Search (70 results, page 1 of 4)

0.074054174 = product of:
  0.14810835 = sum of:
    0.14810835 = sum of:
      0.10692415 = weight(_text_:mining in 2655) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.10692415 = score(doc=2655,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.28585905 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05066224 = queryNorm
          0.37404498 = fieldWeight in 2655, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2655)
      0.0411842 = weight(_text_:22 in 2655) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0411842 = score(doc=2655,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17741053 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05066224 = 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(1/2)

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

0.062372416 = product of:
  0.12474483 = sum of:
    0.12474483 = product of:
      0.24948967 = sum of:
        0.24948967 = weight(_text_:mining in 4784) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.24948967 = score(doc=4784,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.28585905 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05066224 = queryNorm
            0.8727716 = fieldWeight in 4784, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4784)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

LCSH

Data mining

RSWK

Data Mining / Kongress / Cochin <Kerala, 2010>

Subject

Data Mining / Kongress / Cochin <Kerala, 2010>
Data mining

0.06171181 = product of:
  0.12342362 = sum of:
    0.12342362 = sum of:
      0.08910345 = weight(_text_:mining in 3466) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08910345 = score(doc=3466,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.28585905 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05066224 = queryNorm
          0.31170416 = fieldWeight in 3466, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3466)
      0.034320172 = weight(_text_:22 in 3466) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034320172 = score(doc=3466,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17741053 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05066224 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3466, 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=3466)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Specimen identification keys are still the most commonly created tools used by systematic biologists to access biodiversity information. Creating identification keys requires analyzing and synthesizing large amounts of information from specimens and their descriptions and is a very labor-intensive and time-consuming activity. Automating the generation of identification keys from text descriptions becomes a highly attractive text mining application in the biodiversity domain. Fine-grained semantic annotation of morphological descriptions of organisms is a necessary first step in generating keys from text. Machine-readable ontologies are needed in this process because most biological characters are only implied (i.e., not stated) in descriptions. The immediate question to ask is How well do existing ontologies support semantic annotation and automated key generation? With the intention to either select an existing ontology or develop a unified ontology based on existing ones, this paper evaluates the coverage, semantic consistency, and inter-ontology agreement of a biodiversity character ontology and three plant glossaries that may be turned into ontologies. The coverage and semantic consistency of the ontology/glossaries are checked against the authoritative domain literature, namely, Flora of North America and Flora of China. The evaluation results suggest that more work is needed to improve the coverage and interoperability of the ontology/glossaries. More concepts need to be added to the ontology/glossaries and careful work is needed to improve the semantic consistency. The method used in this paper to evaluate the ontology/glossaries can be used to propose new candidate concepts from the domain literature and suggest appropriate definitions.

Date

1. 6.2010 9:55:22

0.0589364 = product of:
  0.1178728 = sum of:
    0.1178728 = product of:
      0.2357456 = sum of:
        0.2357456 = weight(_text_:mining in 5204) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.2357456 = score(doc=5204,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.28585905 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05066224 = queryNorm
            0.8246917 = fieldWeight in 5204, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5204)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Introduction.- Ontology Development.- Compliance using Metadata.- Variety Management for Big Data.- Text Mining in Economics.- Generation of Natural Language Texts.- Sentiment Analysis.- Building Concise Text Corpora from Web Contents.- Ontology-Based Modelling of Web Content.- Personalized Clinical Decision Support for Cancer Care.- Applications of Temporal Conceptual Semantic Systems.- Context-Aware Documentation in the Smart Factory.- Knowledge-Based Production Planning for Industry 4.0.- Information Exchange in Jurisdiction.- Supporting Automated License Clearing.- Managing cultural assets: Implementing typical cultural heritage archive's usage scenarios via Semantic Web technologies.- Semantic Applications for Process Management.- Domain-Specific Semantic Search Applications.

LCSH

Data mining
Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery

RSWK

Data Mining

Subject

Data Mining
Data mining
Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery

0.04023253 = product of:
  0.08046506 = sum of:
    0.08046506 = product of:
      0.24139518 = sum of:
        0.24139518 = weight(_text_:3a in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.24139518 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.429515 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05066224 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Faclanthology.org%2FD19-5317.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0ZZFyq5wWTtNTvNkrvjlGA.

