Â¥Ö÷

ÎÞÓïÖС­¡­ ½èbaojieµÄ¶«·ç£¬ºÜÓÐÐÒµÄϵ½ÁËiswc2006µÄÎļ¯¡£ÔÙÒ»´Î¿´µ½AKTiveRankµÄÎÄÕ£¬ÎÞÓïÖС£ 1¹ØÓÚÒ»¸å¶àͶ£ºk-cup2005,www2006 eon workshop,iswc2006 conference,ͬÑùµÄ˼Ï룬ͬÑùµÄʵÑé½á¹ûºÍÆÀ¹À½á¹û£¨www2006 eon workshopºÍiswc2006 conference¼òֱûÓÐÈκÎÇø±ð£© 2case study£ºÈý´Î»áÒ鶼Óõ½ÁËͬÑùµÄÊý¾Ý£¬À´×Ôswoogle2005¡£swoogle2006¶¼¸üÐÂÁ˲»Öª¶àÉٴΣ¬»¹ÔÚºÍswoogle2005×÷¶Ô±ÈÊÔÑ飬˵×Ô¼º±È±ðÈ˺öàÉÙ¶àÉÙ 3evaluation£º¼´Ê¹Ëã·¨ºÍÊý¾Ý¶¼Óб䶯ÈÔÈ»¼á³ÖÓÃk-cup2005µÄÆÀ¹ÀÊÔ¾íºÍ½á¹û¡£¶øÇÒ»¹°Ñ×Ô¼ºÆ½µÄºÜ¸ß 4Ñо¿Ì¬¶È£ºÊ×ÏȲ»open¡£ÎÒд·âÐÅÈ¥Òª¼¸¸öontology£¨ÓÖ²»ÊÇËûдµÄ£¬¶øÇÒÖ»ÊÇcase£©±»¿ñ´òÌ«¼«£¬ÍÆжÔðÈΣ¬Ëµ×Ô¼ºµÄʵÑé²»´ú±íʲô£¬²»Äܵóöʲô½áÂÛ£¬ÄÇÄãÃÇΪʲôҪͶ¸å£¿»¹ÓУ¬ÄǸöÆÀ¹ÀʹÓõÄpccº¯Êý¼«²»±ê×¼£¬ÎÒÔõôË㶼ÊÇ0.533£¬¶ø·ÇËý˵µÄ0.942¡£ ±¾ÈËÎÞÄÜ£¬²»ÄÜ¿ªÍØÐÂÁìÓò£¬Ö»ºÃºÍËû×÷¶Ô±È¡£¿ÉÊÇÔÚÕâÖÖ¼«²»¹«Æ½µÄÆÀ¹ÀÖУ¬Ê¤Ëã¸ù±¾²»¿ÉÄÜ¡£ÔÚÕâÑùÏÂÈ¥ÒÔºóµÄʵÑé¾Í¸ü²»ºÃ×öÁË£¬Ö»Òª×öÕâ¸öÁìÓò¾ÍÒªºÍÕâЩÀ¬»ø¶¥¼¶»áÒéµÄÎÄÕÂ×÷¶Ô±ÈÊÔÑé¡£´ó¼Ò˵˵ÕâÊÇÔõô»ØÊ£¿    Êղؠ  ·ÖÏí   ¶¥(0)

	µÚ2Â¥

ÄãÕû¼¸¸ö¹Ø¼üÎÊÌ⣬ÓÃÓ¢ÎÄд³öÀ´£¬ÎÒÈ¥ÎÊÎÊ

	µÚ3Â¥

ÎÒ»¹ÒÔΪÕâ´Îiswc2006µÄAKTiveRank²»ÊÇÒÔÇ°µÄAKTiveRankÄØ. ËûµÄÎÄÕÂÎÒ¿´¹ý,˼Ïë¼òµ¥,µ«Ò²²»ÊÇÒ»ÎÞÊÇ´¦,µ«ÊÇÈç¹ûûÓÐʵÖʵĸĽø¾ÍÖÐISWC,»¹ÊÇÈÃÈ˲»Ã⺹ÑÕ.

