• Email
  • Favorite
  • Download
  • Embed
  • Private Content

Loading…

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

Social Media and Scholarly Communication

by CrossRef on Oct 21, 2010

  • 1,552 views

Presentation by Geoffrey Bilder at the ISMTE European Conference, October 2010

Presentation by Geoffrey Bilder at the ISMTE European Conference, October 2010

Accessibility

Categories

Tags

semantic publication attention geoffrey bilder information extraction social semantic web early modern internet scholarly communication

More...

Upload Details

Uploaded via SlideShare as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate. If needed, use the feedback form to let us know more details.

Cancel

5 Embeds 101

http://jodischneider.com 96
http://paper.li 2
http://crossref.org 1
http://static.slidesharecdn.com 1
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com 1

Statistics

Favorites
1
Downloads
41
Comments
2
Embed Views
101
Views on SlideShare
1,451
Total Views
1,552

12 of 2 previous next

  • jodischneider jodischneider I was puzzled by slides 118-122. Answer comes from a useful interview at http://blogs.wiley.com/publishingnews/2009/06/18/your-starter-for-ten/
    (search for 'key messages' to get to the interesting part)
    In each of the above sentences, you can see that there are several italicized words and, without too much thought, you can tell that in each case, the word has been italicized for a different reason. But a computer has no way of telling that the word “Nature” has been italicized because it is a the title of a journal whereas the word “zeitgeist” has been italicized because it is a foreign phrase and the word “sure” has been italicized to indicate voiced emphasis. The problem is that web pages are full of examples like this where important semantic information is usable for humans but not for computers. This is particularly true in online scholarly articles where researchers record the names of chemicals, compounds, processes, people, places, concepts, etc. in narrative form and thus, effectively make the content difficult for a computer to read and process.
    1 year ago Reply
    Are you sure you want to Yes No
  • jodischneider jodischneider Quick pick best slides: 56 - how we select a book
    104-implications of where people's attention is
    107-academic translation 'see the realtime annotated bibliography of Dr. W...'
    131 'Help researchers use machines to discover what they should pay attention to'
    156-'The Early Modern Internet' :) Yes, it is!
    1 year ago Reply
    Are you sure you want to Yes No
Post Comment
Edit your comment Cancel

Social Media and Scholarly Communication — Presentation Transcript