science, library science, digital libraries and computer science will also find this book invaluable.
    Footnote
    Rez. in: J. Doc. 70(2014) no.4: "Books on the organization of information and knowledge, aimed at a library/information audience, tend to fall into two clear categories. Most are practical and pragmatic, explaining the "how" as much or more than the "why". Some are theoretical, in part or in whole, showing how the practice of classification, indexing, resource description and the like relates to philosophy, logic, and other foundational bases; the books by Langridge (1992) and by Svenonious (2000) are well-known examples this latter kind. To this category certainly belongs a recent book by Martin Frické (2012). The author takes the reader for an extended tour through a variety of aspects of information organization, including classification and taxonomy, alphabetical vocabularies and indexing, cataloguing and FRBR, and aspects of the semantic web. The emphasis throughout is on showing how practice is, or should be, underpinned by formal structures; there is a particular emphasis on first order predicate calculus. The advantages of a greater, and more explicit, use of symbolic logic is a recurring theme of the book. There is a particularly commendable historical dimension, often omitted in texts on this subject. It cannot be said that this book is entirely an easy read, although it is well written with a helpful index, and its arguments are generally well supported by clear and relevant examples. It is thorough and detailed, but thereby seems better geared to the needs of advanced students and researchers than to the practitioners who are suggested as a main market. For graduate students in library/information science and related disciplines, in particular, this will be a valuable resource. I would place it alongside Svenonious' book as the best insight into the theoretical "why" of information organization. It has evoked a good deal of interest, including a set of essay commentaries in Journal of Information Science (Gilchrist et al., 2013). Introducing these, Alan Gilchrist rightly says that Frické deserves a salute for making explicit the fundamental relationship between the ancient discipline of logic and modern information organization. If information science is to continue to develop, and make a contribution to the organization of the information environments of the future, then this book sets the groundwork for the kind of studies which will be needed." (D. Bawden)
    LCSH
    Information Systems
    Information storage and retrieval systems
    Subject
    Information Systems
    Information storage and retrieval systems
  4. Stojanovic, N.: Ontology-based Information Retrieval : methods and tools for cooperative query answering (2005) 0.06 
    0.057375073 = product of:
  0.076500095 = sum of:
    0.0535577 = product of:
      0.1606731 = sum of:
        0.1606731 = weight(_text_:3a in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1606731 = score(doc=701,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.428829 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05058132 = queryNorm
            0.3746787 = fieldWeight in 701, 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=701)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.012609138 = weight(_text_:a in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012609138 = score(doc=701,freq=36.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 701, product of:
          6.0 = tf(freq=36.0), with freq of:
            36.0 = termFreq=36.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=701)
    0.010333256 = product of:
      0.020666512 = sum of:
        0.020666512 = weight(_text_:information in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020666512 = score(doc=701,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05058132 = queryNorm
            0.23274568 = fieldWeight in 701, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=701)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    By the explosion of possibilities for a ubiquitous content production, the information overload problem reaches the level of complexity which cannot be managed by traditional modelling approaches anymore. Due to their pure syntactical nature traditional information retrieval approaches did not succeed in treating content itself (i.e. its meaning, and not its representation). This leads to a very low usefulness of the results of a retrieval process for a user's task at hand. In the last ten years ontologies have been emerged from an interesting conceptualisation paradigm to a very promising (semantic) modelling technology, especially in the context of the Semantic Web. From the information retrieval point of view, ontologies enable a machine-understandable form of content description, such that the retrieval process can be driven by the meaning of the content. However, the very ambiguous nature of the retrieval process in which a user, due to the unfamiliarity with the underlying repository and/or query syntax, just approximates his information need in a query, implies a necessity to include the user in the retrieval process more actively in order to close the gap between the meaning of the content and the meaning of a user's query (i.e. his information need). This thesis lays foundation for such an ontology-based interactive retrieval process, in which the retrieval system interacts with a user in order to conceptually interpret the meaning of his query, whereas the underlying domain ontology drives the conceptualisation process. In that way the retrieval process evolves from a query evaluation process into a highly interactive cooperation between a user and the retrieval system, in which the system tries to anticipate the user's information need and to deliver the relevant content proactively. Moreover, the notion of content relevance for a user's query evolves from a content dependent artefact to the multidimensional context-dependent structure, strongly influenced by the user's preferences. This cooperation process is realized as the so-called Librarian Agent Query Refinement Process. In order to clarify the impact of an ontology on the retrieval process (regarding its complexity and quality), a set of methods and tools for different levels of content and query formalisation is developed, ranging from pure ontology-based inferencing to keyword-based querying in which semantics automatically emerges from the results. Our evaluation studies have shown that the possibilities to conceptualize a user's information need in the right manner and to interpret the retrieval results accordingly are key issues for realizing much more meaningful information retrieval systems.
