• Asia pacific journal of information systems
• /
• v.21 no.2
• /
• pp.89-116
• /
• 2011

In collaborative tagging systems such as Delicious.com and Flickr.com, users assign keywords or tags to their uploaded resources, such as bookmarks and pictures, for their future use or sharing purposes. The collection of resources and tags generated by a user is called a personomy, and the collection of all personomies constitutes the folksonomy. The most significant need of the folksonomy users Is to efficiently find useful resources or experts on specific topics. An excellent ranking algorithm would assign higher ranking to more useful resources or experts. What resources are considered useful In a folksonomic system? Does a standard superior to frequency or freshness exist? The resource recommended by more users with mere expertise should be worthy of attention. This ranking paradigm can be implemented through a graph-based ranking algorithm. Two well-known representatives of such a paradigm are Page Rank by Google and HITS(Hypertext Induced Topic Selection) by Kleinberg. Both Page Rank and HITS assign a higher evaluation score to pages linked to more higher-scored pages. HITS differs from PageRank in that it utilizes two kinds of scores: authority and hub scores. The ranking objects of these pages are limited to Web pages, whereas the ranking objects of a folksonomic system are somewhat heterogeneous(i.e., users, resources, and tags). Therefore, uniform application of the voting notion of PageRank and HITS based on the links to a folksonomy would be unreasonable, In a folksonomic system, each link corresponding to a property can have an opposite direction, depending on whether the property is an active or a passive voice. The current research stems from the Idea that a graph-based ranking algorithm could be applied to the folksonomic system using the concept of mutual Interactions between entitles, rather than the voting notion of PageRank or HITS. The concept of mutual interactions, proposed for ranking the Semantic Web resources, enables the calculation of importance scores of various resources unaffected by link directions. The weights of a property representing the mutual interaction between classes are assigned depending on the relative significance of the property to the resource importance of each class. This class-oriented approach is based on the fact that, in the Semantic Web, there are many heterogeneous classes; thus, applying a different appraisal standard for each class is more reasonable. This is similar to the evaluation method of humans, where different items are assigned specific weights, which are then summed up to determine the weighted average. We can check for missing properties more easily with this approach than with other predicate-oriented approaches. A user of a tagging system usually assigns more than one tags to the same resource, and there can be more than one tags with the same subjectivity and objectivity. In the case that many users assign similar tags to the same resource, grading the users differently depending on the assignment order becomes necessary. This idea comes from the studies in psychology wherein expertise involves the ability to select the most relevant information for achieving a goal. An expert should be someone who not only has a large collection of documents annotated with a particular tag, but also tends to add documents of high quality to his/her collections. Such documents are identified by the number, as well as the expertise, of users who have the same documents in their collections. In other words, there is a relationship of mutual reinforcement between the expertise of a user and the quality of a document. In addition, there is a need to rank entities related more closely to a certain entity. Considering the property of social media that ensures the popularity of a topic is temporary, recent data should have more weight than old data. We propose a comprehensive folksonomy ranking framework in which all these considerations are dealt with and that can be easily customized to each folksonomy site for ranking purposes. To examine the validity of our ranking algorithm and show the mechanism of adjusting property, time, and expertise weights, we first use a dataset designed for analyzing the effect of each ranking factor independently. We then show the ranking results of a real folksonomy site, with the ranking factors combined. Because the ground truth of a given dataset is not known when it comes to ranking, we inject simulated data whose ranking results can be predicted into the real dataset and compare the ranking results of our algorithm with that of a previous HITS-based algorithm. Our semantic ranking algorithm based on the concept of mutual interaction seems to be preferable to the HITS-based algorithm as a flexible folksonomy ranking framework. Some concrete points of difference are as follows. First, with the time concept applied to the property weights, our algorithm shows superior performance in lowering the scores of older data and raising the scores of newer data. Second, applying the time concept to the expertise weights, as well as to the property weights, our algorithm controls the conflicting influence of expertise weights and enhances overall consistency of time-valued ranking. The expertise weights of the previous study can act as an obstacle to the time-valued ranking because the number of followers increases as time goes on. Third, many new properties and classes can be included in our framework. The previous HITS-based algorithm, based on the voting notion, loses ground in the situation where the domain consists of more than two classes, or where other important properties, such as "sent through twitter" or "registered as a friend," are added to the domain. Forth, there is a big difference in the calculation time and memory use between the two kinds of algorithms. While the matrix multiplication of two matrices, has to be executed twice for the previous HITS-based algorithm, this is unnecessary with our algorithm. In our ranking framework, various folksonomy ranking policies can be expressed with the ranking factors combined and our approach can work, even if the folksonomy site is not implemented with Semantic Web languages. Above all, the time weight proposed in this paper will be applicable to various domains, including social media, where time value is considered important.