	µÚ4Â¥

ÊÇ°¡£¬ÎҺ͵¼Ê¦ËµµÄʱºò£¬Ëû˵£¬ÕâÊÇʲôµµ´ÎµÄ»áÒ飬ÕâôûÓÐcredits¡£ÎÒÏëËûÃǸãdatabaseµÄ¿ÖŶÔswµÄ»áÒ²ÖªÖ®²»¶à£¬µ«ÎÒ±¾ÈË»¹ÊǺܿ´ºÃiswcµÄ£¬±¾À´¡­¡­

	µÚ5Â¥

ÕâÊÇÎÒÉÏ´ÎÈ¥ÎÊAKTiveRankÒªontologyµÄÐÅ£¬Ð»Ð»collin°ïæ¶Ôenglish×öÁËÐÞ¸Ä:) Dear Authors, > > I am a phd candidate from XXX university, P.R.China. After reading > your papers "ontology ranking based on the analysis of concept > structures" and "Metrics for ranking ontologies", I'd like to say I am > quite interested in the ontology ranking and have already constructed > a ontology ranking tool by ourselves.Now we want to compare the > results of AKTiveRank with our tool. So I am writing to ask you for > help. > > On the one hand, since the experiment of the AKTiveRank is based on > Swoogle 2005, some ontologies mentioned in the papers are not > accessible for now. I am thinking if you may provide the ontology set > in your experiments and the results with respect to it. Appreciate > your kind help in advance. Your source code of AKTiveRank will be of > great help to us in comparing experiments and I am wondering if you > can provide it. We promise that the sour > ce code and results of your experiments will by no means be used for > profit or commercial advantage. And we will definitely cite your paper > whenever your experiments are mentioned . > > On the other hand, I am very interested in your research and eager to > know the ongoing work with your project. Would you let me know how > can I get access to those interesting parts of your work? > > Thank you very much for your kind help! I am looking forward to your > warm reply! > > > Best Regards!

	µÚ6Â¥

Dear XXX, Thank you for your interest in our work. Let us know if you publish about this subject or make any tools available. The experiments we used were based on Swoogle 2005, so you should be able to get those ontologies if you use this version of Swoogle. Our experiments were done on the fly and I'm not sure if we still store those ontologies. AKTiveRank was only a proof of concept, and much more work and experimentation is required before any results can be taken as final. As for the source code, unfortunately we can't release it, but we may try to make the tool accessible online one day in the future. Regards Harith

	µÚ7Â¥

ÄǾÍÐÁ¿àÄãÁË,baojie Dear Authors, I've read your interesting papers from K-cap2005, WWW2006 and ISWC2006 and still have some questions about the experiments and evaluation of the AKTiveRank. I am wondering if you can give me the answers or some advices. Thanks are advinced! To begin with, the evaluation made in AKTiveRank is puzzling. The AKTiveRank had changed its study case and ranking measures from 2005 to 2006, but is still using the same evaluation results of 2005:the same questionnaire, the same human rating from the questionnair.It even got a better rate for AKTiveRank designed in 2006, although using the same evaluation results of 2005 and different case study in 2006. Still, we have no ideas about those human subjects who made the rating, are they professors, or just students in the same group with you? Secondly, and maybe the most important thing, I can not get the same PCC value using the data sample publicized in your paper at WWW2006 and ISWC2006. The PCC values I compute using your data is 0.5333, but not 0.952 as stated in your papers. The formula I using is as follows: r=(n*sum(Xi*Yi)-sum(Xi)sum(Yi))/(sqrt(n*sum(Xi*Xi)-sum(Xi)*sum(Xi))*sqrt(n*sum(Yi*Yi)-sum(Yi)*sum(Yi))) The algorithm for the PCC I used is showing below, you can implement it in Java directly. input: double a[], double b[] output: double R double r;     double sum1=0;     double sumA=0;     double sumB=0;     double sum4=0;     double sum5=0;     int n=a.length;     for (int i=0;i<n;i++)     {       sum1=sum1+a[i]*b[i];       sumA=sumA+a[i];       sumB=sumB+b[i];       sum4=sum4+a[i]*a[i];       sum5=sum5+b[i]*b[i];     }     double temp=n*sum4-Math.pow(sumA,2);     double sqrt1=Math.sqrt(temp);     double temp2=n*sum5-Math.pow(sumB,2);     double sqrt2=Math.sqrt(temp);     r=(n*sum1-sumA*sumB)/(sqrt1*sqrt2);     return r;    Since I am doing the similar work to you, any help from you is greatly appreciated and will be very helpful. I am looking forward to your warm reply! Best Regards! Yours Sincerely,