    Content
    Vgl.: http%3A%2F%2Fdigbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fvolltexte%2Fdocuments%2F1627&ei=tAtYUYrBNoHKtQb3l4GYBw&usg=AFQjCNHeaxKkKU3-u54LWxMNYGXaaDLCGw&sig2=8WykXWQoDKjDSdGtAakH2Q&bvm=bv.44442042,d.Yms.
  5. Xiong, C.: Knowledge based text representations for information retrieval (2016) 0.05 
    0.054523714 = product of:
  0.07269829 = sum of:
    0.0535577 = product of:
      0.1606731 = sum of:
        0.1606731 = weight(_text_:3a in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1606731 = score(doc=5820,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.428829 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05058132 = 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)
    0.009398297 = weight(_text_:a in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009398297 = score(doc=5820,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.16114321 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
    0.009742287 = product of:
      0.019484574 = sum of:
        0.019484574 = weight(_text_:information in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019484574 = score(doc=5820,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05058132 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    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.
  6. Gödert, W.; Hubrich, J.; Nagelschmidt, M.: Semantic knowledge representation for information retrieval (2014) 0.04 
    0.041609224 = product of:
  0.08321845 = sum of:
    0.006304569 = weight(_text_:a in 987) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006304569 = score(doc=987,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.10809815 = fieldWeight in 987, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=987)
    0.07691388 = sum of:
      0.03579545 = weight(_text_:information in 987) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03579545 = score(doc=987,freq=24.0), product of:
          0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = queryNorm
          0.40312737 = fieldWeight in 987, product of:
            4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
              24.0 = termFreq=24.0
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=987)
      0.041118424 = weight(_text_:22 in 987) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041118424 = score(doc=987,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 987, 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=987)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    This book covers the basics of semantic web technologies and indexing languages, and describes their contribution to improve languages as a tool for subject queries and knowledge exploration. The book is relevant to information scientists, knowledge workers and indexers. It provides a suitable combination of theoretical foundations and practical applications.
    Content
    Introduction: envisioning semantic information spacesIndexing and knowledge organization -- Semantic technologies for knowledge representation -- Information retrieval and knowledge exploration -- Approaches to handle heterogeneity -- Problems with establishing semantic interoperability -- Formalization in indexing languages -- Typification of semantic relations -- Inferences in retrieval processes -- Semantic interoperability and inferences -- Remaining research questions.
    Date
    23. 7.2017 13:49:22
    LCSH
    Information retrieval
    Knowledge representation (Information theory)
    Information organization
    RSWK
    Information Retrieval
    Subject
    Information retrieval
    Knowledge representation (Information theory)
    Information organization
    Information Retrieval
  7. Börner, K.: Atlas of knowledge : anyone can map (2015) 0.04 
    0.038610835 = product of:
  0.07722167 = sum of:
    0.0044580037 = weight(_text_:a in 3355) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0044580037 = score(doc=3355,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.07643694 = fieldWeight in 3355, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3355)
    0.07276367 = sum of:
      0.014613431 = weight(_text_:information in 3355) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.014613431 = score(doc=3355,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = queryNorm
          0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 3355, 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=3355)
      0.058150236 = weight(_text_:22 in 3355) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.058150236 = score(doc=3355,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = queryNorm
          0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 3355, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3355)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Content
    One of a series of three publications influenced by the travelling exhibit Places & Spaces: Mapping Science, curated by the Cyberinfrastructure for Network Science Center at Indiana University. - Additional materials can be found at http://http://scimaps.org/atlas2. Erweitert durch: Börner, Katy. Atlas of Science: Visualizing What We Know.