• The korean journal of orthodontics
• /
• v.36 no.5
• /
• pp.339-348
• /
• 2006

Objective: With development of the skeletal anchorage system, orthodontic mini-implant (OMI) assisted on masse sliding retraction has become part of general orthodontic treatment. But compared to the emphasis on successful anchorage preparation, the control of anterior teeth axis has not been emphasized enough. Methods: A 3-D finite element Base model of maxillary dental arch and a Lingual tipping model with lingually inclined anterior teeth were constructed. To evaluate factors influencing the axis of anterior teeth when OMI was used as anchorage, models were simulated with 2 mm or 5 mm retraction hooks and/or by the addition of 4 mm of compensating curve (CC) on the main archwire. The stress distribution on the roots and a 25000 times enlarged axis graph were evaluated. Results: Intrusive component of retraction force directed postero-superiorly from the 2 mm height hook did not reduce the lingual tipping of anterior teeth. When hook height was increased to 5 mm, lateral incisor showed crown-labial and root-lingual torque and uncontrolled tipping of the canine was increased.4 mm of CC added to the main archwire also induced crown-labial and root-lingual torque of the lateral incisor but uncontrolled tipping of the canine was decreased. Lingual tipping model showed very similar results compared with the Base model. Conclusion: The results of this study showed that height of the hook and compensating curve on the main archwire can influence the axis of anterior teeth. These data can be used as guidelines for clinical application.

• Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
• /
• v.41 no.3
• /
• pp.234-240
• /
• 2007

Purpose: In this study we propose a block-iterative method for reconstructing Compton scattered data. This study shows that the well-known expectation maximization (EM) approach along with its accelerated version based on the ordered subsets principle can be applied to the problem of image reconstruction for Compton camera. This study also compares several methods of constructing subsets for optimal performance of our algorithms. Materials and Methods: Three reconstruction algorithms were implemented; simple backprojection (SBP), EM, and ordered subset EM (OSEM). For OSEM, the projection data were grouped into subsets in a predefined order. Three different schemes for choosing nonoverlapping subsets were considered; scatter angle-based subsets, detector position-based subsets, and both scatter angle- and detector position-based subsets. EM and OSEM with 16 subsets were performed with 64 and 4 iterations, respectively. The performance of each algorithm was evaluated in terms of computation time and normalized mean-squared error. Results: Both EM and OSEM clearly outperformed SBP in all aspects of accuracy. The OSEM with 16 subsets and 4 iterations, which is equivalent to the standard EM with 64 iterations, was approximately 14 times faster in computation time than the standard EM. In OSEM, all of the three schemes for choosing subsets yielded similar results in computation time as well as normalized mean-squared error. Conclusion: Our results show that the OSEM algorithm, which have proven useful in emission tomography, can also be applied to the problem of image reconstruction for Compton camera. With properly chosen subset construction methods and moderate numbers of subsets, our OSEM algorithm significantly improves the computational efficiency while keeping the original quality of the standard EM reconstruction. The OSEM algorithm with scatter angle- and detector position-based subsets is most available.

