Search (213 results, page 1 of 11)

  • × type_ss:"a"
  • × theme_ss:"Semantic Web"
  1. Blumauer, A.; Pellegrini, T.: Semantic Web Revisited : Eine kurze Einführung in das Social Semantic Web (2009) 0.10 
    0.09587004 = product of:
  0.19174008 = sum of:
    0.19174008 = sum of:
      0.14232962 = weight(_text_:web in 4855) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.14232962 = score(doc=4855,freq=22.0), product of:
          0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.8371137 = fieldWeight in 4855, product of:
            4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
              22.0 = termFreq=22.0
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4855)
      0.049410466 = weight(_text_:22 in 4855) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049410466 = score(doc=4855,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18244034 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4855, 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=4855)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Während in den vergangenen Monaten Themen wie Web 2.0 und Social Software ein erstaunliches Konjunkturhoch erlebt haben, vollzieht sich weitgehend abseits der öffentlichen Wahrnehmung eine technologische Komplementärinnovation. Die wachsende Adaption semantischer Technologien zu Zwecken der strukturierten Erschließung von "Web 2.0 Content", aber auch der Einsatz von Social Software zur kollaborativen Anreicherung von Web Content mit maschinenlesbaren Metadaten sind Ausdruck eines Trends in Richtung "Social Semantic Web". Bezeichnendes Merkmal dieser Entwicklung ist die voranschreitende Konvergenz zwischen Social Software und Semantic Web Technologien. Dieser Beitrag hat das Ziel ein allgemeines Bewusstsein und Verständnis dieser Entwicklung zu schaffen und nähert sich dem Phänomen aus einer nichttechnischen Perspektive.
    Object
    Web 2.0
    Pages
    S.3-22
    Source
    Social Semantic Web: Web 2.0, was nun? Hrsg.: A. Blumauer u. T. Pellegrini
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  2. Schneider, R.: Web 3.0 ante portas? : Integration von Social Web und Semantic Web (2008) 0.08 
    0.08147512 = product of:
  0.16295023 = sum of:
    0.16295023 = sum of:
      0.11353976 = weight(_text_:web in 4184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.11353976 = score(doc=4184,freq=14.0), product of:
          0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.6677857 = fieldWeight in 4184, product of:
            3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
              14.0 = termFreq=14.0
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4184)
      0.049410466 = weight(_text_:22 in 4184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049410466 = score(doc=4184,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18244034 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4184, 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=4184)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Das Medium Internet ist im Wandel, und mit ihm ändern sich seine Publikations- und Rezeptionsbedingungen. Welche Chancen bieten die momentan parallel diskutierten Zukunftsentwürfe von Social Web und Semantic Web? Zur Beantwortung dieser Frage beschäftigt sich der Beitrag mit den Grundlagen beider Modelle unter den Aspekten Anwendungsbezug und Technologie, beleuchtet darüber hinaus jedoch auch deren Unzulänglichkeiten sowie den Mehrwert einer mediengerechten Kombination. Am Beispiel des grammatischen Online-Informationssystems grammis wird eine Strategie zur integrativen Nutzung der jeweiligen Stärken skizziert.
    Date
    22. 1.2011 10:38:28
    Source
    Kommunikation, Partizipation und Wirkungen im Social Web, Band 1. Hrsg.: A. Zerfaß u.a
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  3. Papadakis, I. et al.: Highlighting timely information in libraries through social and semantic Web technologies (2016) 0.08 
    0.078642875 = product of:
  0.15728575 = sum of:
    0.15728575 = sum of:
      0.08669936 = weight(_text_:web in 2090) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08669936 = score(doc=2090,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.5099235 = fieldWeight in 2090, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2090)
      0.07058638 = weight(_text_:22 in 2090) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07058638 = score(doc=2090,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18244034 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2090, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2090)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Metadata and semantics research: 10th International Conference, MTSR 2016, Göttingen, Germany, November 22-25, 2016, Proceedings. Eds.: E. Garoufallou
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  4. Faaborg, A.; Lagoze, C.: Semantic browsing (2003) 0.08 
    0.07726393 = product of:
  0.15452786 = sum of:
    0.15452786 = sum of:
      0.10511739 = weight(_text_:web in 1026) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.10511739 = score(doc=1026,freq=12.0), product of:
          0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.6182494 = fieldWeight in 1026, product of:
            3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
              12.0 = termFreq=12.0
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1026)
      0.049410466 = weight(_text_:22 in 1026) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049410466 = score(doc=1026,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18244034 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1026, 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=1026)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    We have created software applications that allow users to both author and use Semantic Web metadata. To create and use a layer of semantic content on top of the existing Web, we have (1) implemented a user interface that expedites the task of attributing metadata to resources on the Web, and (2) augmented a Web browser to leverage this semantic metadata to provide relevant information and tasks to the user. This project provides a framework for annotating and reorganizing existing files, pages, and sites on the Web that is similar to Vannevar Bushrsquos original concepts of trail blazing and associative indexing.
