Davenport, E.; Cronin, B.: Who dunnit? : Metatags and hyperauthorship (2001)
0.02
0.023234747 = product of:
0.03485212 = sum of:
0.020782216 = product of:
0.08312886 = sum of:
0.08312886 = weight(_text_:authors in 6031) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08312886 = score(doc=6031,freq=2.0), product of:
0.23577455 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.051718395 = queryNorm
0.35257778 = fieldWeight in 6031, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6031)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.014069905 = weight(_text_:a in 6031) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014069905 = score(doc=6031,freq=14.0), product of:
0.05963374 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.051718395 = queryNorm
0.23593865 = fieldWeight in 6031, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6031)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Multiple authorship is a topic of growing concern in a number of scientific domains. When, as is increasingly common, scholarly articles and clinical reports have scores or even hundreds of authors-what Cronin (in press) has termed "hyperauthorship" -the precise nature of each individual's contribution is often masked. A notation that describes collaborators' contributions and allows those contributions to be tracked in, and across, texts (and over time) offers a solution. Such a notation should be useful, easy to use, and acceptable to communities of scientists. Drawing on earlier work, we present a proposal for an XML-like "contribution" mark-up, and discuss the potential benefits and possible drawbacks
- Type
- a
