|
|
|
|
|
| |
Home -> Models (linguistic, cognitive and statistical) |
|
Number of found records: 5
|
FARROW, John F. |
|
A Cognitive Process Model of Document Indexing |
|
Journal of documentation 1991, vol. 47, n.2, pp.149-166 |
|
On line (10/05/2005) |
|
Outlines a cognitive process model of abstracting, indexing, and classification that is based on text comprehension processes. Text comprehension for indexing versus other purposes is discussed, including conceptual and perceptual processing; conceptual knowledge and the development of expertise are discussed; and characteristics of short-term and long-term memory are described. (DB) |
|
indexing; cognitive process model of abstracting; |
Assessment |
|
|
|
|
GREEN, Rebecca |
|
The Profession`s Models of Information: A Cognitive Linguistic Analysis |
|
Journal of documentation 1991, vol. 47, nº 2, pp. 130-148 |
|
On line (10/05/2005) |
|
Explains three cognitive models of information and the information transfer process present in the literature of library and information science, based on a linguistic analysis of phrases incorporating the word 'information' from a random sample of abstracts in the LISA (Library and Information Science Abstracts) database. (DB) |
|
cognitive models; linguistic analysis |
Assessment |
|
|
|
|
LIN, Chin-Yew; HOVY, Eduard |
|
Identifying Topics by Position. |
|
In Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Applied Natural Language Processing, pp.283-290. Association for Computational Linguistics, March 31 - April 3 1997. |
|
PDF |
|
This paper addresses the problem of identifying likely topics of texts by their position in the text. It describes the automated training and evaluation of an Optimal Position Policy, a method of locating the likely positions of topic-bearing sentences based on genre-specific regularities of discourse structure. This method can be used in applications such as information retrieval, routing, and text summarization. (AU) |
|
summarization; evaluation; information retrieval; discourse structure |
Assessment |
|
|
|
|
MANI, Inderjeet; GATES, Barbara; BLOEDORN, Eric |
|
Using Cohesion and Coherence Models for Text Summarization. |
|
In HOVY, Eduard; RADEV, Dragomir R., (Eds), Proceedings of the AAAI Symposium on Intelligent Text Summarization, pages 69{76, Stanford, CA, March 23-25 1998. AAAI Press. |
|
PDF |
|
In this paper we investigate two classes of techniques to determine what is salient in a text as a means of deciding whether that information should be included in a summary. We introduce three methods based on text cohesion which models text in terms of relations between words or referring expressions to help determine how tightly connected the text is. We also describe a method based on text coherence which models text in terms of macro-level relations between clauses or sentences to help determine the overall argumentative structure of the text. The paper compares salience scores produced by the cohesion and coherence methods and compares them with human judgments. The results show that while the coherence method beats the cohesion methods in accuracy of determining clause salience the best cohesion method can reach 76% of the accuracy levels of the coherence method in determining salience. Further two of the cohesion methods each yield significant positive correlations with the human salience judgments. We also compare the types of discourse related text structure discovered by cohesion and coherence methods. (AU) |
|
cohesión; coherence; |
Assessment |
|
|
|
Showing page 1 of 2 Previous 1 2 Next |
|
