Building and evaluating a collaboratively built structured folksonomy

Flat folksonomy uses simple tags and has emerged as a powerful instrument for classifying and sharing a huge amount of knowledge on Web 2.0. However, it has semantic problems, such as ambiguous and misunderstood tags. To alleviate such problems, researchers have built structured folksonomies with a hierarchical structure or relationships among tags. Structured folksonomies, however, also have some fundamental problems, such as limited tagging of pre-defined vocabulary and time-consuming manual effort required to select tags. To resolve these problems, we suggested a new method of attaching a tag with its category, which we call a categorized tag (CT), to web content. CTs entered by users are automatically and immediately integrated into a collaboratively built structured folksonomy (CSF), reflecting the tag-and-category relationships supported by the majority of users. Then, we developed a CT-based knowledge organization system (CTKOS), which builds upon the CSF to classify organizational knowledge and enables us to locate appropriate knowledge. In addition, the results of the evaluation, which we conducted to compare our proposed system with the flat folksonomy system, indicate that users perceive CTKOS to be more useful than the flat folksonomy system in terms of knowledge sharing (i.e. the tagging mechanism) and retrieval (i.e. the searching mechanism).

[1]  Gail Hodge,et al.  Systems of Knowledge Organization for Digital Libraries: Beyond Traditional Authority Files , 2000 .

[2]  Maria Lapata The Semantics of Relationships: An Interdisciplinary Perspective , 2003 .

[3]  Tony Hammond,et al.  Social Bookmarking Tools (I): A General Overview , 2005, D Lib Mag..

[4]  Simone Pribbenow,et al.  A Conceptual Theory of Part-Whole Relations and its Applications , 1996, Data Knowl. Eng..

[5]  Wolfgang G. Stock,et al.  Folksonomy: The Collaborative Knowledge Organization System , 2010 .

[6]  Enrico Motta,et al.  Semantically enriching folksonomies with FLOR , 2008 .

[7]  Jeff Z. Pan,et al.  Reducing Ambiguity in Tagging Systems with Folksonomy Search Expansion , 2009, ESWC.

[8]  Bernardo A. Huberman,et al.  Usage patterns of collaborative tagging systems , 2006, J. Inf. Sci..

[9]  Steffen Staab,et al.  Organizing Resources on Tagging Systems using TORG , 2007 .

[10]  Ciro Cattuto,et al.  Semantic Grounding of Tag Relatedness in Social Bookmarking Systems , 2008, SEMWEB.

[11]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies , 2000, Management Science.

[12]  Hugh C. Davis,et al.  FAsTA: A Folksonomy-Based Automatic Metadata Generator , 2007, EC-TEL.

[13]  Catherine Faron-Zucker,et al.  SweetWiki: A semantic wiki , 2008, J. Web Semant..

[14]  Thomas R. Gruber,et al.  A translation approach to portable ontology specifications , 1993, Knowl. Acquis..

[15]  Peter Mika Ontologies Are Us: A Unified Model of Social Networks and Semantics , 2005, International Semantic Web Conference.

[16]  D. Cruse,et al.  Hyponymy and Its Varieties , 2002 .

[17]  Adam Mathes,et al.  Folksonomies-Cooperative Classification and Communication Through Shared Metadata , 2004 .

[18]  Andrea Marchetti,et al.  SemKey: A Semantic Collaborative Tagging System , 2007 .

[19]  Robert Meersman,et al.  From Folksologies to Ontologies: How the Twain Meet , 2006, OTM Conferences.

[20]  Deborah L. McGuinness,et al.  OWL Web ontology language overview , 2004 .

[21]  Christopher H. Brooks,et al.  Improved annotation of the blogosphere via autotagging and hierarchical clustering , 2006, WWW '06.

[22]  Fred D. Davis Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology , 1989, MIS Q..

[23]  Pierre Lévy,et al.  Collective Intelligence: Mankind's Emerging World in Cyberspace , 1997 .

[24]  Don Tapscott,et al.  Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything , 2006 .

[25]  Katrin Weller,et al.  Knowledge Representation in the Social Semantic Web , 2010 .

[26]  Enrico Motta,et al.  Integrating Folksonomies with the Semantic Web , 2007, ESWC.

[27]  Katrin Weller,et al.  Paradigmatic and Syntagmatic Relations in Knowledge Organization Systems , 2008 .

[28]  James A. Hendler,et al.  Metcalfe's law, Web 2.0, and the Semantic Web , 2008, J. Web Semant..

[29]  Wolfgang G. Stock,et al.  Automatic Concept-Based Query Expansion Using Weighted Transitive Part-Whole Relations , 2008 .

[30]  Koraljka Golub,et al.  An evaluation of enhancing social tagging with a knowledge organization system , 2010, Aslib Proc..

[31]  Fabien Gandon,et al.  Helping online communities to semantically enrich folksonomies , 2010 .

[32]  Isabella Peters,et al.  Folksonomies - Indexing and Retrieval in Web 2.0 , 2009, Knowledge and Information.

[33]  Alexandre Passant,et al.  Using Ontologies to Strengthen Folksonomies and Enrich Information Retrieval in Weblogs: Theoretical background and corporate use-case , 2007, ICWSM.

[34]  Tero Ojanpera,et al.  The power of collective intelligence , 2011, 2011 IEEE Technology Time Machine Symposium on Technologies Beyond 2020.

[35]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions , 2008, Decis. Sci..