ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Exploring social annotations for the semantic web
Full text PdfPdf (226 KB)
Source International World Wide Web Conference archive
Proceedings of the 15th international conference on World Wide Web table of contents
Edinburgh, Scotland
SESSION: Social networks table of contents
Pages: 417 - 426  
Year of Publication: 2006
ISBN:1-59593-323-9
Authors
Xian Wu  Shanghai JiaoTong University, Shanghai, China
Lei Zhang  IBM China Research Lab, Beijing, China
Yong Yu  Shanghai JiaoTong University, Shanghai, China
Sponsors
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): 62,   Downloads (12 Months): 581,   Citation Count: 10
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Review this Article  
Save this Article to a Binder    Display Formats: BibTex  EndNote ACM Ref   
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1135777.1135839
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

In order to obtain a machine understandable semantics for web resources, research on the Semantic Web tries to annotate web resources with concepts and relations from explicitly defined formal ontologies. This kind of formal annotation is usually done manually or semi-automatically. In this paper, we explore a complement approach that focuses on the "social annotations of the web" which are annotations manually made by normal web users without a pre-defined formal ontology. Compared to the formal annotations, although social annotations are coarse-grained, informal and vague, they are also more accessible to more people and better reflect the web resources' meaning from the users' point of views during their actual usage of the web resources. Using a social bookmark service as an example, we show how emergent semantics [2] can be statistically derived from the social annotations. Furthermore, we apply the derived emergent semantics to discover and search shared web bookmarks. The initial evaluation on our implementation shows that our method can effectively discover semantically related web bookmarks that current social bookmark service can not discover easily.


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
 
2
K. Aberer and et al. Emergent semantics principles and issues. In Proc. of Database Systems for Advanced Applications, LNCS 2973, 2004.
 
3
T. Berners-Lee, J. Hendler, and O. Lassila. The Semantic Web. Scientific American, 284(5):34--43, May 2001.
4
5
6
7
8
 
9
 
10
S. A. Golder and B. A. Huberman. The structure of collaborative tagging systems. http://www.hpl.hp.com/research/idl/papers/tags/, 2005.
 
11
T. Hammond, T. Hannay, B. Lund, and J. Scott. Social bookmarking tools (i) - a general review. D-Lib Magazine, 11(4), 2005.
12
13
 
14
 
15
B. Howe, K. Tanna, P. Turner, and D. Maier. Emergent semantics: Towards self-organizing scientific metadata. In Proc. of the 1st Intl. IFIP Conference on Semantics of a Networked World: Semantics for Grid Databases (ICSNW 2004), LNCS 3226, 2004.
 
16
F. Jelinek and R. L. Mercer. Interpolated estimation of Markov source parameters from sparse data. In Proceedings of Workshop on Pattern Recognition in Practice, 1980.
17
 
18
A. Kiryakov, B. Popov, D. Ognyanoff, D. Manov, A. Kirilov, and M. Goranov. Semantic annotation, indexing, and retrieval. In Proc. of the 2nd Intl. Semantic Web Conference (ISWC2003), 2003.
 
19
A. Maedche. Emergent semantics for ontologies. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 17(1), 2002.
 
20
F. Manola and E. Miller. RDF Primer. W3C Recommendation, 2004.
 
21
A. Mathes. Folksonomies - cooperative classification and communication through shared metadata. Computer Mediated Communication, LIS590CMC (Doctoral Seminar), Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, December 2004.
22
 
23
D. L. McGuinness and F. van Harmelen. OWL Web ontology language overview. W3C Recommendation, 2004.
 
24
P. Merholz. Metadata for the masses. http://www.adaptivepath.com/publications/ essays/archives/000361.php, accessed at May, 2005, October 2004.
 
25
P. Mika. Ontologies are us: A unified model of social networks and semantics. In Proc. of 4rd Intl. Semantic Web Conference (ISWC2005), 2005.
 
26
 
27
K. Rose. Deterministic annealing for clustering, compression. Proceedings of the IEEE, 86(11), 1998.
28
 
29
J. Schachter. Del.icio.us about page. http://del.icio.us/doc/about, 2004.
 
30
G. L. S. Deerwester, S. T. Dumais and R. Harshman. Indexing by latent semantic analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 1990.
31
 
32
G. Smith. Atomiq: Folksonomy: social classification. http://atomiq.org/archives/2004/08/folksonomy_social_classification.html, Aug 2004.
33
 
34
J. Udell. Collaborative knowledge gardening. InfoWorld, August 20, August 2004.
35
 
36
L. Zhang, X. Wu, and Y. Yu. Emergent semantics from folksonomies, a quantitative study. Special issue of Journal of Data Semantics on Emergent Semantics, to appear, 2006.

CITED BY  10