    Source
    Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 7th European Conference, proceedings / ECDL 2003, Trondheim, Norway, August 17-22, 2003
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  5. Synak, M.; Dabrowski, M.; Kruk, S.R.: Semantic Web and ontologies (2009) 0.07 
    0.070708394 = product of:
  0.14141679 = sum of:
    0.14141679 = sum of:
      0.08494768 = weight(_text_:web in 3376) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08494768 = score(doc=3376,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.49962097 = fieldWeight in 3376, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3376)
      0.056469105 = weight(_text_:22 in 3376) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.056469105 = score(doc=3376,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18244034 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3376, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3376)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    This chapter presents ontologies and their role in the creation of the Semantic Web. Ontologies hold special interest, because they are very closely related to the way we understand the world. They provide common understanding, the very first step to successful communication. In following sections, we will present ontologies, how they are created and used. We will describe available tools for specifying and working with ontologies.
    Date
    31. 7.2010 16:58:22
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  6. Franklin, R.A.: Re-inventing subject access for the semantic web (2003) 0.07 
    0.06983581 = product of:
  0.13967162 = sum of:
    0.13967162 = sum of:
      0.0973198 = weight(_text_:web in 2556) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0973198 = score(doc=2556,freq=14.0), product of:
          0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.57238775 = fieldWeight in 2556, product of:
            3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
              14.0 = termFreq=14.0
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2556)
      0.042351827 = weight(_text_:22 in 2556) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042351827 = score(doc=2556,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18244034 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2556, 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=2556)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    First generation scholarly research on the Web lacked a firm system of authority control. Second generation Web research is beginning to model subject access with library science principles of bibliographic control and cataloguing. Harnessing the Web and organising the intellectual content with standards and controlled vocabulary provides precise search and retrieval capability, increasing relevance and efficient use of technology. Dublin Core metadata standards permit a full evaluation and cataloguing of Web resources appropriate to highly specific research needs and discovery. Current research points to a type of structure based on a system of faceted classification. This system allows the semantic and syntactic relationships to be defined. Controlled vocabulary, such as the Library of Congress Subject Headings, can be assigned, not in a hierarchical structure, but rather as descriptive facets of relating concepts. Web design features such as this are adding value to discovery and filtering out data that lack authority. The system design allows for scalability and extensibility, two technical features that are integral to future development of the digital library and resource discovery.
    Date
    30.12.2008 18:22:46
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  7. Malmsten, M.: Making a library catalogue part of the Semantic Web (2008) 0.07 
    0.06761923 = product of:
  0.13523845 = sum of:
    0.13523845 = sum of:
      0.08582799 = weight(_text_:web in 2640) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08582799 = score(doc=2640,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.50479853 = fieldWeight in 2640, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2640)
      0.049410466 = weight(_text_:22 in 2640) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049410466 = score(doc=2640,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18244034 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2640, 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=2640)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Library catalogues contain an enormous amount of structured, high-quality data, however, this data is generally not made available to semantic web applications. In this paper we describe the tools and techniques used to make the Swedish Union Catalogue (LIBRIS) part of the Semantic Web and Linked Data. The focus is on links to and between resources and the mechanisms used to make data available, rather than perfect description of the individual resources. We also present a method of creating links between records of the same work.
