Matches in Nanopublications for { <http://purl.org/np/RADmV72LK0__bK2qDVALw2z3LYU2fYcWIVKa1hFcHgPeQ#comment-9> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 7 of
7
with 100 items per page.
- comment-9 type ReviewComment assertion.
- comment-9 type ContentComment assertion.
- comment-9 type NegativeComment assertion.
- comment-9 type ActionNeededComment assertion.
- comment-9 hasImpact "3" assertion.
- comment-9 hasCommentText "In p.11, Fig 3, the comparison of DBpedia RDF triples (middle column) shown in your tool is compared with wikipedia infobox values (left column) for which you implemented an extractor. How do you ensure that your extractor does not create extraction errors like they are about to occur in the DBpedia infobox which resulted in the RDF triple under consideration? What if both - your wikipedia infobox extractor and the DBpedia RDF triple - show the very same error? Many problems of the DBpedia extractors arise from wrong infobox information, because many wikipedia authors don't care about infobox conventions. Can these kind of errors be detected at all with your crowdsourcing tool (based on the very same mechanisms to give a hint to the crowdworker)?" assertion.
- comment-9 refersTo figure assertion.