    Date
    22. 1.2017 16:54:03
    22. 1.2017 17:10:56
    LCSH
    Information visualization
    Subject
    Information visualization
  8. Priss, U.: Faceted information representation (2000) 0.04 
    0.037711255 = product of:
  0.07542251 = sum of:
    0.010402009 = weight(_text_:a in 5095) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010402009 = score(doc=5095,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 5095, 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=5095)
    0.0650205 = sum of:
      0.017049003 = weight(_text_:information in 5095) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.017049003 = score(doc=5095,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = queryNorm
          0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 5095, 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=5095)
      0.047971494 = weight(_text_:22 in 5095) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.047971494 = score(doc=5095,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5095, 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=5095)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    This paper presents an abstract formalization of the notion of "facets". Facets are relational structures of units, relations and other facets selected for a certain purpose. Facets can be used to structure large knowledge representation systems into a hierarchical arrangement of consistent and independent subsystems (facets) that facilitate flexibility and combinations of different viewpoints or aspects. This paper describes the basic notions, facet characteristics and construction mechanisms. It then explicates the theory in an example of a faceted information retrieval system (FaIR)
    Date
    22. 1.2016 17:47:06
    Type
    a
  9. Beppler, F.D.; Fonseca, F.T.; Pacheco, R.C.S.: Hermeneus: an architecture for an ontology-enabled information retrieval (2008) 0.04 
    0.036570147 = product of:
  0.07314029 = sum of:
    0.008916007 = weight(_text_:a in 3261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008916007 = score(doc=3261,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 3261, 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=3261)
    0.06422429 = sum of:
      0.023105865 = weight(_text_:information in 3261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.023105865 = score(doc=3261,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = queryNorm
          0.2602176 = fieldWeight in 3261, 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=3261)
      0.041118424 = weight(_text_:22 in 3261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041118424 = score(doc=3261,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3261, 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=3261)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Ontologies improve IR systems regarding its retrieval and presentation of information, which make the task of finding information more effective, efficient, and interactive. In this paper we argue that ontologies also greatly improve the engineering of such systems. We created a framework that uses ontology to drive the process of engineering an IR system. We developed a prototype that shows how a domain specialist without knowledge in the IR field can build an IR system with interactive components. The resulting system provides support for users not only to find their information needs but also to extend their state of knowledge. This way, our approach to ontology-enabled information retrieval addresses both the engineering aspect described here and also the usability aspect described elsewhere.
    Date
    28.11.2016 12:43:22
    Type
    a
  10. Priss, U.: Faceted knowledge representation (1999) 0.04 
    0.035214484 = product of:
  0.07042897 = sum of:
    0.010402009 = weight(_text_:a in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010402009 = score(doc=2654,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 2654, 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=2654)
    0.06002696 = sum of:
      0.012055466 = weight(_text_:information in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.012055466 = score(doc=2654,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = queryNorm
          0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 2654, 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=2654)
      0.047971494 = weight(_text_:22 in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.047971494 = score(doc=2654,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2654, 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=2654)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Faceted Knowledge Representation provides a formalism for implementing knowledge systems. The basic notions of faceted knowledge representation are "unit", "relation", "facet" and "interpretation". Units are atomic elements and can be abstract elements or refer to external objects in an application. Relations are sequences or matrices of 0 and 1's (binary matrices). Facets are relational structures that combine units and relations. Each facet represents an aspect or viewpoint of a knowledge system. Interpretations are mappings that can be used to translate between different representations. This paper introduces the basic notions of faceted knowledge representation. The formalism is applied here to an abstract modeling of a faceted thesaurus as used in information retrieval.
    Date
    22. 1.2016 17:30:31
    Type
    a
  11. Das, S.; Roy, S.: Faceted ontological model for brain tumour study (2016) 0.03 
    0.03488304 = product of:
  0.06976608 = sum of:
    0.01114501 = weight(_text_:a in 2831) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01114501 = score(doc=2831,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.19109234 = fieldWeight in 2831, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2831)
    0.05862107 = sum of:
      0.024355719 = weight(_text_:information in 2831) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.024355719 = score(doc=2831,freq=16.0), product of:
          0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = queryNorm
          0.27429342 = fieldWeight in 2831, product of:
            4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
              16.0 = termFreq=16.0
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2831)
      0.034265354 = weight(_text_:22 in 2831) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034265354 = score(doc=2831,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2831, 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=2831)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    The purpose of this work is to develop an ontology-based framework for developing an information retrieval system to cater to specific queries of users. For creating such an ontology, information was obtained from a wide range of information sources involved with brain tumour study and research. The information thus obtained was compiled and analysed to provide a standard, reliable and relevant information base to aid our proposed system. Facet-based methodology has been used for ontology formalization for quite some time. Ontology formalization involves different steps such as identification of the terminology, analysis, synthesis, standardization and ordering. A vast majority of the ontologies being developed nowadays lack flexibility. This becomes a formidable constraint when it comes to interoperability. We found that a facet-based method provides a distinct guideline for the development of a robust and flexible model concerning the domain of brain tumours. Our attempt has been to bridge library and information science and computer science, which itself involved an experimental approach. It was discovered that a faceted approach is really enduring, as it helps in the achievement of properties like navigation, exploration and faceted browsing. Computer-based brain tumour ontology supports the work of researchers towards gathering information on brain tumour research and allows users across the world to intelligently access new scientific information quickly and efficiently.
