CiteULike is a free online bibliography manager. Register and you can start organising your references online.
Tags

Thesaurus or Logical Ontology, Which One Do We Need for Text Mining?

by: Junichi Tsujii, Sophia Ananiadou
Language Resources and Evaluation In Language Resources and Evaluation, Vol. 39, No. 1. (1 February 2005), pp. 77-90, doi:10.1007/s10579-005-2697-0  Key: citeulike:11297361

Formatted Citation


Show HTML

Likes (beta)

This copy of the article hasn't been liked by anyone yet.

View FullText article


Abstract

Ontologies are recognised as important tools, not only for effective and efficient information sharing, but also for information extraction and text mining. In the biomedical domain, the need for a common ontology for information sharing has long been recognised, and several ontologies are now widely used. However, there is confusion among researchers concerning the type of ontology that is needed for text mining , and how it can be used for effective knowledge management, sharing, and integration in biomedicine. We argue that there are several different ways to define an ontology and that, while the logical view is popular for some applications, it may be neither possible nor necessary for text mining. We propose a text-centered approach for knowledge sharing, as an alternative to formal ontologies. We argue that a thesaurus (i.e. an organised collection of terms enriched with relations) is more useful for text mining applications than formal ontologies.


anthropomorphism's tags for this article

Citations (CiTO)

No CiTO relationships defined

X There are no reviews yet

X Find related articles from these CiteULike users

X Find related articles with these CiteULike tags

X Posting History


X Export records

Privacy Statement | Terms & Conditions
CiteULike organises scholarly (or academic) papers or literature and provides bibliographic (which means it makes bibliographies) for universities and higher education establishments. It helps undergraduates and postgraduates. People studying for PhDs or in postdoctoral (postdoc) positions. The service is similar in scope to EndNote or RefWorks or any other reference manager like BibTeX, but it is a social bookmarking service for scientists and humanities researchers.