-
Kless, D.; Milton, S.: Comparison of thesauri and ontologies from a semiotic perspective (2010)
0.21
0.20739017 = product of:
0.24886821 = sum of:
0.015386774 = weight(_text_:und in 756) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015386774 = score(doc=756,freq=2.0), product of:
0.104724824 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.04725067 = queryNorm
0.14692576 = fieldWeight in 756, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=756)
0.07342099 = weight(_text_:anwendung in 756) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07342099 = score(doc=756,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22876309 = queryWeight, product of:
4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
0.04725067 = queryNorm
0.3209477 = fieldWeight in 756, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=756)
0.02402186 = weight(_text_:des in 756) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02402186 = score(doc=756,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13085164 = queryWeight, product of:
2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
0.04725067 = queryNorm
0.18358089 = fieldWeight in 756, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=756)
0.10259437 = weight(_text_:prinzips in 756) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10259437 = score(doc=756,freq=2.0), product of:
0.27041927 = queryWeight, product of:
5.723078 = idf(docFreq=392, maxDocs=44218)
0.04725067 = queryNorm
0.37939 = fieldWeight in 756, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.723078 = idf(docFreq=392, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=756)
0.03344421 = product of:
0.06688842 = sum of:
0.06688842 = weight(_text_:thesaurus in 756) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06688842 = score(doc=756,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21834905 = queryWeight, product of:
4.6210785 = idf(docFreq=1182, maxDocs=44218)
0.04725067 = queryNorm
0.30633712 = fieldWeight in 756, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.6210785 = idf(docFreq=1182, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=756)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.8333333 = coord(5/6)
- Theme
- Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
-
Kless, D.; Milton, S.; Kazmierczak, E.; Lindenthal, J.: Thesaurus and ontology structure : formal and pragmatic differences and similarities (2015)
0.21
0.20648976 = product of:
0.24778771 = sum of:
0.012822312 = weight(_text_:und in 2036) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012822312 = score(doc=2036,freq=2.0), product of:
0.104724824 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.04725067 = queryNorm
0.12243814 = fieldWeight in 2036, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2036)
0.061184157 = weight(_text_:anwendung in 2036) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.061184157 = score(doc=2036,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22876309 = queryWeight, product of:
4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
0.04725067 = queryNorm
0.2674564 = fieldWeight in 2036, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2036)
0.020018218 = weight(_text_:des in 2036) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020018218 = score(doc=2036,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13085164 = queryWeight, product of:
2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
0.04725067 = queryNorm
0.15298408 = fieldWeight in 2036, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2036)
0.08549531 = weight(_text_:prinzips in 2036) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08549531 = score(doc=2036,freq=2.0), product of:
0.27041927 = queryWeight, product of:
5.723078 = idf(docFreq=392, maxDocs=44218)
0.04725067 = queryNorm
0.31615835 = fieldWeight in 2036, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.723078 = idf(docFreq=392, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2036)
0.06826771 = product of:
0.13653542 = sum of:
0.13653542 = weight(_text_:thesaurus in 2036) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.13653542 = score(doc=2036,freq=12.0), product of:
0.21834905 = queryWeight, product of:
4.6210785 = idf(docFreq=1182, maxDocs=44218)
0.04725067 = queryNorm
0.62530804 = fieldWeight in 2036, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
4.6210785 = idf(docFreq=1182, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2036)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.8333333 = coord(5/6)
- Abstract
- Thesauri and other types of controlled vocabularies are increasingly re-engineered into ontologies described using the Web Ontology Language (OWL), particularly in the life sciences. This has led to the perception by some that thesauri are ontologies once they are described by using the syntax of OWL while others have emphasized the need to re-engineer a vocabulary to use it as ontology. This confusion is rooted in different perceptions of what ontologies are and how they differ from other types of vocabularies. In this article, we rigorously examine the structural differences and similarities between thesauri and meaning-defining ontologies described in OWL. Specifically, we conduct (a) a conceptual comparison of thesauri and ontologies, and (b) a comparison of a specific thesaurus and a specific ontology in the same subject field. Our results show that thesauri and ontologies need to be treated as 2 orthogonal kinds of models with superficially similar structures. An ontology is not a good thesaurus, nor is a thesaurus a good ontology. A thesaurus requires significant structural and other content changes to become an ontology, and vice versa.
- Theme
- Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
-
Kless, D.: Erstellung eines allgemeinen Standards zur Wissensorganisation : Nutzen, Möglichkeiten, Herausforderungen, Wege (2010)
0.04
0.036144864 = product of:
0.07228973 = sum of:
0.036266975 = weight(_text_:und in 4422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036266975 = score(doc=4422,freq=16.0), product of:
0.104724824 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.04725067 = queryNorm
0.34630734 = fieldWeight in 4422, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4422)
0.020018218 = weight(_text_:des in 4422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020018218 = score(doc=4422,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13085164 = queryWeight, product of:
2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
0.04725067 = queryNorm
0.15298408 = fieldWeight in 4422, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4422)
0.016004534 = product of:
0.03200907 = sum of:
0.03200907 = weight(_text_:22 in 4422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03200907 = score(doc=4422,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16546379 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04725067 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4422, 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=4422)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(3/6)
- Abstract
- Zur Organisation und zum besseren Auffinden von Wissen werden häufig verschiedene Typen von Vokabularen verwendet. Aufgrund ihres Ursprungs in unterschiedlichen Communities werden die Vokabulare mit unterschiedlicher Terminologie sowie jeweils eigenen Methoden und Werkzeugen beschrieben und sind, wenn überhaupt, unterschiedlich stark und mit unterschiedlichem Fokus standardisiert. Um dieser Entwicklung zu entgegnen, müssen zum einen die Standards für die verschiedenen Vokabulartypen (weiter-)entwickelt werden und dabei auf gemeinsame, heute allgemein anerkannte Modellierungssprachen (z.B. UML) und XML-basierte Auszeichnungssprachen zurückgreifen. Zum anderen ist ein Meta-Standard nötig, der die Terminologie der verschiedenen Communities aufeinander abbildet und die Vokabulare vergleichbar macht. Dies würde nicht nur die qualifizierte Auswahl eines Vokabulartyps ermöglichen, sondern auch deren gegenseitiges Abbilden (Mappen) und allgemein der Wiederverwendung von Vokabularen nutzen. In Ansätzen wurde diese Strategie im jüngst veröffentlichten britischen Standard BS 8723 verfolgt, dessen Schwerpunkt (weiter) auf Thesauri liegt, der jedoch auch explizit Bezug zu anderen Vokabularen nimmt. Die im April 2007 begonnene Revision des Standards als internationale ISO-Norm 25964 erlaubt weitere, wenn auch vielleicht kleine Schritte hin zu einer langfristigen Vision von allgemeingültigen Standards zur Wissensorganisation.
- 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