    Date
    12. 3.2016 13:21:22
    Type
    a
  12. Bittner, T.; Donnelly, M.; Winter, S.: Ontology and semantic interoperability (2006) 0.03 
    0.03312147 = product of:
  0.06624294 = sum of:
    0.0044580037 = weight(_text_:a in 4820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0044580037 = score(doc=4820,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.07643694 = fieldWeight in 4820, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4820)
    0.061784938 = sum of:
      0.020666514 = weight(_text_:information in 4820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.020666514 = score(doc=4820,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = queryNorm
          0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 4820, 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=4820)
      0.041118424 = weight(_text_:22 in 4820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041118424 = score(doc=4820,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4820, 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=4820)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    One of the major problems facing systems for Computer Aided Design (CAD), Architecture Engineering and Construction (AEC) and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) applications today is the lack of interoperability among the various systems. When integrating software applications, substantial di culties can arise in translating information from one application to the other. In this paper, we focus on semantic di culties that arise in software integration. Applications may use di erent terminologies to describe the same domain. Even when appli-cations use the same terminology, they often associate di erent semantics with the terms. This obstructs information exchange among applications. To cir-cumvent this obstacle, we need some way of explicitly specifying the semantics for each terminology in an unambiguous fashion. Ontologies can provide such specification. It will be the task of this paper to explain what ontologies are and how they can be used to facilitate interoperability between software systems used in computer aided design, architecture engineering and construction, and geographic information processing.
    Date
    3.12.2016 18:39:22
    Type
    a
  13. Priss, U.: Description logic and faceted knowledge representation (1999) 0.03 
    0.032774564 = product of:
  0.06554913 = sum of:
    0.014097446 = weight(_text_:a in 2655) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014097446 = score(doc=2655,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.24171482 = fieldWeight in 2655, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2655)
    0.051451683 = sum of:
      0.010333257 = weight(_text_:information in 2655) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.010333257 = score(doc=2655,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = queryNorm
          0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2655, 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=2655)
      0.041118424 = weight(_text_:22 in 2655) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041118424 = score(doc=2655,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2655, 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=2655)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    The term "facet" was introduced into the field of library classification systems by Ranganathan in the 1930's [Ranganathan, 1962]. A facet is a viewpoint or aspect. In contrast to traditional classification systems, faceted systems are modular in that a domain is analyzed in terms of baseline facets which are then synthesized. In this paper, the term "facet" is used in a broader meaning. Facets can describe different aspects on the same level of abstraction or the same aspect on different levels of abstraction. The notion of facets is related to database views, multicontexts and conceptual scaling in formal concept analysis [Ganter and Wille, 1999], polymorphism in object-oriented design, aspect-oriented programming, views and contexts in description logic and semantic networks. This paper presents a definition of facets in terms of faceted knowledge representation that incorporates the traditional narrower notion of facets and potentially facilitates translation between different knowledge representation formalisms. A goal of this approach is a modular, machine-aided knowledge base design mechanism. A possible application is faceted thesaurus construction for information retrieval and data mining. Reasoning complexity depends on the size of the modules (facets). A more general analysis of complexity will be left for future research.
