<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 6.5.7226.0">
<TITLE>Author+'s plans for books</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/rtf format -->
<P><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">I am trying to learn ontologies from text. Evaluation is a problem, since if you ask people to read the text and then to evaluate the automatically generated ontology; every reader's concept structure may be different. The variation amongst readers may be too great! </FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">It is also difficult to have such an ontology marked by domain experts. What the domain experts know about the domain may not be reflected in the text and so Rrecall is particularly difficult. Also, evaluators may not be willing to read large texts.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">Does the ontology defined by the author(s) of a large text constitute a more objective yardstick? Do authors have a list of concepts and possibly some notion of structure about the text they set out to create? (I am thinking particularly of textbooks). Do any authors commit something like a concept structure to paper or a computer documentbefore they write the text? Alternatively, is it likely that an author could retrospectively construct such a plan, notwithstanding the issues of memory lapses etc.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">Do any authors have such plans and the texts they wrote using those plans in an electronic form which they would be happy to make available for research? What do list members who write textbooks, do?</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">Do list members have any views about this evaluation methodology?</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">Dileep Damle</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">PhD student</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">Open University</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">Milton Keybws</FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>