"... In PAGE 32: ... This integrated ontology with CV amp;V is called Cooperative Ontology. Table9 compares and contrasts the cooperative ontology and traditional ontology. ... ..."

"... In PAGE 6: ... The registries we used for discovering these services are popular, commonly used public registries listed in [12]. Table2 shows the statistics of this evaluation. Of the ten semantically relevant services that we found, none could interoperate with the apos;investment helper apos; service without the use of data mappings.... ..."

"... In PAGE 23: ... From these, nine different view hierarchies were projected in the user interface. Table1 shows these views, the ontologies they are based on, as well as a grouping that relates them to four more general aspects of the items. Of particular interest is the Situation of use facet.... ..."

"... In PAGE 10: ....e., small ontologies are authored by different sources in an incremental fashion. To reuse existing ontologies, effective web based tools are in great need to browse, search and navigate distributed ontologies. Table3 compares some popular repositories for publishing and searching ontologies on the Web, and their technical highlights are de-... ..."

"... In PAGE 11: ....e., small ontologies are authored by different sources in an incremental fashion. To reuse existing ontologies, effective web based tools are in great need to browse, search and navigate distributed ontologies. Table3 compares some popular repositories for publishing and searching ontologies on the Web, and their technical highlights are de-... ..."

"... In PAGE 17: ... 4 Evaluation To evaluate the automated process we have participated in the CLEF evaluation forum in the years 2000 and 2001 with bilingual runs using English as the target language. Table1 presents the results of test runs using the CLEF 2001 topic set (47 queries). For each source language (Swedish, Finnish and German) the performance of the test queries are compared to that of monolingual English queries.... In PAGE 17: ... The measure is average precision. Table1 Evaluation results for UTACLIR CLEF 2001 topic set N=47 UTACLIR Average precision Monolingual English Av. precision % of monolingual English Swedish 0,3769 0,4925 76,53 Finnish 0,3894 0,4925 79,07 German 0,3476 0,4925... In PAGE 24: ... Findings Altogether six transitive runs were carried out, two using Swedish, two Finnish and two German as the source language. The results of the runs, measured in average precision, are presented in Table1 . The results of the baseline direct translations and the monolingual English runs are also given, as well as the differences between the bilingual and the transitive runs.... In PAGE 36: ...1302 (-48.70) Table1 . Average retrieval precision of the monolingual runs and the bilingual runs using English queries translated into Indonesian using the dictionaries by taking all senses and taking only the first sense.... In PAGE 36: ... The effectiveness of the translation was measured by the effectiveness of the resulting queries in retrieving the relevant documents, measured using the average retrieval precision across the queries. The results show that Dic- 1 and Dic-3 produced better translations than the Dic-2 (see Table1 ). The reason is because using the Dic-2, there were more terms not translated as compared to using Dic-1 and Dic-3.... In PAGE 80: ...Given these three principles, we have sketched a five year plan along the dimensions of resources and evaluation: Table1 : 5-year Roadmap for CLIR Research Resources Evaluation Year 1Development of standards and tools for translation resources, both bilingual and multilingual Isolation of the resources and retrieval methodology in evaluation conferences Year 2Release of large, comparable and aligned corpora including several genres (10 GB+ / language pair) Evaluation of name translation / trans- literation and spelling correction in 5-10 languages Year 3Evaluation of systems that build bilingual dictionaries in several languages with 100,000 or more entries using publicly available Web sources Evaluation of document selection by users with no ability to read a foreign language Year 4Tools and methods that simplify building speech models from spoken corpora Evaluation of multilingual retrieval (ad hoc or classification) in 15 (or more) languages, including Asian, European, Indic, and Semitic languages Year 5A global WordNet available in 15 languages with a kernel of 100,000 synsets in each of the languages Evaluation workshop on cross-language speech retrieval in 4 or more languages that attracts at least 10 participating groups In summary, we believe that the best possibilities for advancing the field in the near-term will stem from solving problems that are more akin to translation than document retrieval. Chief among these are the problems of scaling to many languages, name and phrase translation, translation resource construction and augmentation, and translation of monolingual language resources.... ..."

"... In PAGE 15: ... First, in contrast to previous poverty alleviation programs in Mexico, PRO- GRESA applies targeting at the household level to ensure that the resources of the program are directed and delivered to households in extreme poverty, that is, the households that can most benefit from the program. General food subsidies, such as the tortilla price subsidy (Sub- 2For more details see Section 4 and Table1 in Coady (2000).... In PAGE 41: ... See Buddelmeyer and Skoufias (2004) for an evaluation of the impact of PROGRESA on child work and schooling using the RD design. 28For more details see Section 4 and Table1 in Coady (2000). 29More details on the geographic distribution of the evaluation sample of localities and their characteristics are... ..."