    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
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  8. Heflin, J.; Hendler, J.: Semantic interoperability on the Web (2000) 0.06 
    0.061869845 = product of:
  0.12373969 = sum of:
    0.12373969 = sum of:
      0.07432922 = weight(_text_:web in 759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07432922 = score(doc=759,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.43716836 = fieldWeight in 759, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=759)
      0.049410466 = weight(_text_:22 in 759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049410466 = score(doc=759,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18244034 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 759, 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=759)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    XML will have a profound impact on the way data is exchanged on the Internet. An important feature of this language is the separation of content from presentation, which makes it easier to select and/or reformat the data. However, due to the likelihood of numerous industry and domain specific DTDs, those who wish to integrate information will still be faced with the problem of semantic interoperability. In this paper we discuss why this problem is not solved by XML, and then discuss why the Resource Description Framework is only a partial solution. We then present the SHOE language, which we feel has many of the features necessary to enable a semantic web, and describe an existing set of tools that make it easy to use the language.
    Date
    11. 5.2013 19:22:18
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  9. Gendt, M. van; Isaac, I.; Meij, L. van der; Schlobach, S.: Semantic Web techniques for multiple views on heterogeneous collections : a case study (2006) 0.06 
    0.057959333 = product of:
  0.115918666 = sum of:
    0.115918666 = sum of:
      0.07356684 = weight(_text_:web in 2418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07356684 = score(doc=2418,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.43268442 = fieldWeight in 2418, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2418)
      0.042351827 = weight(_text_:22 in 2418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042351827 = score(doc=2418,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18244034 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2418, 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=2418)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Integrated digital access to multiple collections is a prominent issue for many Cultural Heritage institutions. The metadata describing diverse collections must be interoperable, which requires aligning the controlled vocabularies that are used to annotate objects from these collections. In this paper, we present an experiment where we match the vocabularies of two collections by applying the Knowledge Representation techniques established in recent Semantic Web research. We discuss the steps that are required for such matching, namely formalising the initial resources using Semantic Web languages, and running ontology mapping tools on the resulting representations. In addition, we present a prototype that enables the user to browse the two collections using the obtained alignment while still providing her with the original vocabulary structures.
    Source
    Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 10th European conference, proceedings / ECDL 2006, Alicante, Spain, September 17 - 22, 2006
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  10. Brunetti, J.M.; Roberto García, R.: User-centered design and evaluation of overview components for semantic data exploration (2014) 0.05 
    0.04879702 = product of:
  0.09759404 = sum of:
    0.09759404 = sum of:
      0.06935949 = weight(_text_:web in 1626) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06935949 = score(doc=1626,freq=16.0), product of:
          0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.4079388 = fieldWeight in 1626, product of:
            4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
              16.0 = termFreq=16.0
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1626)
      0.028234553 = weight(_text_:22 in 1626) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.028234553 = score(doc=1626,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18244034 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1626, 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=1626)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Purpose - The growing volumes of semantic data available in the web result in the need for handling the information overload phenomenon. The potential of this amount of data is enormous but in most cases it is very difficult for users to visualize, explore and use this data, especially for lay-users without experience with Semantic Web technologies. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach - The Visual Information-Seeking Mantra "Overview first, zoom and filter, then details-on-demand" proposed by Shneiderman describes how data should be presented in different stages to achieve an effective exploration. The overview is the first user task when dealing with a data set. The objective is that the user is capable of getting an idea about the overall structure of the data set. Different information architecture (IA) components supporting the overview tasks have been developed, so they are automatically generated from semantic data, and evaluated with end-users. Findings - The chosen IA components are well known to web users, as they are present in most web pages: navigation bars, site maps and site indexes. The authors complement them with Treemaps, a visualization technique for displaying hierarchical data. These components have been developed following an iterative User-Centered Design methodology. Evaluations with end-users have shown that they get easily used to them despite the fact that they are generated automatically from structured data, without requiring knowledge about the underlying semantic technologies, and that the different overview components complement each other as they focus on different information search needs. Originality/value - Obtaining semantic data sets overviews cannot be easily done with the current semantic web browsers. Overviews become difficult to achieve with large heterogeneous data sets, which is typical in the Semantic Web, because traditional IA techniques do not easily scale to large data sets. There is little or no support to obtain overview information quickly and easily at the beginning of the exploration of a new data set. This can be a serious limitation when exploring a data set for the first time, especially for lay-users. The proposal is to reuse and adapt existing IA components to provide this overview to users and show that they can be generated automatically from the thesaurus and ontologies that structure semantic data while providing a comparable user experience to traditional web sites.