0.038582932 = product of:
  0.077165864 = sum of:
    0.077165864 = product of:
      0.15433173 = sum of:
        0.15433173 = weight(_text_:mining in 3280) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15433173 = score(doc=3280,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.28585905 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05066224 = queryNorm
            0.5398875 = fieldWeight in 3280, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3280)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This publication shows how the gap between the HTML based internet and the RDF based vision of the semantic web might be bridged, by linking words in texts to concepts of ontologies. Most current search engines use indexes that are built at the syntactical level and return hits based on simple string comparisons. However, the indexes do not contain synonyms, cannot differentiate between homonyms ('mouse' as a pointing vs. 'mouse' as an animal) and users receive different search results when they use different conjugation forms of the same word. In this publication, we present a system that uses ontologies and Natural Language Processing techniques to index texts, and thus supports word sense disambiguation and the retrieval of texts that contain equivalent words, by indexing them to concepts of ontologies. For this purpose, we developed fully automated methods for mapping equivalent concepts of imported RDF ontologies (for this prototype WordNet, SUMO and OpenCyc). These methods will thus allow the seamless integration of domain specific ontologies for concept based information retrieval in different domains. To demonstrate the practical workability of this approach, a set of web pages that contain synonyms and homonyms were indexed and can be queried via a search engine like query frontend. However, the ontology based indexing approach can also be used for other data mining applications such text clustering, relation mining and for searching free text fields in biological databases. The ontology alignment methods and some of the text mining principles described in this publication are now incorporated into the ONDEX system http://ondex.sourceforge.net/.

0.038582932 = product of:
  0.077165864 = sum of:
    0.077165864 = product of:
      0.15433173 = sum of:
        0.15433173 = weight(_text_:mining in 3320) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15433173 = score(doc=3320,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.28585905 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05066224 = queryNorm
            0.5398875 = fieldWeight in 3320, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3320)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Domain ontologies play an important role in supporting knowledge-based applications in the Semantic Web. To facilitate the building of ontologies, text mining techniques have been used to perform ontology learning from texts. However, traditional systems employ shallow natural language processing techniques and focus only on concept and taxonomic relation extraction. In this paper we present a system, known as Concept-Relation-Concept Tuple-based Ontology Learning (CRCTOL), for mining ontologies automatically from domain-specific documents. Specifically, CRCTOL adopts a full text parsing technique and employs a combination of statistical and lexico-syntactic methods, including a statistical algorithm that extracts key concepts from a document collection, a word sense disambiguation algorithm that disambiguates words in the key concepts, a rule-based algorithm that extracts relations between the key concepts, and a modified generalized association rule mining algorithm that prunes unimportant relations for ontology learning. As a result, the ontologies learned by CRCTOL are more concise and contain a richer semantics in terms of the range and number of semantic relations compared with alternative systems. We present two case studies where CRCTOL is used to build a terrorism domain ontology and a sport event domain ontology. At the component level, quantitative evaluation by comparing with Text-To-Onto and its successor Text2Onto has shown that CRCTOL is able to extract concepts and semantic relations with a significantly higher level of accuracy. At the ontology level, the quality of the learned ontologies is evaluated by either employing a set of quantitative and qualitative methods including analyzing the graph structural property, comparison to WordNet, and expert rating, or directly comparing with a human-edited benchmark ontology, demonstrating the high quality of the ontologies learned.

0.038582932 = product of:
  0.077165864 = sum of:
    0.077165864 = product of:
      0.15433173 = sum of:
        0.15433173 = weight(_text_:mining in 99) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15433173 = score(doc=99,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.28585905 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05066224 = queryNorm
            0.5398875 = fieldWeight in 99, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=99)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

A new model is proposed to retrieve information by building automatically a semantic metatext structure for texts that allow searching and extracting discourse and semantic information according to certain linguistic categorizations. This paper presents approaches for searching and mining full text with semantic categories. The model is built up from two engines: The first one, called EXCOM (Djioua et al., 2006; Alrahabi, 2010), is an automatic system for text annotation, related to discourse and semantic maps, which are specification of general linguistic ontologies founded on the Applicative and Cognitive Grammar. The annotation layer uses a linguistic method called Contextual Exploration, which handles the polysemic values of a term in texts. Several 'semantic maps' underlying 'point of views' for text mining guide this automatic annotation process. The second engine uses semantic annotated texts, produced previously in order to create a semantic inverted index, which is able to retrieve relevant documents for queries associated with discourse and semantic categories such as definition, quotation, causality, relations between concepts, etc. (Djioua & Desclés, 2007). This semantic indexation process builds a metatext layer for textual contents. Some data and linguistic rules sets as well as the general architecture that extend third-party software are expressed as supplementary information.

