2013 Brazilian Conference on Intelligent Systems 2013
DOI: 10.1109/bracis.2013.40
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Learning Well-Founded Ontologies through Word Sense Disambiguation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
9
0
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
2
2
1

Relationship

2
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
1
9
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Looking at the 7 cases in error, we observe that all errors are the result of the frequent disambiguation problem been reported in several studies of semantic analysis and which is currently a challenge for the area [35]. With this result, we believe that the extraction of concepts was satisfactory.…”
Section: Phase 3 -Evaluationsupporting
confidence: 53%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Looking at the 7 cases in error, we observe that all errors are the result of the frequent disambiguation problem been reported in several studies of semantic analysis and which is currently a challenge for the area [35]. With this result, we believe that the extraction of concepts was satisfactory.…”
Section: Phase 3 -Evaluationsupporting
confidence: 53%
“…However, we conclude that the method needs to be revised to include a new phase, in order to reduce the ambiguities. In this sense, the work of Leão, Revoredo and Baiao [35] could provide a basis to support this new phase.…”
Section: Phase 3 -Evaluationmentioning
confidence: 93%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In the literature, most systems/methodologies (Friedman et al, 2004;Leao et al, 2013;Rajni & Taneja, 2013) require a knowledge engineer to translate unstructured text into fully structured form and most systems have been developed using NLP techniques and without the support of controlled natural language (Friedman et al, 2004;Houser, 2004;Jindal & Taneja, 2013). Regarding structured knowledge construction, some studies do not support lexical ambiguity (Rajni & Taneja, 2013;Reuss et al, 2015).…”
Section: Domain Knowledge Construction Literaturementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The research community prefers to use natural language processing (NLP) techniques to construct machine-readable knowledge. In the literature, most systems/methodologies (Friedman, Shagina, Lussier, & Hripcsak, 2004;Leao, Revoredo, & Baiao, 2013;Rajni & Taneja, 2013) require high intervention of a knowledge engineer to translate unstructured text into a structured form and to resolve the construction of unambiguous machine-readable knowledge. For an automated CBL, a structured knowledge construction from textual data is a challenging task (Rusu et al, 2013).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%