Graph-Sparse LDA: A Topic Model with Structured Sparsity

Originally designed to model text, topic modeling has become a powerful tool for uncovering latent structure in domains including medicine, finance, and vision. The goals for the model vary depending on the application: in some cases, the discovered topics may be used for prediction or some other downstream task. In other cases, the content of the topic itself may be of intrinsic scientific interest. Unfortunately, even using modern sparse techniques, the discovered topics are often difficult to interpret due to the high dimensionality of the underlying space. To improve topic interpretability, we introduce Graph-Sparse LDA, a hierarchical topic model that leverages knowledge of relationships between words (e.g., as encoded by an ontology). In our model, topics are summarized by a few latent concept-words from the underlying graph that explain the observed words. Graph-Sparse LDA recovers sparse, interpretable summaries on two real-world biomedical datasets while matching state-of-the-art prediction performance

User evaluation of a pilot terminologies server for a distributed multi-scheme environment

The present paper reports on a user-centred evaluation of a pilot terminology service developed as part of the High Level Thesaurus (HILT) project at the Centre for Digital Library Research (CDLR) in the University of Strathclyde in Glasgow. The pilot terminology service was developed as an experimental platform to investigate issues relating to mapping between various subject schemes, namely Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH), the Unesco thesaurus, and the MeSH thesaurus, in order to cater for cross-browsing and cross-searching across distributed digital collections and services. The aim of the evaluation reported here was to investigate users' thought processes, perceptions, and attitudes towards the pilot terminology service and to identify user requirements for developing a full-blown pilot terminology service

Special Libraries, April 1932

Volume 23, Issue 4https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/sla_sl_1932/1003/thumbnail.jp

Participatory Monitoring of Community-Based Rehabilitation and other Disability- Inclusive Development Programmes: the Development of a Manual and Menu

Purpose: This paper describes a three-year research project leading to the development of the CBR Monitoring Manual and Menu (MM&M). The MM&M is a practical toolkit that meets the needs of CBR managers and stakeholders, and is consistent with the philosophy of CBR and community-based disability-inclusive development. It is designed to produce meaningful and locally useful information and data, based on international data standards where possible, to enable aggregation at regional, national and international levels. Methods: Five complementary workstreams of research were carried out from 2011 to 2014: 1) literature review and analysis; 2) participatory action research with CBR stakeholders; 3) analysis and refinement of validity of concepts and structures; 4) consultation and review; and 5) synthesis of results. This article documents the method and key results of each of the five workstreams, and the lessons learned along the way. Results: The MM&M is now freely available on-line at http://sydney.edu.au/health-sciences/cdrp/projects/cbr-monitoring.shtml. Collaboration among members of the development team continues, chiefly via an on-line group to which new members have been welcomed. Conclusion and Implications: At the time of writing, the MM&M is the only international monitoring product, known to the authors, that consciously sets out to reflect both a ‘bottom- up’ and ‘top-down’ perspective of monitoring information and data. To achieve this for a complex programme such as CBR, and to align with its principles, it was essential to use a multi-component and multi-stage strategy for tool development, involving a diverse multidisciplinary team includingcollaboration with CBR stakeholders

Writing with Discipline: A Call for Avoiding APA Style Guide Errors in Manuscript Preparation

The education community in the United States—as in many countries—is extremely large and diverse. Indeed, as documented by Mosteller, Nave, and Miech (2004), The United States has more than 3.6 million teachers in elementary and secondary education, more than 100,000 principals, and about 15,000 school districts, each with its own set of district administrators, school board members, and concerned citizens. The parents and family members of the 60 million students in elementary and secondary education represent another constituency, as do the policymakers and legislators in the 50 states (along with the District of Columbia) and at the federal level. Postsecondary education represents another 1 million faculty members, along with an enrollment of 15 million undergraduates and 1.8 million graduate students. (p. 29) Indeed, with the number of individuals involved in the educational system, educational research has the potential to play a pivotal role in improving the quality of education—from Kindergarten through primary, through secondary, through tertiary education. Yet, for educational research to play such a role, its findings must be disseminated to individuals (e.g., educators, administrators, stakeholders, policymakers) and groups (e.g., teacher associations) who can most effectively use them (Mosteller et al., 2004; Onwuegbuzie, Leech, & Whitmore, 2008). Unfortunately, research findings do not disseminate themselves, regardless of how statistically, practically, clinically, or economically significant they are for the field of education. Rather, it is educational researchers in general and practitioner-researchers in particular who must convey these findings

Special Libraries, November 1955

Volume 46, Issue 9https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/sla_sl_1955/1008/thumbnail.jp