ISWC 2007, ASWC 2007: The Semantic Web pp 966-970 | Cite as

Mutual Contextualization in Tripartite Graphs of Folksonomies

  • Ching-man Au Yeung
  • Nicholas Gibbins
  • Nigel Shadbolt
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4825)

Abstract

The use of tags to describe Web resources in a collaborative manner has experienced rising popularity among Web users in recent years. The product of such activity is given the name folksonomy, which can be considered as a scheme of organizing information in the users’ own way. This research work attempts to analyze tripartite graphs – graphs involving users, tags and resources – of folksonomies and discuss how these elements acquire their semantics through their associations with other elements, a process we call mutual contextualization. By studying such process, we try to identify solutions to problems such as tag disambiguation, retrieving documents of similar topics and discovering communities of users. This paper describes the basis of the research work, mentions work done so far and outlines future plans.

Keywords

Bipartite Graph Single User Tripartite Graph Social Annotation Mutual Contextualization 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
Download to read the full conference paper text

References

  1. 1.
    Adam, M.: Folksonomies - cooperative classification and communication through shared metadata (2004), http://www.adammathes.com/academic/computer-mediatedcommunication/folksonomies.html
  2. 2.
    Clauset, A.: Finding local community structure in networks. Physical Review E 72(026132) (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Girvan, M., Newman, M.E.J.: Community structure in social and biological networks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA  99(7821) (2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Golder, S., Huberman, B.A.: Usage patterns of collaborative tagging systems. Journal of Information Science 32(2), 198–208 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hotho, A., Jäschke, R., Schmitz, C., Stumme, G.: Information retrieval in folksonomies: Search and ranking. In: Sure, Y., Domingue, J. (eds.) ESWC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4011, pp. 411–426. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    John, A., Seligmann, D.: Collaborative tagging and expertise in the enterprise. In: WWW 2006. Proceedings of the 15th international conference on World Wide Web, ACM Press, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mika, P.: Ontologies are us: A unified model of social networks and semantics. In: International Semantic Web Conference, pp. 522–536 (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wu, X., Zhang, L., Yu, Y.: Exploring social annotations for the semantic web. In: WWW 2006. Proceedings of the 15th international conference on World Wide Web, pp. 417–426. ACM Press, New York (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ching-man Au Yeung
    • 1
  • Nicholas Gibbins
    • 1
  • Nigel Shadbolt
    • 1
  1. 1.Intelligence, Agents and Multimedia Group (IAM), School of Electronics and Computer Science, University of Southampton, Southampton SO17 1BJUK

Personalised recommendations