Semantic relations in knowledge organization systems

6Citations
Citations of this article
23Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Semantic relations in knowledge organization systems (KOS) are discussed as well as the need to analyze and systematize the contributions from different areas of knowledge that are devoted to semantic studies in order to collaborate in the definition of a theoretical framework for the study of types of relations included in KOS. Partial results of a survey reveal that, in general, standards and guidelines for developing thesauri are limited to defining and exemplifying types of relationships without guidance concerning the theoretical underpinning of these definitions. The possibilities of a compositional approach to defining the meaning of syntagmatic relations is discussed. Studies on the dieoretical foundations that guide the establishment of semantic relations and approaches to be adopted for the preparation of KOS certainly contribute to consolidating a dieoretical framework for the area of knowledge organization.

References Powered by Scopus

Semantic relations in information science

101Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Semantics and knowledge organization

100Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Knowledge organization: Its scope and possibilities

69Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Research on the standardization model of data semantics in the knowledge graph construction of Oil&Gas industry

6Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Improving Chinese term association from the linguistic perspective

1Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Research on the construction and mapping model of knowledge organization system driven by standards

0Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Bräscher, M. (2014). Semantic relations in knowledge organization systems. Knowledge Organization, 41(2), 175–180. https://doi.org/10.5771/0943-7444-2014-2-175

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

Professor / Associate Prof. 4

44%

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 4

44%

Researcher 1

11%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Computer Science 4

36%

Social Sciences 3

27%

Arts and Humanities 3

27%

Decision Sciences 1

9%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free