integrative levels
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

42
(FIVE YEARS 6)

H-INDEX

7
(FIVE YEARS 1)

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ceri Binding ◽  
Claudio Gnoli ◽  
Douglas Tudhope

PurposeThe Integrative Levels Classification (ILC) is a comprehensive “freely faceted” knowledge organization system not previously expressed as SKOS (Simple Knowledge Organization System). This paper reports and reflects on work converting the ILC to SKOS representation.Design/methodology/approachThe design of the ILC representation and the various steps in the conversion to SKOS are described and located within the context of previous work considering the representation of complex classification schemes in SKOS. Various issues and trade-offs emerging from the conversion are discussed. The conversion implementation employed the STELETO transformation tool.FindingsThe ILC conversion captures some of the ILC facet structure by a limited extension beyond the SKOS standard. SPARQL examples illustrate how this extension could be used to create faceted, compound descriptors when indexing or cataloguing. Basic query patterns are provided that might underpin search systems. Possible routes for reducing complexity are discussed.Originality/valueComplex classification schemes, such as the ILC, have features which are not straight forward to represent in SKOS and which extend beyond the functionality of the SKOS standard. The ILC's facet indicators are modelled as rdf:Property sub-hierarchies that accompany the SKOS RDF statements. The ILC's top-level fundamental facet relationships are modelled by extensions of the associative relationship – specialised sub-properties of skos:related. An approach for representing faceted compound descriptions in ILC and other faceted classification schemes is proposed.


2021 ◽  
Vol 48 (3) ◽  
pp. 213-218
Author(s):  
Claudio Gnoli

Faceted knowledge organization systems have sophisticated logical structures, making their representation as linked data a demanding task. The term facet is often used in ambiguous ways: while in thesauri facets only work as semantic categories, in classification schemes they also have syntactic functions. The need to convert the Integrative Levels Classification (ILC) into SKOS stimulated a more general analysis of the different kinds of syntactic facets, as can be represented in terms of RDF properties and their respective domain and range. A nomenclature is proposed, distinguishing between common facets, which can be appended to any class, that is, have an unrestricted domain; and special facets, which are exclusive to some class, that is, have a restricted domain. In both cases, foci can be taken from any other class (unrestricted range: free facets), or only from subclasses of an existing class (parallel facets), or be defined specifically for the present class (bound facets). Examples are given of such cases in ILC and in the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC).


2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-50
Author(s):  
Ziyoung Park ◽  
Claudio Gnoli ◽  
Daniele P. Morelli

AbstractPurposeThis paper informs about the publication of the second edition of the Integrative Levels Classification (ILC2), a freely-faceted knowledge organization system (KOS), and reviews the main changes that have been introduced as compared to its first edition (ILC1).Design/methodology/approachThe most relevant changes are illustrated, with special reference to those of interest to general classification theory, by means of examples of notation for individual classes and combinations of them.FindingsChanges introduced in ILC2 include: the names and order of some main classes; the development of subclasses for various phenomena, especially quantities and algebraic structures; the order of facet categories and the new category of Disorder; notation for special facets; distinction of the semantical function of facets (attributes) from their syntactic function. The system can be freely accessed online through a PHP browser as well as in SKOS format.Research limitationsOnly a selection of changed classes is discussed for space reasons.Practical implicationsILC1 has been previously applied to the BARTOC directory of KOSs. Update of BARTOC data to ILC2 and application of ILC2 to further information systems are envisaged. Possible methods for reclassifying BARTOC with ILC2 are discussed.OriginalityILC is a newly developed classification system, based on phenomena instead of traditional disciplines and featuring various innovative devices. This paper is an original account of its most recent evolution.


Author(s):  
Ceri Binding ◽  
Claudio Gnoli ◽  
Gabriele Merli ◽  
Marcin Trzmielewski ◽  
Douglas Tudhope
Keyword(s):  

2019 ◽  
Vol 109 (6) ◽  
pp. 916-931 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Reis ◽  
R. Pierron ◽  
P. Larignon ◽  
P. Lecomte ◽  
E. Abou-Mansour ◽  
...  

Vitis vinifera is affected by many diseases every year, depending on causal agents, susceptibility of cultivars, and climate region. Some are caused by a single agent, such as gray mold caused by Botrytis cinerea or powdery mildew caused by Erysiphe necator. Others result from the actions of a complex of pathogens such as grapevine trunk diseases (GTDs). GTDs are presently among the most devastating diseases in viticulture worldwide because both the economic losses and the long-term sustainability of vineyards are strongly affected. The complexity of GTDs results from the diversity of associated fungi, the undetermined period of latency within the vine (asymptomatic status), the erratic foliar symptom expression from one year to the next, and, probably correlated with all of these points, the lack of efficient strategies to control them. Distinct methods can be beneficial to improve our knowledge of GTDs. In vitro bioassays with cell suspensions, calli, foliar discs, full leaves, or plantlets, and in vivo natural bioassays with cuttings, grafted plants in the greenhouse, or artificially infected ones in the vineyard, can be applied by using progressive integrative levels of in vitro and in vivo, depending on the information searched. In this review, the methods available to understand GTDs are described in terms of experimental procedures, main obtained results, and deliverable prospects. The advantages and disadvantages of each model are also discussed.


2017 ◽  
Vol 44 (5) ◽  
pp. 349-379 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Kleineberg
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document