0.037803393 = product of:
  0.075606786 = sum of:
    0.075606786 = product of:
      0.15121357 = sum of:
        0.15121357 = weight(_text_:mining in 1142) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15121357 = score(doc=1142,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.28585905 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05066224 = queryNorm
            0.5289795 = fieldWeight in 1142, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1142)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

We provide a brief, non-technical introduction to the text mining methodology known as "topic modeling." We summarize the theory and background of the method and discuss what kinds of things are found by topic models. Using a text corpus comprised of the eight articles from the special issue of Poetics on the subject of topic models, we run a topic model on these articles, both as a way to introduce the methodology and also to help summarize some of the ways in which social and cultural scientists are using topic models. We review some of the critiques and debates over the use of the method and finally, we link these developments back to some of the original innovations in the field of content analysis that were pioneered by Harold D. Lasswell and colleagues during and just after World War II.

Theme

Data Mining

0.03564138 = product of:
  0.07128276 = sum of:
    0.07128276 = product of:
      0.14256552 = sum of:
        0.14256552 = weight(_text_:mining in 2568) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14256552 = score(doc=2568,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.28585905 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05066224 = queryNorm
            0.49872664 = fieldWeight in 2568, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2568)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Theme

Data Mining

0.03564138 = product of:
  0.07128276 = sum of:
    0.07128276 = product of:
      0.14256552 = sum of:
        0.14256552 = weight(_text_:mining in 3723) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14256552 = score(doc=3723,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.28585905 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05066224 = queryNorm
            0.49872664 = fieldWeight in 3723, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3723)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Interviews, Spielstatistiken oder Videoaufzeichnungen sind für Fußballfans zwar zahlreich im Internet verfügbar, aber auf viele verschiedene Websites verstreut. "Semantic Media Mining" verknüpft nun Fußballdaten aus unterschiedlichen Quellen, bereitet sie semantisch auf und führt sie auf einer einzigen Website zusammen. Dadurch dokumentieren und visualisieren wir mehr als 50 Jahre Fußballgeschichte mit über 500 Mannschaften und 40.000 Spielern der Champions League, sowie der 1. und 2. Bundesliga.

0.031186208 = product of:
  0.062372416 = sum of:
    0.062372416 = product of:
      0.12474483 = sum of:
        0.12474483 = weight(_text_:mining in 267) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12474483 = score(doc=267,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.28585905 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05066224 = queryNorm
            0.4363858 = fieldWeight in 267, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=267)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Domain ontologies facilitate the organization, sharing and reuse of domain knowledge, and enable various vertical domain applications to operate successfully. Most methods for automatically constructing ontologies focus on taxonomic relations, such as is-kind-of and is- part-of relations. However, much of the domain-specific semantics is ignored. This work proposes a semi-unsupervised approach for extracting semantic relations from domain-specific text documents. The approach effectively utilizes text mining and existing taxonomic relations in domain ontologies to discover candidate keywords that can represent semantic relations. A preliminary experiment on the natural science domain (Taiwan K9 education) indicates that the proposed method yields valuable recommendations. This work enriches domain ontologies by adding distilled semantics.

0.026821688 = product of:
  0.053643376 = sum of:
    0.053643376 = product of:
      0.16093013 = sum of:
        0.16093013 = weight(_text_:3a in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.16093013 = score(doc=701,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.429515 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05066224 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

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.

0.026821688 = product of:
  0.053643376 = sum of:
    0.053643376 = product of:
      0.16093013 = sum of:
        0.16093013 = weight(_text_:3a in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.16093013 = score(doc=5820,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.429515 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05066224 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

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.

