Tagging, Folksonomy & Co - Renaissance of Manual Indexing?

This paper gives an overview of current trends in manual indexing on the Web. Along with a general rise of user generated content there are more and more tagging systems that allow users to annotate digital resources with tags (keywords) and share their annotations with other users. Tagging is frequently seen in contrast to traditional knowledge organization systems or as something completely new. This paper shows that tagging should better be seen as a popular form of manual indexing on the Web. Difference between controlled and free indexing blurs with sufficient feedback mechanisms. A revised typology of tagging systems is presented that includes different user roles and knowledge organization systems with hierarchical relationships and vocabulary control. A detailed bibliography of current research in collaborative tagging is included.Comment: Preprint. 12 pages, 1 figure, 54 reference

Measuring Similarity in Large-Scale Folksonomies

Social (or folksonomic) tagging has become a very popular way to describe content within Web 2.0 websites. Unlike\ud taxonomies, which overimpose a hierarchical categorisation of content, folksonomies enable end-users to freely create and choose the categories (in this case, tags) that best\ud describe some content. However, as tags are informally de-\ud fined, continually changing, and ungoverned, social tagging\ud has often been criticised for lowering, rather than increasing, the efficiency of searching, due to the number of synonyms, homonyms, polysemy, as well as the heterogeneity of\ud users and the noise they introduce. To address this issue, a\ud variety of approaches have been proposed that recommend\ud users what tags to use, both when labelling and when looking for resources. As we illustrate in this paper, real world\ud folksonomies are characterized by power law distributions\ud of tags, over which commonly used similarity metrics, including the Jaccard coefficient and the cosine similarity, fail\ud to compute. We thus propose a novel metric, specifically\ud developed to capture similarity in large-scale folksonomies,\ud that is based on a mutual reinforcement principle: that is,\ud two tags are deemed similar if they have been associated to\ud similar resources, and vice-versa two resources are deemed\ud similar if they have been labelled by similar tags. We offer an efficient realisation of this similarity metric, and assess its quality experimentally, by comparing it against cosine similarity, on three large-scale datasets, namely Bibsonomy, MovieLens and CiteULike

Of course we share! Testing Assumptions about Social Tagging Systems

Social tagging systems have established themselves as an important part in today's web and have attracted the interest from our research community in a variety of investigations. The overall vision of our community is that simply through interactions with the system, i.e., through tagging and sharing of resources, users would contribute to building useful semantic structures as well as resource indexes using uncontrolled vocabulary not only due to the easy-to-use mechanics. Henceforth, a variety of assumptions about social tagging systems have emerged, yet testing them has been difficult due to the absence of suitable data. In this work we thoroughly investigate three available assumptions - e.g., is a tagging system really social? - by examining live log data gathered from the real-world public social tagging system BibSonomy. Our empirical results indicate that while some of these assumptions hold to a certain extent, other assumptions need to be reflected and viewed in a very critical light. Our observations have implications for the design of future search and other algorithms to better reflect the actual user behavior

Collective dynamics of social annotation

The enormous increase of popularity and use of the WWW has led in the recent years to important changes in the ways people communicate. An interesting example of this fact is provided by the now very popular social annotation systems, through which users annotate resources (such as web pages or digital photographs) with text keywords dubbed tags. Understanding the rich emerging structures resulting from the uncoordinated actions of users calls for an interdisciplinary effort. In particular concepts borrowed from statistical physics, such as random walks, and the complex networks framework, can effectively contribute to the mathematical modeling of social annotation systems. Here we show that the process of social annotation can be seen as a collective but uncoordinated exploration of an underlying semantic space, pictured as a graph, through a series of random walks. This modeling framework reproduces several aspects, so far unexplained, of social annotation, among which the peculiar growth of the size of the vocabulary used by the community and its complex network structure that represents an externalization of semantic structures grounded in cognition and typically hard to access

FolkRank: A Ranking Algorithm for Folksonomies

In social bookmark tools users are setting up lightweight conceptual structures called folksonomies. Currently, the information retrieval support is limited. We present a formal model and a new search algorithm for folksonomies, called FolkRank, that exploits the structure of the folksonomy. The proposed algorithm is also applied to find communities within the folksonomy and is used to structure search results. All findings are demonstrated on a large scale dataset. A long version of this paper has been published at the European Semantic Web Conference 2006

Dynamic Tagging for Enterprise Knowledge Sharing and Representation

The development of Web 2.0 technology provides an easy way for people to transfer and share knowledge. As a collaborative tagging tool, folksonomy is an efficient indexing method in Web 2.0 environments. After analyzing the pros and cons of current knowledge management systems, this research proposes a dynamic Tagging system that combines folksonomy technologies with other approaches including automatic schema enrichment and training. The proposed system improves access to a large, growing collection by supporting users collaboratively contribute to the building of tags. In addition, the proposed system provides an efficient way for firms to represent knowledge and share knowledge with customers and other firms

Knowledge Base Enrichment by Relation Learning from Social Tagging Data

There has been considerable interest in transforming unstructured social tagging data into structured knowledge for semantic-based retrieval and recommendation. Research in this line mostly exploits data co-occurrence and often overlooks the complex and ambiguous meanings of tags. Furthermore, there have been few comprehensive evaluation studies regarding the quality of the discovered knowledge. We propose a supervised learning method to discover subsumption relations from tags. The key to this method is quantifying the probabilistic association among tags to better characterise their relations. We further develop an algorithm to organise tags into hierarchies based on the learned relations. Experiments were conducted using a large, publicly available dataset, Bibsonomy, and three popular, human-engineered or data-driven knowledge bases: DBpedia, Microsoft Concept Graph, and ACM Computing Classification System. We performed a comprehensive evaluation using different strategies: relation-level, ontology-level, and knowledge base enrichment based evaluation. The results clearly show that the proposed method can extract knowledge of better quality than the existing methods against the gold standard knowledge bases. The proposed approach can also enrich knowledge bases with new subsumption relations, having the potential to significantly reduce time and human effort for knowledge base maintenance and ontology evolution

Scholarometer: A Social Framework for Analyzing Impact across Disciplines

The use of quantitative metrics to gauge the impact of scholarly publications, authors, and disciplines is predicated on the availability of reliable usage and annotation data. Citation and download counts are widely available from digital libraries. However, current annotation systems rely on proprietary labels, refer to journals but not articles or authors, and are manually curated. To address these limitations, we propose a social framework based on crowdsourced annotations of scholars, designed to keep up with the rapidly evolving disciplinary and interdisciplinary landscape. We describe a system called Scholarometer, which provides a service to scholars by computing citation-based impact measures. This creates an incentive for users to provide disciplinary annotations of authors, which in turn can be used to compute disciplinary metrics. We first present the system architecture and several heuristics to deal with noisy bibliographic and annotation data. We report on data sharing and interactive visualization services enabled by Scholarometer. Usage statistics, illustrating the data collected and shared through the framework, suggest that the proposed crowdsourcing approach can be successful. Secondly, we illustrate how the disciplinary bibliometric indicators elicited by Scholarometer allow us to implement for the first time a universal impact measure proposed in the literature. Our evaluation suggests that this metric provides an effective means for comparing scholarly impact across disciplinary boundaries. © 2012 Kaur et al