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  11. Monireh, E.; Sarker, M.K.; Bianchi, F.; Hitzler, P.; Doran, D.; Xie, N.: Reasoning over RDF knowledge bases using deep learning (2018) 0.04 
    0.044192746 = product of:
  0.08838549 = sum of:
    0.08838549 = sum of:
      0.053092297 = weight(_text_:web in 4553) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.053092297 = score(doc=4553,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.3122631 = fieldWeight in 4553, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4553)
      0.03529319 = weight(_text_:22 in 4553) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03529319 = score(doc=4553,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18244034 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4553, 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=4553)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Semantic Web knowledge representation standards, and in particular RDF and OWL, often come endowed with a formal semantics which is considered to be of fundamental importance for the field. Reasoning, i.e., the drawing of logical inferences from knowledge expressed in such standards, is traditionally based on logical deductive methods and algorithms which can be proven to be sound and complete and terminating, i.e. correct in a very strong sense. For various reasons, though, in particular the scalability issues arising from the ever increasing amounts of Semantic Web data available and the inability of deductive algorithms to deal with noise in the data, it has been argued that alternative means of reasoning should be investigated which bear high promise for high scalability and better robustness. From this perspective, deductive algorithms can be considered the gold standard regarding correctness against which alternative methods need to be tested. In this paper, we show that it is possible to train a Deep Learning system on RDF knowledge graphs, such that it is able to perform reasoning over new RDF knowledge graphs, with high precision and recall compared to the deductive gold standard.
    Date
    16.11.2018 14:22:01
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  12. Shoffner, M.; Greenberg, J.; Kramer-Duffield, J.; Woodbury, D.: Web 2.0 semantic systems : collaborative learning in science (2008) 0.04 
    0.044150814 = product of:
  0.08830163 = sum of:
    0.08830163 = sum of:
      0.06006708 = weight(_text_:web in 2661) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06006708 = score(doc=2661,freq=12.0), product of:
          0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.35328537 = fieldWeight in 2661, product of:
            3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
              12.0 = termFreq=12.0
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2661)
      0.028234553 = weight(_text_:22 in 2661) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.028234553 = score(doc=2661,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18244034 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2661, 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=2661)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The basic goal of education within a discipline is to transform a novice into an expert. This entails moving the novice toward the "semantic space" that the expert inhabits-the space of concepts, meanings, vocabularies, and other intellectual constructs that comprise the discipline. Metadata is significant to this goal in digitally mediated education environments. Encoding the experts' semantic space not only enables the sharing of semantics among discipline scientists, but also creates an environment that bridges the semantic gap between the common vocabulary of the novice and the granular descriptive language of the seasoned scientist (Greenberg, et al, 2005). Developments underlying the Semantic Web, where vocabularies are formalized in the Web Ontology Language (OWL), and Web 2.0 approaches of user-generated folksonomies provide an infrastructure for linking vocabulary systems and promoting group learning via metadata literacy. Group learning is a pedagogical approach to teaching that harnesses the phenomenon of "collective intelligence" to increase learning by means of collaboration. Learning a new semantic system can be daunting for a novice, and yet it is integral to advance one's knowledge in a discipline and retain interest. These ideas are key to the "BOT 2.0: Botany through Web 2.0, the Memex and Social Learning" project (Bot 2.0).72 Bot 2.0 is a collaboration involving the North Carolina Botanical Garden, the UNC SILS Metadata Research center, and the Renaissance Computing Institute (RENCI). Bot 2.0 presents a curriculum utilizing a memex as a way for students to link and share digital information, working asynchronously in an environment beyond the traditional classroom. Our conception of a memex is not a centralized black box but rather a flexible, distributed framework that uses the most salient and easiest-to-use collaborative platforms (e.g., Facebook, Flickr, wiki and blog technology) for personal information management. By meeting students "where they live" digitally, we hope to attract students to the study of botanical science. A key aspect is to teach students scientific terminology and about the value of metadata, an inherent function in several of the technologies and in the instructional approach we are utilizing. This poster will report on a study examining the value of both folksonomies and taxonomies for post-secondary college students learning plant identification. Our data is drawn from a curriculum involving a virtual independent learning portion and a "BotCamp" weekend at UNC, where students work with digital plan specimens that they have captured. Results provide some insight into the importance of collaboration and shared vocabulary for gaining confidence and for student progression from novice to expert in botany.