0.026731037 = product of:
  0.053462073 = sum of:
    0.053462073 = product of:
      0.10692415 = sum of:
        0.10692415 = weight(_text_:mining in 1680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10692415 = score(doc=1680,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.28585905 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05066224 = queryNorm
            0.37404498 = fieldWeight in 1680, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1680)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Last word ontological thought and practice is exemplified on an axiomatic framework [a model for an Integrative Cross-Language Ontology (ICLO), cf. Poli, R., Schmitz-Esser, W., forthcoming 2007] that is highly general, based on natural language, multilingual, can be implemented as topic maps and may be openly enhanced by software available for particular languages. Basics of ontological modelling, conditions for construction and maintenance, and the most salient points in application are addressed, such as cross-language text mining and knowledge generation. The rationale is to open the eyes for the tremendous potential of terminology-based ontologies for principled Knowledge Organization and the interchange and reuse of formalized knowledge.

0.026731037 = product of:
  0.053462073 = sum of:
    0.053462073 = product of:
      0.10692415 = sum of:
        0.10692415 = weight(_text_:mining in 2357) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10692415 = score(doc=2357,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.28585905 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05066224 = queryNorm
            0.37404498 = fieldWeight in 2357, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2357)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Ontology plays an essential role in recognizing the meaning of the information in Web documents. It has been shown that extracting concepts is easier than building relationships among them. For a defined set of concepts, many existing algorithms produce all possible relationships for that set. This makes the process of refining the relationships almost impossible. A new algorithm is needed to reduce the number of relationships among a defined set of concepts produced by existing algorithms. This article contributes such an algorithm, which enables a domain-knowledge expert to refine the relationships linking a set of concepts. In the research reported here, text-mining tools have been used to extract concepts in the domain of e-commerce laws. A new algorithm has been proposed to reduce the number of extracted relationships. It groups the concepts according to the number of relationships with other concepts and provides formalization. An experiment and software have been built, proving that reducing the number of relationships will reduce the efforts needed from a human expert.

0.026731037 = product of:
  0.053462073 = sum of:
    0.053462073 = product of:
      0.10692415 = sum of:
        0.10692415 = weight(_text_:mining in 5876) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10692415 = score(doc=5876,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.28585905 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05066224 = queryNorm
            0.37404498 = fieldWeight in 5876, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5876)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Mining product reviews and sentiment analysis are of great significance, whether for academic research purposes or optimizing business strategies. We propose a feature-level sentiment analysis framework based on rules parsing and fine-grained domain ontology for Chinese reviews. Fine-grained ontology is used to describe synonymous expressions of product features, which are reflected in word changes in online reviews. First, a semiautomatic construction method is developed by using Word2Vec for fine-grained ontology. Then, featurelevel sentiment analysis that combines rules parsing and the fine-grained domain ontology is conducted to extract explicit and implicit features from product reviews. Finally, the domain sentiment dictionary and context sentiment dictionary are established to identify sentiment polarities for the extracted feature-sentiment combinations. An experiment is conducted on the basis of product reviews crawled from Chinese e-commerce websites. The results demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach.

0.022275863 = product of:
  0.044551726 = sum of:
    0.044551726 = product of:
      0.08910345 = sum of:
        0.08910345 = weight(_text_:mining in 335) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08910345 = score(doc=335,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.28585905 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05066224 = queryNorm
            0.31170416 = fieldWeight in 335, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=335)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Estimation of the degree of semantic similarity/distance between concepts is a very common problem in research areas such as natural language processing, knowledge acquisition, information retrieval or data mining. In the past, many similarity measures have been proposed, exploiting explicit knowledge-such as the structure of a taxonomy-or implicit knowledge-such as information distribution. In the former case, taxonomies and/or ontologies are used to introduce additional semantics; in the latter case, frequencies of term appearances in a corpus are considered. Classical measures based on those premises suffer from some problems: in the ?rst case, their excessive dependency of the taxonomical/ontological structure; in the second case, the lack of semantics of a pure statistical analysis of occurrences and/or the ambiguity of estimating concept statistical distribution from term appearances. Measures based on Information Content (IC) of taxonomical concepts combine both approaches. However, they heavily depend on a properly pre-tagged and disambiguated corpus according to the ontological entities in order to computer accurate concept appearance probabilities. This limits the applicability of those measures to other ontologies - like specific domain ontologies - and massive corpus - like the Web. In this paper, several of the presente issues are analyzed. Modifications of classical similarity measures are also proposed. They are based on a contextualized and scalable version of IC computation in the Web by exploiting taxonomical knowledge. The goal is to avoid the measures' dependency on the corpus pre-processing to achieve reliable results and minimize language ambiguity. Our proposals are able to outperform classical approaches when using the Web for estimating concept probabilities.

0.022275863 = product of:
  0.044551726 = sum of:
    0.044551726 = product of:
      0.08910345 = sum of:
        0.08910345 = weight(_text_:mining in 3934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08910345 = score(doc=3934,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.28585905 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05066224 = queryNorm
            0.31170416 = fieldWeight in 3934, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3934)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Neumaier, Sebastian (et al.): Data Integration for Open Data on the Web - Stamou, Giorgos (et al.): Ontological Query Answering over Semantic Data - Calì, Andrea: Ontology Querying: Datalog Strikes Back - Sequeda, Juan F.: Integrating Relational Databases with the Semantic Web: A Reflection - Rousset, Marie-Christine (et al.): Datalog Revisited for Reasoning in Linked Data - Kaminski, Roland (et al.): A Tutorial on Hybrid Answer Set Solving with clingo - Eiter, Thomas (et al.): Answer Set Programming with External Source Access - Lukasiewicz, Thomas: Uncertainty Reasoning for the Semantic Web - Calvanese, Diego (et al.): OBDA for Log Extraction in Process Mining

0.01782069 = product of:
  0.03564138 = sum of:
    0.03564138 = product of:
      0.07128276 = sum of:
        0.07128276 = weight(_text_:mining in 4622) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07128276 = score(doc=4622,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.28585905 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05066224 = queryNorm
            0.24936332 = fieldWeight in 4622, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.642448 = idf(docFreq=425, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4622)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Dieses Buch präsentiert ein breites Spektrum aktueller Methoden zur Repräsentation und Verarbeitung (un)sicheren Wissens in maschinellen Systemen in didaktisch aufbereiteter Form. Neben symbolischen Ansätzen des nichtmonotonen Schließens (Default-Logik, hier konstruktiv und leicht verständlich mittels sog. Default-Bäume realisiert) werden auch ausführlich quantitative Methoden wie z.B. probabilistische Markov- und Bayes-Netze vorgestellt. Weitere Abschnitte beschäftigen sich mit Wissensdynamik (Truth Maintenance-Systeme), Aktionen und Planen, maschinellem Lernen, Data Mining und fallbasiertem Schließen.In einem vertieften Querschnitt werden zentrale alternative Ansätze einer logikbasierten Wissensmodellierung ausführlich behandelt. Detailliert beschriebene Algorithmen geben dem Praktiker nützliche Hinweise zur Anwendung der vorgestellten Ansätze an die Hand, während fundiertes Hintergrundwissen ein tieferes Verständnis für die Besonderheiten der einzelnen Methoden vermittelt . Mit einer weitgehend vollständigen Darstellung des Stoffes und zahlreichen, in den Text integrierten Aufgaben ist das Buch für ein Selbststudium konzipiert, eignet sich aber gleichermaßen für eine entsprechende Vorlesung. Im Online-Service zu diesem Buch werden u.a. ausführliche Lösungshinweise zu allen Aufgaben des Buches angeboten.Zahlreiche Beispiele mit medizinischem, biologischem, wirtschaftlichem und technischem Hintergrund illustrieren konkrete Anwendungsszenarien. Von namhaften Professoren empfohlen: State-of-the-Art bietet das Buch zu diesem klassischen Bereich der Informatik. Die wesentlichen Methoden wissensbasierter Systeme werden verständlich und anschaulich dargestellt. Repräsentation und Verarbeitung sicheren und unsicheren Wissens in maschinellen Systemen stehen dabei im Mittelpunkt. In der vierten, verbesserten Auflage wurde die Anzahl der motivierenden Selbsttestaufgaben mit aktuellem Praxisbezug nochmals erweitert. Ein Online-Service mit ausführlichen Musterlösungen erleichtert das Lernen.