020610

315 views

Published on

Presentation 020610 New media

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
315
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Literature: we searched for example LISTA, a bibliographical database for library and information sciences, Sociological Abstracts, for social sciences, and
  • Print editions of scholarly journals are becoming a ‘thing of the past’ But, distributed in different digital libraries: we have more than 300 databases, ranging from full-text (Sage), biographical (PubMed), research data etc, repositories, scattered among university, individual open access journals. Where do you start your search?
  • And when you search in Google Scholar or sEURch, which are integrated search engines, covering a lot of databases, you get so many results! You can’t read them all!
  • So there are a number of problems. Human information processing capacity is according to some just 300 kb per day! Computers can’t think for us, they use their own language
  • What do researchers want, or what would be the ideal situation? We want to find what’s relevant but with as less irrelevant articles as possible: Part A should be as big as possible, and Part B and D as little as possible. (picture is borrowed from http://choo.fis.utoronto.ca/FIS/Courses/LIS1325/Strategy.html)
  • When you search with the term mouse the relevant articles will be different among scholars from different disciplines.
  • 020610

    1. 1. Digital collections of academic libraries and semantic support Examples, potentials and challenges Judith Gulpers
    2. 2. Overview <ul><li>What’s the problem? </li></ul><ul><li>Possible solutions found in the literature </li></ul><ul><li>About the literature </li></ul>
    3. 4. You can’t read them all!
    4. 5. What’s the problem? <ul><li>Where do you search? </li></ul><ul><li>Human information processing capacity is limited </li></ul><ul><li>Computers don’t speak ‘human’. </li></ul>
    5. 6. What’s the problem? <ul><li>High recall and high precision are needed: finding the relevant articles with not much irrelevant articles. </li></ul><ul><li>For a scholar relevancy depends on his needs, interests, and context of the search. </li></ul><ul><li>In databases: Articles are ranked on relevancy, but that relevancy is calculated. </li></ul><ul><li>Because: the computer doesn’t understand the query </li></ul>
    6. 7. An example <ul><li>‘ Mouse’ </li></ul>For a biologist: Mus musculus For a computer scientist: a computer device For a psychologist: test animal For a doctor: cause of RSI
    7. 8. The solution? <ul><li>Semantic support </li></ul><ul><ul><li>gives meaning to information so that humans and computers can work together </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>metadata (data about data) is added and shared between multiple applications </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>computers can read this metadata, because it is put in an ontology </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>ontology: “formally describes concepts and relationships which can exist between them in some community” </li></ul></ul>
    8. 9. Semantics between digital libraries <ul><li>Digital libraries already have a lot of semantic support: search by author, title words, keywords from a thesaurus, etc. </li></ul><ul><li>The problem: communication between the DLs </li></ul><ul><li>An example: Vascode portal </li></ul><ul><li>Creating cross-cordanance between different vocabularies - A lot of human work! </li></ul><ul><li>Does it work?! Not visible in www.vascoda.de / </li></ul>
    9. 10. Semantics for research data <ul><li>UK project ‘policy grid’: concentrates on research data (questionnaires and interviews) collected for evidence-based policy research </li></ul><ul><li>Ontologies were created for the context of the data: who collected the data, how, when and where </li></ul><ul><li>But what about the content of the data? </li></ul><ul><li>Researchers: don’t even try to make an ontology! </li></ul><ul><li>Their solution: researchers add their own tags, that will create a folksonomy </li></ul>
    10. 11. Searching ín articles <ul><li>Automatic indexing of documents </li></ul><ul><li>Software creates a fingerprint of the document: representation of the characteristic concepts in a text </li></ul><ul><li>Thesauri are used to ‘tell’ the software what are the characteristic concepts within a certain domain </li></ul><ul><li>The search results can be visualized, helping you to see the concepts used a lot (or not), helping you find articles </li></ul>
    11. 12. About the literature <ul><li>Our startingpoint: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>What role can social scientists play in enhancing the digital libraries? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>The literature is mostly written by computer scientists and véry technical </li></ul><ul><li>Are the computer scientists even telling the scholars what they are doing?? </li></ul><ul><li>Can libraries can play a role in this, as intermediate? </li></ul>

    ×