    Date
    22. 1.2016 17:30:31
    Type
    a
  14. Knorz, G.; Rein, B.: Semantische Suche in einer Hochschulontologie (2005) 0.03 
    0.03261398 = product of:
  0.06522796 = sum of:
    0.0052010044 = weight(_text_:a in 1852) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0052010044 = score(doc=1852,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 1852, 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=1852)
    0.06002696 = sum of:
      0.012055466 = weight(_text_:information in 1852) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.012055466 = score(doc=1852,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = queryNorm
          0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 1852, 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=1852)
      0.047971494 = weight(_text_:22 in 1852) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.047971494 = score(doc=1852,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1852, 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=1852)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Date
    11. 2.2011 18:22:58
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 56(2005) H.5/6, S.281-290
    Type
    a
  15. Boteram, F.: Semantische Relationen in Dokumentationssprachen : vom Thesaurus zum semantischen Netz (2010) 0.03 
    0.03261398 = product of:
  0.06522796 = sum of:
    0.0052010044 = weight(_text_:a in 4792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0052010044 = score(doc=4792,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = 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)
    0.06002696 = sum of:
      0.012055466 = weight(_text_:information in 4792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.012055466 = score(doc=4792,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = 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)
      0.047971494 = weight(_text_:22 in 4792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.047971494 = score(doc=4792,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    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
  16. Renear, A.H.; Wickett, K.M.; Urban, R.J.; Dubin, D.; Shreeves, S.L.: Collection/item metadata relationships (2008) 0.03 
    0.03232393 = product of:
  0.06464786 = sum of:
    0.008916007 = weight(_text_:a in 2623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008916007 = score(doc=2623,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 2623, 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=2623)
    0.055731855 = sum of:
      0.014613431 = weight(_text_:information in 2623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.014613431 = score(doc=2623,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = queryNorm
          0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 2623, 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=2623)
      0.041118424 = weight(_text_:22 in 2623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041118424 = score(doc=2623,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2623, 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=2623)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Contemporary retrieval systems, which search across collections, usually ignore collection-level metadata. Alternative approaches, exploiting collection-level information, will require an understanding of the various kinds of relationships that can obtain between collection-level and item-level metadata. This paper outlines the problem and describes a project that is developing a logic-based framework for classifying collection/item metadata relationships. This framework will support (i) metadata specification developers defining metadata elements, (ii) metadata creators describing objects, and (iii) system designers implementing systems that take advantage of collection-level metadata. We present three examples of collection/item metadata relationship categories, attribute/value-propagation, value-propagation, and value-constraint and show that even in these simple cases a precise formulation requires modal notions in addition to first-order logic. These formulations are related to recent work in information retrieval and ontology evaluation.
    Source
    Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
    Type
    a
  17. Eito-Brun, R.: Ontologies and the exchange of technical information : building a knowledge repository based on ECSS standards (2014) 0.03 
    0.030797021 = product of:
  0.061594043 = sum of:
    0.008406092 = weight(_text_:a in 1436) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008406092 = score(doc=1436,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 1436, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1436)
    0.05318795 = sum of:
      0.02577567 = weight(_text_:information in 1436) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02577567 = score(doc=1436,freq=28.0), product of:
          0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = queryNorm
          0.29028487 = fieldWeight in 1436, product of:
            5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
              28.0 = termFreq=28.0
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1436)
      0.027412282 = weight(_text_:22 in 1436) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.027412282 = score(doc=1436,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1436, 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=1436)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    The development of complex projects in the aerospace industry is based on the collaboration of geographically distributed teams and companies. In this context, the need of sharing different types of data and information is a key factor to assure the successful execution of the projects. In the case of European projects, the ECSS standards provide a normative framework that specifies, among other requirements, the different document types, information items and artifacts that need to be generated. The specification of the characteristics of these information items are usually incorporated as annex to the different ECSS standards, and they provide the intended purpose, scope, and structure of the documents and information items. In these standards, documents or deliverables should not be considered as independent items, but as the results of packaging different information artifacts for their delivery between the involved parties. Successful information integration and knowledge exchange cannot be based exclusively on the conceptual definition of information types. It also requires the definition of methods and techniques for serializing and exchanging these documents and artifacts. This area is not covered by ECSS standards, and the definition of these data schemas would improve the opportunity for improving collaboration processes among companies. This paper describes the development of an OWL-based ontology to manage the different artifacts and information items requested in the European Space Agency (ESA) ECSS standards for SW development. The ECSS set of standards is the main reference in aerospace projects in Europe, and in addition to engineering and managerial requirements they provide a set of DRD (Document Requirements Documents) with the structure of the different documents and records necessary to manage projects and describe intermediate information products and final deliverables. Information integration is a must-have in aerospace projects, where different players need to collaborate and share data during the life cycle of the products about requirements, design elements, problems, etc. The proposed ontology provides the basis for building advanced information systems where the information coming from different companies and institutions can be integrated into a coherent set of related data. It also provides a conceptual framework to enable the development of interfaces and gateways between the different tools and information systems used by the different players in aerospace projects.