• Journal of Bio-Environment Control
• /
• v.5 no.2
• /
• pp.215-235
• /
• 1996

The thermal analysis by mathematical model simulation makes it possible to reasonably predict heating and/or cooling requirements of certain greenhouses located under various geographical and climatic environment. It is another advantages of model simulation technique to be able to make it possible to select appropriate heating system, to set up energy utilization strategy, to schedule seasonal crop pattern, as well as to determine new greenhouse ranges. In this study, the control pattern for greenhouse microclimate is categorized as cooling and heating. Dynamic model was adopted to simulate heating requirements and/or energy conservation effectiveness such as energy saving by night-time thermal curtain, estimation of Heating Degree-Hours(HDH), long time prediction of greenhouse thermal behavior, etc. On the other hand, the cooling effects of ventilation, shading, and pad ||||&|||| fan system were partly analyzed by static model. By the experimental work with small size model greenhouse of 1.2m$\times$2.4m, it was found that cooling the greenhouse by spraying cold water directly on greenhouse cover surface or by recirculating cold water through heat exchangers would be effective in greenhouse summer cooling. The mathematical model developed for greenhouse model simulation is highly applicable because it can reflects various climatic factors like temperature, humidity, beam and diffuse solar radiation, wind velocity, etc. This model was closely verified by various weather data obtained through long period greenhouse experiment. Most of the materials relating with greenhouse heating or cooling components were obtained from model greenhouse simulated mathematically by using typical year(1987) data of Jinju Gyeongnam. But some of the materials relating with greenhouse cooling was obtained by performing model experiments which include analyzing cooling effect of water sprayed directly on greenhouse roof surface. The results are summarized as follows : 1. The heating requirements of model greenhouse were highly related with the minimum temperature set for given greenhouse. The setting temperature at night-time is much more influential on heating energy requirement than that at day-time. Therefore It is highly recommended that night- time setting temperature should be carefully determined and controlled. 2. The HDH data obtained by conventional method were estimated on the basis of considerably long term average weather temperature together with the standard base temperature(usually 18.3$^{\circ}C$). This kind of data can merely be used as a relative comparison criteria about heating load, but is not applicable in the calculation of greenhouse heating requirements because of the limited consideration of climatic factors and inappropriate base temperature. By comparing the HDM data with the results of simulation, it is found that the heating system design by HDH data will probably overshoot the actual heating requirement. 3. The energy saving effect of night-time thermal curtain as well as estimated heating requirement is found to be sensitively related with weather condition: Thermal curtain adopted for simulation showed high effectiveness in energy saving which amounts to more than 50% of annual heating requirement. 4. The ventilation performances doting warm seasons are mainly influenced by air exchange rate even though there are some variations depending on greenhouse structural difference, weather and cropping conditions. For air exchanges above 1 volume per minute, the reduction rate of temperature rise on both types of considered greenhouse becomes modest with the additional increase of ventilation capacity. Therefore the desirable ventilation capacity is assumed to be 1 air change per minute, which is the recommended ventilation rate in common greenhouse. 5. In glass covered greenhouse with full production, under clear weather of 50% RH, and continuous 1 air change per minute, the temperature drop in 50% shaded greenhouse and pad ＆ fan systemed greenhouse is 2.6$^{\circ}C$ and.6.1$^{\circ}C$ respectively. The temperature in control greenhouse under continuous air change at this time was 36.6$^{\circ}C$ which was 5.3$^{\circ}C$ above ambient temperature. As a result the greenhouse temperature can be maintained 3$^{\circ}C$ below ambient temperature. But when RH is 80%, it was impossible to drop greenhouse temperature below ambient temperature because possible temperature reduction by pad ||||&|||| fan system at this time is not more than 2.4$^{\circ}C$. 6. During 3 months of hot summer season if the greenhouse is assumed to be cooled only when greenhouse temperature rise above 27$^{\circ}C$, the relationship between RH of ambient air and greenhouse temperature drop($\Delta$T) was formulated as follows : $\Delta$T= -0.077RH＋7.7 7. Time dependent cooling effects performed by operation of each or combination of ventilation, 50% shading, pad ＆ fan of 80% efficiency, were continuously predicted for one typical summer day long. When the greenhouse was cooled only by 1 air change per minute, greenhouse air temperature was 5$^{\circ}C$ above outdoor temperature. Either method alone can not drop greenhouse air temperature below outdoor temperature even under the fully cropped situations. But when both systems were operated together, greenhouse air temperature can be controlled to about 2.0-2.3$^{\circ}C$ below ambient temperature. 8. When the cool water of 6.5-8.5$^{\circ}C$ was sprayed on greenhouse roof surface with the water flow rate of 1.3 liter/min per unit greenhouse floor area, greenhouse air temperature could be dropped down to 16.5-18.$0^{\circ}C$, whlch is about 1$0^{\circ}C$ below the ambient temperature of 26.5-28.$0^{\circ}C$ at that time. The most important thing in cooling greenhouse air effectively with water spray may be obtaining plenty of cool water source like ground water itself or cold water produced by heat-pump. Future work is focused on not only analyzing the feasibility of heat pump operation but also finding the relationships between greenhouse air temperature(T$_{g}$ ), spraying water temperature(T$_{w}$ ), water flow rate(Q), and ambient temperature(T$_{o}$).