Document Sample
HM Powered By Docstoc
					Visualizing Search Results from Metadata-Enabled
         Repositories in Cultural Domains

                 Lynne C. Howarth
                    Thea Miller

                University of Toronto
The project

●   project start May 2003, follow-up to earlier project Modelling a Metalevel Ontology
●   principal investigator: Lynne C.Howarth
●   research assistants:
         doctoral: Thea Miller
         masters: Christopher Cronin, Christine Dumovich, Julie Hannaford, Annie Ng,
         Suzan Poyraz, Alison Sterling
●   funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC
    SRG 410-03-1413)

       TMRA '05, Leipzig, 7 October 2005
Metadata-enabled cultural repositories: the situation

●   need for systems that obviate the requirement of understanding underlying metadata
    structures and tagging (Buckland et al., 1999)
●   current research focus in metadata arena has tended to be on syntax -- less focus on
●   while cross-schema crosswalks have been developed, cross-domain search tools have

       TMRA '05, Leipzig, 7 October 2005
Research objectives

  Building on previous research (Howarth, Cronin, Hannaford, 2002; 2003; Howarth
  2004), the goal is to develop and refine a common set of labelled categories to serve as
  a natural language "gateway" to metadata-enabled resources, enhancing:

     ●   semantic interoperability
     ●   language interoperability
     ●   multilingual access
     ●   cross-domain searching

     TMRA '05, Leipzig, 7 October 2005
Cognitive model

                                         3. Understanding / contextualisation phase
                                           user interpretation of results, facilitated by
                                           topic map

                                         2. Orientation / sense-making phase
                                           user sorts results according to categories

                                         1. Perceptual phase
                                           results from repository/-ies are
                                           presented to the user

     TMRA '05, Leipzig, 7 October 2005
Orientation/sense-making: the 17 common categories

●   Contact Information: Information on how to communicate witth someone about a
    work, i.e., names, phone numbers, etc.
●   Date & Time Period: Dates associated with a work, as well as time period information
    regarding a work's content.
●   Edition: Information on a work's version.
●   Genre / Type: The nature or style of a work's intellectual content.
●   Identifiers: Unique names or numbers assigned to a work so that it can be
    distinguished from others, for example, its ISBN.
●   Language: The language or dialect of a work.
●   Methodology: The procedures / techniques used to make or change a work.
●   Names: Names of individuals or organizations associated with a work, such as
    creators, publishers, sponsors, etc.
●   Physical format: The physical appearance of a work.

       TMRA '05, Leipzig, 7 October 2005
Orientation/sense-making: the 17 common categories (continued)

●   Place: Locations associated with a work, for example, where a work was created,
    published, is housed, etc.
●   Rights & Restrictions on Use: Legal limitations / rules that affect how you can use a
    work after you have been given access to it.
●   Roles: The function of an individual or organization associated with a work.
●   Sources, References & Related Works: Other works that are related to the work you
    are seeking or were used to develop the work you are looking for.
●   Subject: The topic of a work; its intellectual content.
●   Summary & Description: Details about a work that illustrate its main points.
●   Terms of Access & Availability: The legal limitations / rules that affect your ability to
    access a work. This relates to privacy or intellectual property concerns.
●   Title: The name or phrase assigned to a work for identification purposes.

       TMRA '05, Leipzig, 7 October 2005
Focus group testing

    –   potential clarity and utility of labeled categories tested using quantitative
        (assigned activities) and qualitative (focus group discussions) approaches
    –   categorization exercises - purpose:
           ●   resolve any semantic ambiguities (“fuzzy” terms that defied ready
               assignment to any one category)
           ●   refine category definitions to ensure that categories contain the kinds of
               concepts the end user expects
    –   once categories validated in English – can broaden to multilingual environments

     TMRA '05, Leipzig, 7 October 2005
Focus group findings

  What's in a name?

     ●   Ambiguity and confusion: “Well, it was interesting, challenging. It really
         makes you realize how much terminology we're all tied by and how
         troubling it really is (general agreement). I mean, people, you know … like
         us that are allegedly finding information (laughs) and doing research all the
         time and we're going "what does this mean?", "I don't know what this is" so
         imagine the role of the user who is more baffled, presumably.”

     ●   The importance of context: “It is kind of hard, just looking at it sort of
         abstractly, sort of broken apart like this without being able to look at a few
         records or something, you know, because when you're actually using it, the
         context always does help. I mean that's part of understanding it, so you
         know, just because it's sometimes hard to understand then, how some of the
         things relate to one another cuz you don't know how they're going to be put
         together on the screen, that made it harder in some places.”

     TMRA '05, Leipzig, 7 October 2005
Results display: the prototype and topic maps

                                         inserted into

                               inserted into

                                                                                   Individual HTML
                                     XTM                                          results files for each
                                                  category topic
                                                   counters set
                                                                                                   links to
                                                            XTM                                                      output

                                                                                    SVG                              HTML
                                                                   converted to                      embedded in


                                                           Perl-cgi script

     TMRA '05, Leipzig, 7 October 2005
Results display: the prototype and topic maps

  Search interface

     TMRA '05, Leipzig, 7 October 2005
 Results display: the prototype and topic maps

     Search results display (XTM)


              TMRA '05, Leipzig, 7 October 2005
Results display: the prototype and topic maps

  Search results display (node clicked)

     TMRA '05, Leipzig, 7 October 2005
Results display: the prototype and topic maps

  Retrieved document

     TMRA '05, Leipzig, 7 October 2005
Future work, and Implications of research

future research will include:
●   assess relevance of categories to search results
●   evaluate display variables

some implications of this research:
●   integration of heterogeneous domains in resource discovery
●   extends application of topic maps in area of user interpretation/understanding

       TMRA '05, Leipzig, 7 October 2005

Shared By: