ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
The CONCUR framework forcommunity maintenance of curated resources
Full text PdfPdf (272 KB)
Source
Document Engineering archive
Proceeding of the eighth ACM symposium on Document engineering table of contents
Sao Paulo, Brazil
SESSION: Finding, mashing and mixing table of contents
Pages 123-126  
Year of Publication: 2008
ISBN:978-1-60558-081-4
Author
Patrick Schmitz  University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA
Sponsors
SIGDOC : ACM Special Interest Group on Systems Documentation
SIGWEB: ACM Special Interest Group on Hypertext, Hypermedia, and Web
ACM: Association for Computing Machinery
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 2,   Downloads (12 Months): 43,   Citation Count: 0
Additional Information:

abstract   references   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1410140.1410166
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

The increasing use of computational linguistics for semantic search and discovery tools requires much work on development and maintenance of associated ontologies. Related applications depend upon curated resources like dictionaries, gazetteers, etc. In order to scale these application models and leverage the respective communities of interest, a new set of tools is needed that facilitate community development and extension of these resources while retaining the curatorial model to ensure a reliable, high quality resource. We describe the requirements and principles for such a system, and present the CONCUR framework that addresses these needs. CONCUR defines a reputation model and a set of reusable infrastructure services to maintain the resource. The reputation model combines correctness as well as utility of participants' contributions, tracked over time and by sub-domain within the resource. We describe the architectural issues of the model, potential applications, and continuing research on the model.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
Astudillo, H., et al., 2008. Contexta/SR: A multi-institutional semantic integration platform. In J. Trant and D. Bearman (eds.). Museums and the Web 2008.
 
2
 
3
Cuneiform Digital Library Initiative, http://cdli.ucla.edu/.
 
4
Freebase, created by Metaweb Technologies. http://www.freebase.com/.
 
5
Gene Ontology: tool for the unification of biology. The Gene Ontology Consortium (2000) Nature Genet. 25: 25--29.
 
6
J. Paul Getty Trust, Art & Architecture Thesaurus (AAT). Available online (as of 6/10/2008) at: http://www.getty.edu/research/conducting_research/vocabularies/aat/about.html.
 
7
 
8
Golbeck, J., Hendler, J. and Parsia B. 2003. Trust networks on the semantic web. In Proc. of Cooperative Intelligent Agents, 2003.
 
9
Ignat, C-L., Norrie, M., (2006). Supporting Customised Collaboration over Shared Document Repositories. CAiSE 2006: 190--204
 
10
Kuter, U., and Golbeck, J., 2007. Sunny: A new algorithm for trust inference in social networks, using probabilistic confidence models. In Proc. of AAAI, 2007
 
11
 
12
Rector, A., et al., 2003. OpenGALEN: Open Source Medical Terminology and Tools. AMIA Annu. Symp. Proc. 2003.
13
 
14
Schmitz, P., 2006. Inducing Ontology from Flickr Tags. In Proc. of Collaborative Web Tagging Workshop, WWW '06.
 
15
Schmitz, P., and Black, M., 2008. The Delphi Toolkit: Enabling Semantic Search for Museum Collections. In J. Trant and D. Bearman (eds.). Museums and the Web 2008.
 
16
 
17
Whetzel, T., 2006. Pronto. Presentation given at MGED Ontology Workshop. MGED9 - Seattle, 2006.
18