Vocabulary Matching for Book IndexingSuggestion in Linked Libraries A PrototypeImplementation & Evaluation

Antoine Isaac, Dirk Kramer, Lourens van der Meij, Shenghui Wang, Stefan Schlobach, Johan Stapel

Problem: subject indexingDescribing subjects of booksUsing concepts from vocabularies (e.g. thesauri)

Problem: re-indexingDescribing a book that has already be describedWith a new vocabularyFitting a different context (e.g., different libraries)

Why re-indexing at KB?The Dutch National Library (KB) holds many books that are also in other Dutch public librariesKB deposit uses Brinkman thesaurus for indexingPublic Libraries use Biblion thesaurus

KB DepositCollection

DutchPublic Libraries

Biblion

Brinkman

overlap betweenbook collections

A wider issueKB shares books with many other librariesAll having their own description practices

KB

KB DepositColl.

KB ScientificColl.

DutchPublic Libraries

LC(US Nat. Lib)

BnF(French Nat. Lib)

DNB(German Nat. Lib)

DutchBook-trade

Biblion

NUR

BISACsubject codes

Brinkman

GTT

NBCclass.

UNESCOclass.

KB Corporatie+ Persoon

RAMEAUsubject headings

LCSHsubject headings

DDCDeweydecimalclass.

SWDsubject headings

Personennamendatei

LC authority file

AutoritsBNF

overlap between book collections (thickness indicates degree of overlap)

Vertical adjustment between a coll. and KOSs denotes KOSs' being used to describe that coll.

otherclassifications

domain/disciplineclassifications

subject thesauri / subj. heading lists

book collection datasets

person/corporation data

Doel-groep--audience

Room for improvement?Libraries devote large resources to indexing20 people at KBAbout 20,000 books per year

Leveraging already existing descriptions for re-indexing can be beneficial for both sides

Alignment and re-indexingSTITCH projectTackling semantic interoperability in Cultural HeritageUsing ontology alignment

Mappings between concepts from different vocabularies can be used for re-indexingBasic idea: replace concepts in descriptionsby conceptually equivalent concepts

Goal: a re-indexing prototypePast: preliminary experiments with KB data

Now: building a prototype andplugging it onto the KB production systemhaving it evaluated by its potential users (indexers)

Prototype case: Dutch public libraries / KBSuggesting Brinkman subjects based on Biblion ones

Alignment and re-indexing: requirementsSubjects can be complex

Mappings between groups of concepts "Travel guides" + "Spain" "Spain; travel guides"

Concepts are used in descriptions

Mappings taking into account extensional semantics"Building engineering" "Learning material ; building engineering"

Obtaining re-indexing rulesLexical alignments are not good enough

Probabilistic rules are calculatedUsing extension of concepts: existing indexingSimple probabilities, with adhoc adjustment"Travel guides","Spain""Spain; travel guides", 0.982

Not only based on Biblion subjectsAUT main authors of booksKAR characteristicDGP intellectual level/target group

DemoDoesn't work?

User studyQuantitative aspectHow well does the tool compare to human subject indexing?

Qualitative aspectUser satisfactionImprovement suggestion

Evaluation setting6 indexers6 weeks284 booksEvaluation integrated in daily indexing work

Pre-evaluation briefingQuestionnaire during evaluation Post-evaluation de-briefing & questionnaire

User study resultsTop ranked mappings are indeed much better

Individual book satisfaction level > 70%

Suggestion class# suggestionsprecisionrecallblue30872.7%47.9%purple1,18810.7%27.1%red2,5251.11%5.98%non suggested8919.0%

User study results (1)But the general satisfaction is lowerOnly two out of six would use the tool as such

Quality of suggestionsLower-level suggestions are often not meaningful

Perception of suggestions' qualityLong lists with wrong suggestions ad the end are badRanking is appreciated, but it is not enough

User study results (2)Suggestions were found promisingBridging the indexing gap between collectionsDifferent indexing strategies"Persian language" (Biblion)vs. "Iranian language and literature" (Brinkman)

Lots of suggestions for improvementMore re-indexing!Suggesting concepts from other vocabulariesMore context metadata as input

ConclusionsShows the potential of re-using data in a library network

Alignment approach fitting indexing practice

Concrete demonstration, in KB production environment

Technology transfer: KB wants to continue efforts

Flexibility: architecture ready to exploit other vocabulariesLinked data & SKOS

Prototype components

Database

STITCH stylesheet (XSLT)

WinIBWcataloguing interface

IE

GGC cataloguing system

LOD SPARQL endpoints

suggestion service(SWI-Prolog)

vocabularyservice(Java/Tomcat)

STITCH script(VisualBasic)

Indexer

lexical alignmentsSesame RDF store

Sesame SKOSRDF store

Linked libraries?

KB DepositColl.

DutchPublic Libraries

KB ScientificColl.

LC(US Nat. Lib)

BnF(French Nat. Lib)

DNB(German Nat. Lib)

DutchBook-trade

Biblion

NUR

BISACsubject codes

Brinkman

GTT

NBCclass.

UNESCOclass.

KB Corporatie+ Persoon

RAMEAUsubject headings

LCSHsubject headings

DDCDeweydecimalclass.

SWDsubject headings

Personennamendatei

wikipedia.nl

wikipedia.de

LC authority file

AutoritsBNF

existing KOS alignment

potential KOS alignment of interest

overlap between book collections (thickness indicates degree of overlap)

otherclassifications

domain/disciplineclassifications

subject thesauri / subj. heading lists

book collection datasets

person/corporation data

others

LCSH

currently available entry point to the LOD cloud

KB

Vertical adjustment between a coll. and KOSs denotes KOSs' being used to describe that coll.

Doel-groep--audience

Thank you!Questions?

Screenshots

WinIBW production tool

STITCH suggestion tool

Original metadata

Concept suggestions

Comparing with human re-indexing

Complement: lexical alignments

Adding subjects using thesaurus access

Concept suggestions

Saving and back to WinIBW

ScreenshotsBack

fr : 2BI 2BR