    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
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  13. Ziegler, C.: Smartes Chaos : Web 2.0 versus Semantic Web (2006) 0.04 
    0.04334968 = product of:
  0.08669936 = sum of:
    0.08669936 = product of:
      0.17339872 = sum of:
        0.17339872 = weight(_text_:web in 4868) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.17339872 = score(doc=4868,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052098576 = queryNorm
            1.019847 = fieldWeight in 4868, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4868)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Web 2.0 und Semantic Web schicken sich gleichermaßen an, dem klassischen WWW neuen Lebensatem einzuhauchen. Dabei könnte Web 2.0 sich zu genau dem entwickeln, was das Semantic Web sein wollte, nie wurde und womöglich niemals sein kann
    Object
    Web 2.0
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  14. Hooland, S. van; Verborgh, R.; Wilde, M. De; Hercher, J.; Mannens, E.; Wa, R.Van de: Evaluating the success of vocabulary reconciliation for cultural heritage collections (2013) 0.04 
    0.039567623 = product of:
  0.07913525 = sum of:
    0.07913525 = sum of:
      0.03678342 = weight(_text_:web in 662) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03678342 = score(doc=662,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 662, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=662)
      0.042351827 = weight(_text_:22 in 662) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042351827 = score(doc=662,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18244034 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 662, 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=662)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    22. 3.2013 19:29:20
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  15. Prud'hommeaux, E.; Gayo, E.: RDF ventures to boldly meet your most pedestrian needs (2015) 0.04 
    0.039567623 = product of:
  0.07913525 = sum of:
    0.07913525 = sum of:
      0.03678342 = weight(_text_:web in 2024) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03678342 = score(doc=2024,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 2024, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2024)
      0.042351827 = weight(_text_:22 in 2024) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042351827 = score(doc=2024,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18244034 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = 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(1/2)
    Source
    Bulletin of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 41(2015) no.4, S.18-22
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  16. Zeng, M.L.; Fan, W.; Lin, X.: SKOS for an integrated vocabulary structure (2008) 0.04 
    0.037304714 = product of:
  0.07460943 = sum of:
    0.07460943 = sum of:
      0.034679744 = weight(_text_:web in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034679744 = score(doc=2654,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.2039694 = fieldWeight in 2654, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2654)
      0.039929688 = weight(_text_:22 in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.039929688 = score(doc=2654,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.18244034 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.21886435 = fieldWeight in 2654, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2654)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    In order to transfer the Chinese Classified Thesaurus (CCT) into a machine-processable format and provide CCT-based Web services, a pilot study has been conducted in which a variety of selected CCT classes and mapped thesaurus entries are encoded with SKOS. OWL and RDFS are also used to encode the same contents for the purposes of feasibility and cost-benefit comparison. CCT is a collected effort led by the National Library of China. It is an integration of the national standards Chinese Library Classification (CLC) 4th edition and Chinese Thesaurus (CT). As a manually created mapping product, CCT provides for each of the classes the corresponding thesaurus terms, and vice versa. The coverage of CCT includes four major clusters: philosophy, social sciences and humanities, natural sciences and technologies, and general works. There are 22 main-classes, 52,992 sub-classes and divisions, 110,837 preferred thesaurus terms, 35,690 entry terms (non-preferred terms), and 59,738 pre-coordinated headings (Chinese Classified Thesaurus, 2005) Major challenges of encoding this large vocabulary comes from its integrated structure. CCT is a result of the combination of two structures (illustrated in Figure 1): a thesaurus that uses ISO-2788 standardized structure and a classification scheme that is basically enumerative, but provides some flexibility for several kinds of synthetic mechanisms Other challenges include the complex relationships caused by differences of granularities of two original schemes and their presentation with various levels of SKOS elements; as well as the diverse coordination of entries due to the use of auxiliary tables and pre-coordinated headings derived from combining classes, subdivisions, and thesaurus terms, which do not correspond to existing unique identifiers. The poster reports the progress, shares the sample SKOS entries, and summarizes problems identified during the SKOS encoding process. Although OWL Lite and OWL Full provide richer expressiveness, the cost-benefit issues and the final purposes of encoding CCT raise questions of using such approaches.