	µÚ8Â¥

ÖÎѧҪÑϽ÷£¬²»·Ö¹ú¼®ºÍÐԱ𡭡­ ÏÂÃæÊÇÄÇƬISWC2006µÄ×÷Õ߸øÎҵĻØÐŵÄժ¼£¬Íû¸÷λÒýÒÔΪ½ä£¡ as for the PCC error, we already spotted that but it was too late for corrections. however, we always made it clear (in the paper, and in all the presentations we gave on this work) that the evaluation bit is very weak and no one should make any conclusions from it whatsoever. however, the qualitative evaluation is the important one.

	µÚ9Â¥

ok£¬ÎÒÕâô˵°É£¬Ê×ÏÈÈκλáÒ鶼ÓÐÀÃÎÄ£¬ÄÄÅÂÊÇAAAIÒ²ÊÇÒ»ÑùµÄ¡£ Õâƪpaper£¬nigel shaboltÃû×ÖÒ»¹Ò£¬Ö»Òª²»ÊÇÌ«À㬲»ÖÐÊDz»´ó¿ÉÄÜ£¬Õâ¸öÈËË­¶¼¿ª×ï²»Æð¡£ »áÒéÊǸö½»Á÷ƽ̨£¬ÆäʵºÜ¶àʱºò¾ÍÊÇÒ»¸öcommunityµÄÈ˼ûÃ洵ţºÈ²è³Ô·¹£¬¾ÍÕâô¼òµ¥£¬±ð¿´ÁËÕâôÇå¸ß¾ÍÐС£AKT projectÊÇÓ¢¹úµÄÖ÷Á÷֪ʶ¹¤³ÌÏîÄ¿£¬È˼Òiswc, wwwÄĸöûÓÐÔÞÖú¹ý£¿www¸É´à¾ÍÊÇÆóÒµÔÞÖúµ½Ò»¶¨Êý¶îÄã¾Í¿ÉÒÔÉĮ̈Ñݽ²¡£Ò»¾ä»°Ëµ£¬ÄãÈç¹û°ìÒ»¸öʵÑéÊÒ·¶Î§ÄÚµÄÑÐÌֻᣬÄãºǫ́ÀÏ°åÏë½²¸ö»°£¬Äã¸Ò¾Ü¾øô£¿ ×öÑо¿ÒªÑϽ÷£¬²»¼Ù£¬µ«ÊÇÑо¿ÀïÃæÓкܶàÕþÖΣ¬²»¸ãÕþÖÎÖ»¸ãÑо¿£¬ºÇºÇ¡­¡­

	µÚ10Â¥

Ò²ÊÇ¡£ÎұȽÏÁËһϣ¬Õâ3ƪÀïÖ»ÓÐÕâһƬÓÐnigel shabolt£¬ºÇºÇ¡£²»¹ý»°ÓÖ˵»ØÀ´£¬Ã»ÓÐÇå¸ßµÄÒâ˼£¬Ö»ÊÇÒòΪʵÑéµÄÔ­Òò¡£×öÁ˼¸ÌìµÄÊý¾Ý·ÖÎö£¬ÕæÊÇÒ»¼þºÜÀÛÈ˵ÄÊÂÇé¡£