    Source
    Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik
    Type
    a
  18. Järvelin, K.; Kristensen, J.; Niemi, T.; Sormunen, E.; Keskustalo, H.: ¬A deductive data model for query expansion (1996) 0.03 
    0.030183844 = product of:
  0.06036769 = sum of:
    0.008916007 = weight(_text_:a in 2230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008916007 = score(doc=2230,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 2230, 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=2230)
    0.051451683 = sum of:
      0.010333257 = weight(_text_:information in 2230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.010333257 = score(doc=2230,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = queryNorm
          0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2230, 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=2230)
      0.041118424 = weight(_text_:22 in 2230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041118424 = score(doc=2230,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2230, 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=2230)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    We present a deductive data model for concept-based query expansion. It is based on three abstraction levels: the conceptual, linguistic and occurrence levels. Concepts and relationships among them are represented at the conceptual level. The expression level represents natural language expressions for concepts. Each expression has one or more matching models at the occurrence level. Each model specifies the matching of the expression in database indices built in varying ways. The data model supports a concept-based query expansion and formulation tool, the ExpansionTool, for environments providing heterogeneous IR systems. Expansion is controlled by adjustable matching reliability.
    Source
    Proceedings of the 19th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (ACM SIGIR '96), Zürich, Switzerland, August 18-22, 1996. Eds.: H.P. Frei et al
    Type
    a
  19. Kruk, S.R.; Kruk, E.; Stankiewicz, K.: Evaluation of semantic and social technologies for digital libraries (2009) 0.03 
    0.030094929 = product of:
  0.060189858 = sum of:
    0.0044580037 = weight(_text_:a in 3387) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0044580037 = score(doc=3387,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.07643694 = fieldWeight in 3387, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3387)
    0.055731855 = sum of:
      0.014613431 = weight(_text_:information in 3387) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.014613431 = score(doc=3387,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = queryNorm
          0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 3387, 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=3387)
      0.041118424 = weight(_text_:22 in 3387) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041118424 = score(doc=3387,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3387, 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=3387)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Libraries are the tools we use to learn and to answer our questions. The quality of our work depends, among others, on the quality of the tools we use. Recent research in digital libraries is focused, on one hand on improving the infrastructure of the digital library management systems (DLMS), and on the other on improving the metadata models used to annotate collections of objects maintained by DLMS. The latter includes, among others, the semantic web and social networking technologies. Recently, the semantic web and social networking technologies are being introduced to the digital libraries domain. The expected outcome is that the overall quality of information discovery in digital libraries can be improved by employing social and semantic technologies. In this chapter we present the results of an evaluation of social and semantic end-user information discovery services for the digital libraries.
    Date
    1. 8.2010 12:35:22
    Type
    a
  20. Prud'hommeaux, E.; Gayo, E.: RDF ventures to boldly meet your most pedestrian needs (2015) 0.03 
    0.029586587 = product of:
  0.059173174 = sum of:
    0.0077214893 = weight(_text_:a in 2024) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0077214893 = score(doc=2024,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05058132 = queryNorm
        0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 2024, 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=2024)
    0.051451683 = sum of:
      0.010333257 = weight(_text_:information in 2024) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.010333257 = score(doc=2024,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = queryNorm
          0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2024, 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=2024)
      0.041118424 = weight(_text_:22 in 2024) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041118424 = score(doc=2024,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05058132 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2024, 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=2024)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Defined in 1999 and paired with XML, the Resource Description Framework (RDF) has been cast as an RDF Schema, producing data that is well-structured but not validated, permitting certain illogical relationships. When stakeholders convened in 2014 to consider solutions to the data validation challenge, a W3C working group proposed Resource Shapes and Shape Expressions to describe the properties expected for an RDF node. Resistance rose from concerns about data and schema reuse, key principles in RDF. Ideally data types and properties are designed for broad use, but they are increasingly adopted with local restrictions for specific purposes. Resource Shapes are commonly treated as record classes, standing in for data structures but losing flexibility for later reuse. Of various solutions to the resulting tensions, the concept of record classes may be the most reasonable basis for agreement, satisfying stakeholders' objectives while allowing for variations with constraints.
    Footnote
    Contribution to a special section "Linked data and the charm of weak semantics".
    Source
    Bulletin of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 41(2015) no.4, S.18-22
    Type
    a

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 446
  • d 109
  • pt 5
  • el 1
  • f 1
  • sp 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 419
  • el 151
  • m 33
  • x 30
  • n 15
  • s 14
  • r 7
  • p 5
  • A 1
  • EL 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications