Russian Experience in Hypertext: Automatic
Compiling of Coherent Texts
Ft. S. Gilyarevskii
All-Russian Institute for Scientific and Technical Information,
M. M. Subbotin
State Scientific Technical Center of Hypertext Information
Russian hypertext research emphasizes algorithmic
navigation. Navigation rules are based on features
of hypertext nodes formulated in terms of graph
theory. The trail built in this navigation can be per-
ceived as a nonformal reasoning or a coherent text.
In creating hypertext systems there appear specific
problems of logic and structural analysis which were
first advanced by Russian researchers. The Russian
hypertext systems, HYPERLOG, HYPERNET, BAHYS,
and SEMPRO, are described.
Introduction: The Concept of Hypertext
The readers of JASLSare familiar with the basic concept
of hypertext (Lunin & Rada, 1989) which is why we shall
only dwell upon some features of this concept that are
significant from our point of view.
Hypertext is interpreted as a nonlinear, networking form
of arranging textual material.
Thus, textual material consists of separate fragments
(“nodes”) with indicated possible transitions (“links”) be-
tween them. There are various ways of establishing these
links, but for us the important issue is semantic proximity
of the linked fragments.
As a rule, every fragment is connected with several oth-
ers by links, which gives the material a network form. The
process of reading the fragments, which form a hypertext,
by following the links, is called navigation.
A hypertext network gives a reader the possibility of
navigating along different routes, i.e., reading the ma-
terial in a different order, and not in only one, as in
the case of reading ordinary linear texts. In contrast to
the network forms of representing knowledge, which are
Received February 15, 1991; revised June 16, 1991, March 16, 1992;
accepted October 21, 1992.
0 1993 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION
Usievicha 2Oa, Moscow 125219, Russia
Technologies, Zemlyanoi Vat 52/16, Moscow, Russia
used in the systems of artificial intelligence, the hypertext
network is intended not for acquiring derivative knowl-
edge-conclusion, appraisal, diagnosis, etc.-but for read-
ing sequentially the textual material; the goal here is the
same as in reading the linear text-to master the knowledge
given in the text.
When knowledge is represented in the form of hyper-
text, the reader receives the possibility to acquire it more
actively: he/she alone can select the initial point and order
of reading in accordance with his/her intellectual interests
and knowledge.
These advantages of the hypertext, in comparison with
the linear text, will become apparent only if the reader
establishes the proper navigational routes in the hypertext
network, i.e., if the consequently read fragments form a
joint, coherent content.
The problem of finding suitable intelligent navigation
routes is an acute one, when large and complex hypertext
networks are under discussion.
Large and Complex Hypertext Networks
Very large hypertext networks usually appear, when we
speak about a dynamic hypertext (Carmel, McHenry, &
Cohen, 1989) that expands permanently with newly inserted
information. Complex networks emerge in a hypertext,
which originally is not built hierarchically (new information
is not counted to be inserted in rubrics set before), and
especially when links of new nodes are set on the estimation
of its semantic proximity to each available node. As a rule,
many cycles appear in texts built in this way. It should also
be mentioned that a link which reflects semantic proximity
may go in two directions, so a graph built on these links is
not directed in general cases. The more links are related to
the same node in a network, the more difficult it is for the
user to select the next node while in navigation. The well-
known problem of “getlost” in hypertext emerges (Conklin,
1987).
SCIENCE. 44(4):185-193, 1993 CCC 0002-8231/93/040185-09
 Direction of the links, hierarchically organized structure,
the building of composite nodes, and finally, an availability
of routes paved beforehand for the reader-all reduce the
difficulties in choosing while in navigation. But it is reached
simply through the reduction of a possible choice. All the
mentioned means of facilitation of navigation weaken the
most interesting property of the hypertext-the variety of
implicit routes (linear texts), the possibility of revealing in
the hypertext unexpected, but quite intelligent routes.
From our point of view, it is very important that the
hypertext include all the variety and fullness of possible
semantic links between cognitive elements, and thus a great
variety of potential navigational routes.
This means that facilitation of navigation and perception
of the material read in the process of navigation must
be reached not through directly reducing the number of
possible routes, but in an other way.
We believe it can be reached by using certain rules,
criteria, and in selecting each next node from a possible
variety.
Navigation Which Provides Coherence
of the Read Material
If links in hypertext reflect a semantic connection of
the content of nodes, then the consequence of the text’s
fragments determined by the navigational route always has
some level of semantic organization. But an availability
of semantic links between two neighboring fragments only
does not give any guarantee that the joint content of the
nodes will be coherent for the user and thus available for
mastering it effectively. To meet these requirements, while
in navigation, one must take into consideration not only
the semantic proximity to the direct earlier node, but also
semantic and logical relations with all preceding nodes of
the navigational route.
Under ordinary “manual” navigation in a large and
complex hypertext network it is very difficult to select the
next node that would meet the mentioned requirements.
We believe a true, effective choice of the next node in
navigation can be made on the basis of an estimation of its
place in the topological structure of the hypertext network.
Correspondence between the Hypertext
Topological Structure and the System
of Semantic Links of Knowledge Units
There are direct and mediate links between the elements
of knowledge in any subject domain. The direct links take
place if one unit of knowledge confirms the other; makes
it more concrete; generalizes it; or makes it appear as a
cause, goal, etc.
The topological structure of the hypertext network can
quite adequately reflect a system of such semantic links un-
der two conditions: if nodes are elementary monosemantic
units of knowledge (statements, ideas, facts, etc.); and if
links are established in the hypertext in all cases when a
direct semantic link is present.
186 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION
Correspondence between the hypertext topology and
system of links of represented knowledge in hypertext
makes it possible to impart semantic interpretation to the
graph characteristics of the nodes. In particular, a correct
semantic connection of the nodes in the navigation route can
be described in graph theory terms (e.g., as a requirement to
every next node to have links not only with the previous, but
with some other preceding nodes of the navigational route
also). Such criteria of selection of nodes in a navigational
route have a heuristic character. For the last 20 years we
have revealed and checked a series of requirements to
graph characteristics of the node being chosen. Keeping to
these requirements provides quite high logical and semantic
qualities of the textual material being built in the process
of navigation.
Possibility of Navigation under Rules
(Algorithmic Navigation)
With availability of criteria in selecting nodes according
to structure, the graph-theory features give the possibility
of carrying out navigation under the rules. Usage of these
rules does not turn the hypertext into an expert system.
These rules do not require an already checked model of
a subject domain, they are, in general, independent from
the concrete material. That is why they also can be applied
in dynamic hypertext, which is permanently expanding and
changing with new information.
In the Russian systems, HYPERLOG, SEMPRO, and
BAHYS, these rules are implemented in corresponding al-
gorithms and programs and provide algorithmic navigation
through hypertext.
Illustrating the Algorithmic Navigation
in Dynamic Hypertext
Let us assume that we accumulate knowledge on the
problem “navigation in hypertext,” finding statements from
literature on this problem and writing them down in the
order we came across them. Let us assume that now we
have the 14 statements listed in Table 1.
Let us establish direct semantic links in our collection of
statements and express them (Table 2). The left column of
Table 2 contains the statements numbers in the order they
were set down initially, and the lines contain the numbers
of adjacent semantic statements for each one.
The hypertext network, reflected in this table, can be
easily presented graphically (Fig. 1).
The presence of the link in this hypertext is a property of
adjustment of the corresponding statements, therefore, navi-
gation here provides a certain coherence level of sequence
of statements.
However, ordinary manual navigation does not, as a rule,
provide a very high level of coherence. The reader can try to
move across the links of this hypertext and, in most cases,
will realize the typical defects essential to this type of text
building. On one hand, they are characterized by a violation
of logic (e.g., later statements evidently introduce ideas,
SCIENCE-May 1993
TABLE 1. Collection of statements.

1. Hypertext, or nonlinear text consists of separate text fragments which are called “nodes.”
2. While in process of navigation, user has access to information on the content of neighboring nodes and, on this basis, selects
his/her route through the network.
3. A necessity arises to have something like a compass for hypertext navigation.
4. Russian research indicate that rules of algorithmic navigation may be based on structural characteristics of the hypertext network.
5. Possibility to move from one node to another is called “link.”
6. Following the hypertext network’s links is called “navigation.”
7. In complex networks, where each node has many links, selection for the next navigational step becomes very difficult.
8. Structural characteristics of the hypertext network, used for setting rules of algorithmic navigation, can be described in terms of graph
theory.
9. Following links, it is possible to traverse a hypertext network in various directions and by different routes.
10. With the rules, navigation may be carried out algorithmically.
11, Since every node may have many links, the so-called “hypertext network” emerges. A hypertext network may be very large and of high
complexity.
12. Each node has a prescribed set of links.
13. Rules determining direction of navigation in accordance with the user’s subject matter should act as a compass.
14. Many researchers point out that, in large hypertext networks, it is easy for the user to become disoriented or to get lost.

which were used in previous statements); on the other,
statements included in these texts by manual navigation
are far from all being a rule. Often, when the navigational
route reaches any node, it turns out that all the neighboring
nodes have been used already in the building of the linear
text; having returned, one can move to new statements, but,
as we know, it is very easy to get lost in large hypertext (the
reader permanently returns to routes he has already passed).
Our system, BAHYS, has automatically created a linear
text of these 14 statements, built on the basis of one of
the algorithms which implement our heuristic rules (see
Table 3).
One can become convinced that this linear text is
logically consequent and set out the material quite
systematically.
The algorithm used in this case selects the nodes, be-
ginning from the third-the first two nodes are set by
the user. The nodes are selected on the basis of pure
structural indication; the following two criteria were used
for selection: the current node should have no less than two
direct links with previous nodes of the route (it provides
quite a high level of general coherence of the linear text
under building); there must be a direct link with the
previously adjacent node (it provides continuity of content).
For navigation in large hypertexts there are also other
criteria used. Of importance is the following criterion: the
general number of links of the next node must not be more
than that of the previous (as numerous observations show, it
provides a deductive character of exposition, from general
to particular) (Subbotin, 1986).
Semantical Gaps
Of course, the possibility of building a logically coherent
exposition of a theme depends not only on criteria of
selection of the next node, but on the accumulated material
itself, on the actual topology of the hypertext network.
That is why the navigational algorithm must be adapted
to the network structure. If it is impossible to select the
next node by strong criteria (just like the one mentioned
above), weaker criteria are used, or the entire set of criteria
is not taken into account. Systems carrying out algorithmic

TABLE 2. Direct semantic links in the collection of statements.

1 5 12
2 6 7 9
3 7 10 13 14
4 8 10 13
5 1 9 11 12
6 2 7 9 11
7 2 3 6 11 13 14
8 4 10
9 2 5 6 11
IO 3 4 8 13
11 5 6 7 12 14
12 I 5 11
13 3 4 7 10
14 3 7 11
FIG. 1. Arrows indicate the “good” path, forming good linear text.

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE-May 1993 187

TABLE 3. Automatically constructed text.

Hypertext, or nonlinear text consists of separate text fragments which are called “nodes” (Lunin & Rada, 1989).
Possibility to move from one node to another is called “link” (Gilyarevskii & Kaloshin, 1988).
Each node has a prescribed set of links (Luhn, 1958).
Since every node may have many links, the so-called “hypertext network” emerges. A hypertext network may be very large and of high
complexity (Nelson, 1966).
Following links, it is possible to traverse a hypertext network in various directions and by different routes (Bush, 1945).
Following the hypertext network’s links is called “navigation” (Chelnokov, 1985).
While in process of navigation. The user has access to information on the content of neighboring nodes and, on this basis, selects his/her
route through the network (Carmel, McHenry, & Cohen, 1989).
In complex networks, where each node has many links, selection for the next navigational step becomes very difficult (Otlet, 1975).
Many researchers point out that, in large hypertext networks, it is easy for the user to become disoriented or to get lost (Tscitin, 1961).
A necessity arises to have something like a compass for hypertext navigation (Conklin, 1987).
Rules determining direction of navigation in accordance with user’s subject matter should act as a compass (Garfield, 1955).
With the rules, navigation may be carried out algorithmically (Engelbart & English, 1968).
Russian research indicates that rules of algorithmic navigation may be based on structural characteristics of hypertext network (Subbotin,
1986).
Structural characteristics of hypertext network, used for setting rules of algorithmic navigation, can be described in terms of graph theory
(Otlet, 1975).

navigation indicate places in the built linear text, where
next node was selected by weaker criteria and, therefore,
where logical correctness and coherence weakened (i.e., the
semantical gap).
As a rule, a gap is overcome by inserting additional
information, by adding new cognitive elements, which are
able to establish a link between fragments of a linear text.
Indication of the gaps stimulates a purposeful search for
new information and ideas.
Construction of Hypertext and Algorithmic
Navigation as an Instrument of Logical
Arranging of the Accumulated Material
The example given shows that conslruction of the hy-
pertext and the algorithmic navigation through it can be
considered as instrument of systematization of the accumu-
lated knowledge.
If, at input, we have a free and a nonorganized collection
of statements and at the output we want to achieve a well-
organized sequence (from the logical and semantic criteria
point of view), we must convert statements into nodes and
set direct semantic links between them, and then carry out
navigation under the structural criteria.
If the user has regulated and structuralized the accu-
mulated statements corresponding to the formerly fixed
structure of the given subject domain, he actually would
have brought new information to some strict, a priori
scheme. If the collection of statements is left not structural-
ized, then the possibility of comprehending and acquiring
the stored knowledge is lost. A structuralization (hierar-
chization, systematization) of the accumulated material,
proceeding on semantic and logical links, contained in the
collection of statements, would have been most desirable.
Of course, the problem of the laboriousness of this kind
of systematization of knowledge appears. First, there is
the supposed building of the hypertext on the principle
of setting links in all cases of close semantic contiguity
between statements. Though not complicated intellectually,
the the procedure of semantic contiguity (direct link) turns out
be laborious when inserting every following statement in
relation to every available one in hypertext statements.
Practically, an ascertainment of the availability or ab-
sence of semantic contiguity is set not for every pair of
statements, but only for those, which by some indications,
most probably, have this contiguity. A selection of corre-
sponding pairs of statements is carried out on the basis of
key words, which can be singled out automatically-on the
basis of morphological and syntactic analysis of the text.
In many cases, in the practical sense, the final result can be
satisfactorily received under fully automatic establishment
of links between statements.
In our case, it should be noted also that it is not necessary
to point out the type of relations for establishing semantic
contiguity (correspondingly, there is no need to classify
these relations); the fact of presence of some relation is
itself important. The explanation is that the final result-a
good linear text-presumes high coherence of every next
statement with previous fragments of the exposed material,
independently of what concrete relations this statement has
with the previous ones.
Some Other Directions of Algorithmic Structural
Analysis of the Hypertext Network
Until now, we spoke about a structural analysis of the
hypertext network, meaning the linear adjustment of its
nodes. However, other types of analyses are also of cer-
tain interest, in particular, the singling out by structural
indication subgraphs which reflect the content of the given
hypertext as a whole. As in the case of algorithmic navi-
gation, we speak about structural indications which have
a semantic interpretation, because of the correspondence
between the topological structure of the network and the
system of semantic links of cognitive elements.
Thus, the more links the node has in the hypertext
network, obviously the higher and more considerable the

188 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE-May 1993

role of the corresponding cognitive element in the total
knowledge represented in the hypertext.
Such graph characteristics as the node’s centrality (the
sum of distances from other nodes) is also evidence of
the importance of the corresponding cognitive element in
the system of the presented knowledge.
Using such structural indications one can single out the
most essential cognitive elements that best characterize the
content of the hypertext. For example, the subgraph, which
includes only nodes with the number of links higher than
a certain limit (and the links of these nodes with each
other)-is a representative part of the whole hypertext.
An Example: Investigation of Soviet Dissertations
The changes in the subjects of Soviet dissertations had
to be analyzed to reveal the substantive trends in the
development of information science in 1965-69, 1970-74,
and 1975-79 (Gilyarevskii & Kaloshin, 1988). Dissertation
subjects formulated on the basis of titles and abstracts (a
total of 3,500 subjects in some 700 dissertations) served as
hypertext elements. For each subject, its logical relations
with other subjects in the file were established. Building
such a logical-semantic information collection is equiva-
lent to forming an unoriented graph of conceptual relations
for the subject field.
It was constructed and analyzed automatically by a set
of algorithms and programs which consists of five steps:
(1) statements are ranked according to the number of links;
(2) a minimal number of links is defined that makes a
statement eligible for the aggregated scheme; (3) statements
that pass the threshold of detailing are singled out; (4) for
statements that pass the detailing threshold, their links with
each other are specified; and (5) the data are used for
automatic construction of a graph.
This graph-building scheme makes it possible to deter-
mine the key problems of Soviet information science and
its groups of problems represented by connected subgraphs
(Figs. 2-4). For estimating the significance of problems,
we ranked subjects by the number of links with other
problems [although other criteria are possible, such as
statistical description
of text
nmJral language
text procewng
text analysis
machine translat
technical means of IR
FIG. 2. Graph reflecting dissertations prepared for 1965-1969. Autom., automatic (ed); Bibl., bibliography(ic);
system(s); Inf., information; IR, information retrieval; IS, information system(s); Lang., language; Lib., library(ies); Ref., reference; S&T,
science and technology; SDI, selective dissemination of information; Transl., translation.
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN
ranking topics by the sum of distances-an algorithm
developed and programmed by Chelnokov (1985)]. The
substantive analysis of the resulting graphs indicated that,
during the 15 years, Soviet information science contained at
least three problem areas which were not strongly connected
with other fields:
l means for automation of information retrieval;
l linguistic aspects of text processing; and
l information needs-analysis and services.
The first of these problem areas for the initial five-
year period was undoubtedly the most important; in the
last period, however, it was superseded by theoretical
and methodological problems of information science. The
second of the fields, which initially appeared isolated and
underdeveloped, had a large number of nodes in the last
period, with strong connections to the core of the subgraph.
The third problem area, throughout the 15 years, remained
one of the main though isolated regions, with a large
number of links. Certain areas selected for dissertations
were remarkably stable. Throughout the 15 years, improve-
ments in scientific information work based on automation
of information processes remained in a key position.
Now we have the possibility to comparing these
results with the analysis of 120 Soviet dissertations
defended in 1989-1990 (this analysis was made by
O.V. Stolyarova in her Masters thesis). The dissertations
graph consists of two isolated subgraphs (see Fig. 5).
They demonstrate that two problems-“Development of
Library/Bibliographic/Reference and Information Services”
and “Semantic Processing in Information Systems” were
most important in Soviet information science during the
last years of the USSR’s existence.
Approach to the Knowledge as a
Network of Cognitive Units
The method under consideration is theoretically based
on the ideas developed not only by the researchers of
hypertext, but also by their predecessors. One of the basic
principles of our method is based on the assumption that
comparison of types of IS
theory of IR
choice of inf. lang.
mechanized IS
computerized IS
l scanning of text
secondary publications
l use of book collections
SD1 documentary IS
classification
organization of inf. work
DB, data base(s); ES, expert
SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE-May 1993 189
 machine transl.
auf. lang. text processing
commumcation science
FIG. 3. Graph reflecting dissertations
any subject area (ultimately human knowledge) is a single
system of links among cognitive elements forming it. It
is this particular understanding that has been forming in
information science for a long time. Pioneers of this science
had advanced similar ideas as far back as the pre-hypertext
period. Now it is becoming clear that successes in the
development of computer facilities and programming have
made it possible to realize ideas which had been developed
within library and information sciences long before. Bibli-
ographers, for hundreds of years, appreciated the difficulty
of organizing and presenting information. Possibilities and
trends in the development of information technology in this
field were guessed and correctly predicted by the pioneers
of informatics.
P. Otlet is known to most specialists only in connection
with the Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) he created
in 1905. As far back as 1905 he realized the need to
order the world system of scientific communication. In his
report at the International Congress on Bibliography and
Documentation (Brussels, 1908) he expressed an idea which
contained the kernel of hypertext technology:
The medium of the organization of scientific work is the
book, above all in its latest form, the periodical . . . .
The only conception which corresponds to reality is
to consider all books, all periodical articles, all the
official reports as volumes, chapters, paragraphs in one
great book, the Universal Book, a colossal encyclopedia
semantic text
DB in management
informatics for management
theory of scient. inf
theory of inf. science
representation of data
FIG. 4. Graph reflecting dissertations prepared for 197551979.
190 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION
implementation
of aotom. IS
aotom. inf. services
S & T specialized IS
l Inf. & bibl. services
efticiency of scientific documents
national inf. network
prepared for 1970-1974. See legend to Figure 2 for abbreviations.
framed from all that has been published . . (Otlet,
1975a)
It should certainly be taken into account that this idea
was expressed at the beginning of the 20th century and was
oriented at the technical possibilities of that time. Although
they were very limited by present-day standards, Otlet
foresaw modern achievements, even systems of remote
access to data banks. In 1934, he wrote:
Any one from afar would be able to read the passage,
expanded or limited to the desired subject, projected on
his individual screen. Thus, in his armchair, any one
would be able to contemplate the whole of creation or
certain of its parts. (Otlet, 1975b)
From the time of pioneers of hypertext (Bush, 1945;
Engelbart & English, 1968; Nelson, 1966) to the mid-
1980s the hypertext idea experienced an incubation period
when numerous projects which developed certain aspects
of this idea were carried out in an isolated way within the
framework of various scientific directions. As a rule, the
designers, far from using the term “hypertext,” did not often
realize their link with the works by Engelbart and Nelson.
Only now is it possible to identify the range of works
which in fact developed certain essential elements of the
hypertext concept. Although the task is far from simple its
solution would facilitate the use of the potential of former
projects to ensure further development of hypertext and
autom. text recognition
structure
tom. analysis of a text
semantic compression
inf. needs
bibl. services
inf. services
man-machine communication
theory of IS
See legend to Figure 2 for abbreviations.
SCIENCE-May 1993
 ref. serwces I” agriculture L & I services in agriculture

international bibl.
bibl. in agriculture

inf. needs & users

bibl. in science
bibl. in engineering

ref. service in big library

bibl. & inf. services in medicine

bibl. DB for new technology

mathematical models of IS for city management

lexical control in IS IS in management
logic & semantic
in classification

inf. services in

software for
language interface
software for DB

mathematical model of language

knowledge processing

i” Sema”tic “~~~n~~c .,,,dem semantic networks

semantic data in ES autom. creation of structure

of subject field

FIG. 5. Graph reflecting dissertations prepared. See legend to Figure 2 for abbreviations.

improvement of its new forms and tools. If the problem of
hypertext is viewed from broad logical-linguistic positions,
one can see that it arose from attempts to overcome the
narrowness of traditional tools of information retrieval:
hierarchical classification schemes and descriptor languages
of coordinate indexing. Similar attempts in earlier years
led to Luhn’s (1958) ideas of automatic abstracting and
Garfield’s (1955) citation networks. The former line proved
unpromising, whereas the latter was brilliantly developed in
science citation indexes and in maps and atlases of scientific
fields.
Soviet Investigations in the 1960s and 1970s
One of important lines leading to modern linear text gen-
erating based on logical-linguistic research of the 1960s.
In the 1960s the USSR conducted major logi-
cal-linguistic and logical-mathematical projects aimed
at establishing formalized models of natural language
with a view to automating information processes. Of
the many works of this cycle mention should be made
of the reports by Tseitin (1961) and Ivanov (1961)
at the Conference on Information Processing, Machine
Translation and Automatic Reading of Text held in Moscow
in 1961.
In the Tseitin report, the main task dealing with the
construction of a model of text was to identify a host
of grammatically correct phrases and to indicate which
were equivalent to each other in meaning. The task was
to develop an algorithm generating a multitude of such
equivalent pairs. The Ivanov report ended with a prophetic
idea to the effect that deliberate operations over linguistic
systems required for machine translation and information
retrieval may be linked by feedback with the development
of these systems themselves.
Of special interest are works dealing with the distributive
analysis of text and developing methods of American
descriptive linguistics (Harris, 1951). In this connection we
would like to mention the book by Andreev (1967) and
a Doctoral thesis by Shaikevich (1982). The dissertation

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE-May 1993 191

defines this analysis as a formal description of the structure
of collections of written texts subdivided into segments
(words and utterances) and forming the so-called semantic
graph. The description takes the form of the classification of
source linguistic elements, which in the course of analysis
may be linked into classes which are perceived as clusters
on the graph. We can say that in this period the tradition
appeared to present texts as networks of semantic links.
In the early 197Os, Ivanov and Subbotin (1978) began
to link knowledge units (concepts and assertions) instead
of text segments for describing any subject field. Hence,
“logical-semantic models” emerged. In these models, those
cognitive units are linked that are related in meaning. The
criterion for linking some pair of units is the possibility of
combining its concepts or assertions by expressions such
as “is, ” “is the cause of,” “is the end of,” “therefore,”
and so on. Networks built on that principle served for
describing and investigation of any subject field. They came
right up to hypertext. It is important that links would be
fixed for all pairs of concepts or assertions which can
be combined by copula or other correlate expressions.
This, of course, caused technological problems in large
networks in searching candidates for linking. But it is the
principle of completeness of links that paved the way to the
investigation of topological characteristics of the hypertext
network.
The most interesting direction of these investigations
proved the algorithmic navigation in the network. This
navigation is based on heuristic rules reflecting the intuitive
ideas on good connectivity. The sequence of nodes built in
accordance with rules of good connectivity was called “non-
formal reasoning” (Subbotin, 1986). The range of criteria
of good connectivity has expanded gradually.
At the end of the 1970s and beginning of the 198Os,
large hypertext networks (up to 3500 nodes, as in the case
of dissertations investigation) consisting of statements on
different subject domains were built and analyzed experi-
mentally on large mainframes.
Navigation rules add to hypertext a shade of logi-
calization. But this is not the logic of formal inference
used in Al systems. It is quite a different logic which
Subbotin proposed to call connectivity logic. Its rules can be
advanced proceeding from intuitive ideas, from logical and
philosophical theories, and then tested on many hypertext
networks represented by various subject fields.
Russian Hypertext Systems with
Algorithmic Navigation
Today, four hypertext systems with algorithmic naviga-
tion realized on PCs IBM XT/AT have been developed:
HYPERLOG, BAHYS, HYPERNET, and SEMPRO.
The HYPERLOG system has been functioning since
1988 (Zefirova, 1990). It served initially for research in
algorithmic navigation criteria. For researchers a sheet was
built that contained graph characteristics of each node
regarded as a candidate for the continuation of navigation
path. The experienced user was enabled to influence output
text features by ranking connectivity criteria in some pri-
ority order. The recent version of HYPERLOG is currently
used for interactive navigation offering user some local
filters to select nodes. HYPERLOG was developed in the
State Scientific Technical Center of Hypertext Information
Technologies (Moscow).
The most recent product of this center is BAHYS (Basic
Hypertext System). BAHYS can be considered an intelli-
gent text processor. It provides, besides various common
procedures of text processing, transformation of elementary
text units (“statements”) into hypertext nodes and also
supports arrangement of these statements into new coher-
ent texts. Thus, BAHYS supports the elaborating of text
documents on the semantic level (see Figs. 6 and 7).
BAHYS lacks a graphical browser or tools to visualize
hypertext. In this regard it is supplemented by the HYPER-
NET system intended, above all, for visual representation of
hypertext nets with a different degree of detailing. It also al-

. -...- .
rA
for
necessity
hypertext
arises
navigation.
to have something 1 il::e a compass

I---- -----Ob:PECT~OC:Tb-
) In complex network, wher+ each, npde. has. many. 1 I nkcj-, se,]:ec>
Many researchers point out, that in large hyperte,:c network:
Rules determining direction af navigation in accordqce, wi-t
With the rules, navigation may be carried out algorlthmical

FIG. 6. Semantical area of a node in BAHYS (adjacent nodes represented by first lines).

