1 / 17

Report on TELplus Plenary Meeting March 27, 2009

This report discusses the progress made in aligning vocabularies and converting subjects to a standard representation language during the TELplus Plenary Meeting. It also highlights the deployment of alignment knowledge into the TEL framework.

tcannon
Download Presentation

Report on TELplus Plenary Meeting March 27, 2009

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Report on WP3.2 TELplus Plenary Meeting March 27, 2009 Shenghui Wang, Antoine Isaac Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam

  2. Task 1. Converting the subjects to standard representation language • Rameau, SWD, LCSH converted to SKOS • Files and web service that can be re-used • See http://eculture.cs.vu.nl:48080/vocreptags/ • Re-used in WP 3.1 call for tender • Internally at BnF • Plans for releasing Rameau as open linked data (in coordination with LoC releasing LCSH)

  3. SKOS conversion • Reminder: VU participates in the design of SKOS • SKOS is now candidate recommendation • New version of SKOS Primer on 17/03 • TELplus SKOS service will be advertised as a SKOS implementation • In the end, T3.2.1 might bring the most visible outcomes of T3.2 for the community • But this has a drawback in terms of efforts made in T3.2

  4. Task 2. Aligning the vocabularies • Method: focus on techniques using books

  5. Selection (& running) of tool/method Several approaches • Lexical baseline (with basic translation) • Using (dually indexed) books already present in two collections • Usingsimilarity of books across collections • Done: runs on all our vocabularies and collections, producing mappings between: • Rameau – LCSH • Rameau – SWD • LCSH - SWD

  6. Running of tool/method • Getting book data and preparing it is hard • Re-processing almost continuous this past quarter • Some limitations: • Limited usage of concepts in the book description • Not all concepts are used, many are used seldom • Multilinguality • Due to lack of time, we use simple machine translation (Google)

  7. Evaluation • Previous semester: methodological preparation • Determination of evaluation processes and measures • Past semester: data preparation • Recently: automatic evaluation process is operational • Re-indexing & comparison with MACS • Has to be completed by manual evaluation

  8. Task 2. Summary • M3.6 – Report on the followed alignment strategy (M15) • M3.7 - Alignment + report giving evaluation of alignment (M17) • Full technical report is being assembled • We are trying to submit a paper to ECDL! • Data is produced, but later/better versions may be delivered at the end of the project We are (slightly) behind schedule • But remind: finding that automatic alignment requires too much work is also a valid finding…

  9. Task 3. Deploying the alignment knowledge obtained into TEL framework • D3.4 – TEL prototype with new alignments (M21) • Seems at risk for M21 • Uncertainty: plans re. mapping links in TEL? • Work on LVAT tool has to be re-started • Maybe other TELplus areas could make use of alignments: WP3.1 & WP4? • The quality of automatic alignments is low

  10. Task 3. Deploying the alignment knowledge obtained into TEL framework • OK from a technical perspective • two channels for providing alignments for deployment • Mappings as file in standard format (RDF/XML/SKOS) • Service for alignments • just need to find consumers of such data

  11. Objectives for the next 6 months • Wrapping up work on alignments • M3.6 - Report documenting and motivating the followed alignment strategy (M15) • M3.7 - Alignment + report giving evaluation of alignment (M17) • M3.8 - Report giving assessment of feasibility of the alignment (M21) • M3.9 - Report giving assessment of usefulness of the alignment (M21) • Investigate deployment of alignment • If there is momentum (this point was already there the last year!!) • Create such a momentum??

  12. Thanks

  13. Timeline • Indicative main periods • Note: potential delay (order of month) due to Europeana-related activities

  14. WP 3 Task 2 – Improving subject access • Participants • Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam • STITCH project team • German National Library • French National Library • National Library of the Netherlands • TEL Office

  15. WP 3 Task 2 – Improving Subject Access • Improving subject access via semantic alignment between subjects • Reference: MACS project • Manual equivalences between Rameau, SWD, LCSH headings • Here: an experiment on deploying automatic alignment techniques in the same context • Determining possible strategies • Assessing feasibility and usefulness

  16. Sub Tasks • 3.2.1. Converting the subjects to standard representation language • 3.2.2. Aligning the vocabularies • 3.2.3. Deploying the alignment knowledge obtained into TEL framework

  17. Task 2. Aligning the vocabularies • Specifying required alignment format (links) M3.4 – Specification of alignment format (M9) • Simple SKOS mapping links + richer "OAEI" format • Selection (& running) of tool/method M3.6 – Report on the followed alignment strategy (M15) • Evaluation (& cleaning) M3.7 – Alignment + report on evaluation (M17) • Assessment of the approach M3.8 – Report on feasibility of the alignment (M21)

More Related