    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
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  17. Birkenbihl, K.: Standards für das Semantic Web (2006) 0.04 
    0.03678342 = product of:
  0.07356684 = sum of:
    0.07356684 = product of:
      0.14713368 = sum of:
        0.14713368 = weight(_text_:web in 5788) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14713368 = score(doc=5788,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052098576 = queryNorm
            0.86536884 = fieldWeight in 5788, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5788)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Semantic Web - das ist die Anwendung von Wissenstechnologie im World Wide Web. Dieses Kapitel beschreibt in einigen einführenden Absätzen die Aufgabe und Entstehung von Standards. Sodann gibt es einen Überblick über die Technologien und Standards, die für das Web und seine Erweiterung zum Semantic Web entwickelt und eingesetzt werden. Diese werden überwiegend vom World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) [35] definiert. Abschließend folgen einige Bemerkungen zur weiteren Entwicklung des Semantic Web.
    Source
    Semantic Web: Wege zur vernetzten Wissensgesellschaft. Hrsg.: T. Pellegrini, u. A. Blumauer
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  18. Bettel, S.: Warum Web 2.0? Oder : Was vom Web 2.0 wirklich bleiben wird (2009) 0.03 
    0.034679744 = product of:
  0.06935949 = sum of:
    0.06935949 = product of:
      0.13871898 = sum of:
        0.13871898 = weight(_text_:web in 4856) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13871898 = score(doc=4856,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052098576 = queryNorm
            0.8158776 = fieldWeight in 4856, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4856)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Dieser Beitrag diskutiert die Entwicklungsgeschichte und den Facettenreichtum eines Begriffes, der gleichsam für technologische Innovation, soziale Modernisierung und eine schlaue Marketingstrategie steht. Es zeigt sich, dass die Verortung des Phänomens Web 2.0, gerade aufgrund der Polemik und Polarisierung, die der Begriff hervorgerufen hat, schwieriger ist, als man vermuten mag. Doch eines ist gewiss: Seit das Web 2.0 in unser Bewusstsein gelangt ist, ist das Internet wieder "in".
    Object
    Web 2.0
    Source
    Social Semantic Web: Web 2.0, was nun? Hrsg.: A. Blumauer u. T. Pellegrini
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  19. Aslam, S.; Sonkar, S.K.: Semantic Web : an overview (2019) 0.03 
    0.034679744 = product of:
  0.06935949 = sum of:
    0.06935949 = product of:
      0.13871898 = sum of:
        0.13871898 = weight(_text_:web in 54) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13871898 = score(doc=54,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052098576 = queryNorm
            0.8158776 = fieldWeight in 54, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=54)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    This paper presents the semantic web, web writing content, web technology, goals of semantic and obligation for the expansion of web 3.0. This paper also shows the different components of semantic web and such as HTTP, HTML, XML, XML Schema, URI, RDF, Taxonomy and OWL. To provide valuable information services semantic web execute the benefits of library functions and also to be the best use of library collection are mention here.
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  20. Greenberg, J.: Advancing Semantic Web via library functions (2006) 0.03 
    0.03315613 = product of:
  0.06631226 = sum of:
    0.06631226 = product of:
      0.13262452 = sum of:
        0.13262452 = weight(_text_:web in 244) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13262452 = score(doc=244,freq=26.0), product of:
            0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052098576 = queryNorm
            0.780033 = fieldWeight in 244, product of:
              5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
                26.0 = termFreq=26.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=244)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    This article explores the applicability primary library functions (collection development, cataloging, reference, and circulation) to the Semantic Web. The article defines the Semantic Web, identifies similarities between the library institution and the Semantic Web, and presents research questions guiding the inquiry. The article addresses each library function and demonstrates the applicability of each function's polices to Semantic Web development. Results indicate that library functions are applicable to Semantic Web, with "collection development" translating to "Semantic Web selection;" "cataloging" translating to "Semantic Web 'semantic' representation;" "reference" translating to "Semantic Web service," and circulation translating to "Semantic Web resource use." The last part of this article includes a discussion about the lack of embrace between the library and the Semantic Web communities, recommendations for improving this gap, and research conclusions.
    Footnote
    Simultaneously published as Knitting the Semantic Web
    Theme
    Semantic Web

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 151
  • d 60
  • f 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • el 26
  • x 1
  • More… Less…

Themes