192 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE-May 1993

 _. _ - - - _ -. k:. ~33~1~08.
- Teb::cT
A necessity arises to hav;ezg;ething
F’ossilqi l,iTy. to move from one
FIG. 7.
lows one to effect transitions (navigation) between different
hypertexts (designers call this feature “hyperlink”). Visual-
ization of a hypertext net combined with various images
and pictographs is a good tool for intensifying the user’s
thinking in solving complex problems. The HYPERNET is
also a product of the State Scientific Technical Center of
Hypertext Information Technologies (Moscow).
SEMPRO (Semantic Processor) is a hypertext system
of a similar type designed and disseminated by the
Soviet-Finnish-Bulgarian joint venture NOVINTEKH. It
takes into account peculiarities of users with a humanistic
thinking process and is specially adapted to the main
stages of the authorship process: information (source texts)
accumulation, creating a variety of notes and fragments for
the future text, and compiling variants of the exposition.
In all described systems with algorithmic navigation are
implemented the same rules of compiling coherent texts
from small fragments. All of them inform the user of the
semantic gaps that cannot be suppressed in the constructed
texts. Each of these systems supports the creation and
updating of hyperbases using keywords for searching
“candidates for linking” [this method is similar to that used
by designers of the Arizona Analyst Information System;
see Carmel, McHenry, & Cohen (1989)].
References
Andreev, N. D. (1967).Statistical-combinatoric methods in theoretical
and applied linguistics. Leningrad(in Russian).
Bush, V. (1945). As we may think. Atlantic Monthly, 276, 101-108.
Cannel, E., McHenry, W. K., & Cohen, J. (1989). Building large,
dynamic hypertext: How do we link intelligently? Journal of
Management Information Systems, 6, 33-50.
Chelnokov, V. M. (1985). Making the concept of integrity opera-
tional in the representation of knowledge. In System research:
Methodological Problems. A yearbook (pp. 103-112). Moscow (in
Russian).
JOURNAL OF THE
r-i
like a compass
many 1 inks,
lipks is called
the so called
node to another is
Chain of statements as a result.
Conklin. J. (1987). Hypertext: An introduction and survey. Computer,
17-24.
Engelbart, D., & English, W. (1968). A research center for augmenting
human intellect. AFIPS Conference Proceedings, 33, 1.
Garfield, E. (1955). Citation indexes for science. Science, 122,
108-111.
Gilyarevskii, R. S., & Kaloshin, V. V. (1988). Development trends
of informatics (based on Soviet dissertations from 1965 to 1980).
Automatic Documentation & Mathematical Linguistics, 22, 56-68.
Harris, Z. (1951). Methods in structural linguistics. Chicago.
Ivanov, V.V. (1961). On constructing of information language for
texts on descriptive linguistics. Conference on Informntion Process-
ing, Machine Translation and Automatic Reading of Text, Moscow,
p, 15 (in Russian).
Ivanov, V. G., & Subbotin, M. M. (1978). Analysis and updating of
comprehensive solutions with the use of computers on the basis of
the method of logical-semantic modeling. Moscow (in Russian).
Luhn, H.P. (1958). The automatic creation of literature abstracts
(autoabstracts). IBM Journal of Research and Development, 2,
159-165.
Lunin, L.N., & Rada, R. (Eds.) (1989). Perspectives on hypertext.
Articles about hypertext. Journal of the American Society for Infor-
mation Science, 40, 158-220.
Nelson, T. (1966, May) The information systems in the future.
Information retrieval: A critical view. In G. Schecter (Ed.), Third
Annual Colloquium on Information Retrieval, Philadelphia.
Otlet, P. (1975a). La documentation on matiere administrative. In
Actes de la Conference internationale de bibliographie et de docu-
mentation (pp. 147-154). Bruxelles (W. Boyd Rayword, trans.)
The Universe of Information (p. 16). Moscow, FID 520 (Original
work published in 1908).
Otlet, P. (1975b). Traite de documentation. Bruxelles (W. Boyd
Rayword, trans.) The Universe of Information, (p. 354). Moscow,
FID 520 (Original work published in 1934).
Shaikevich, A. Y. (1982). Distributive-statistic& analysis of texts.
Doctoral thesis, Moscow (in Russian).
Subbotin, M. M. (1986). Computer applications and the construction
of chains of reasoning. Automatic Documentation & Mathematical
Linguisfics, 20, 1 - 10.
Tseitin, G. S. (1961). On constructing of mathematical models of Ian-
guage. Conference on Information Processing, Machine Translation
and Automatic Reading of Text, Moscow, p. 11 (in Russian).
Zefirova, V.L. (1990). The research hypertext system HYPERLOG.
NOVINTEKH: International Computer Journal, 1, 29-30.
AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE-May 1993 193