Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

0.044743963 = product of:
  0.089487925 = sum of:
    0.089487925 = sum of:
      0.010735838 = weight(_text_:s in 4992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.010735838 = score(doc=4992,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.06319627 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05812554 = queryNorm
          0.16988087 = fieldWeight in 4992, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4992)
      0.078752086 = weight(_text_:22 in 4992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.078752086 = score(doc=4992,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20354573 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05812554 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4992, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4992)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

14. 2.2012 12:53:22

Footnote

This article corrects: Thoughts on uncitedness: Nobel laureates and Fields medalists as case studies in: JASIST 62(2011) no,8, S.1637-1644.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.2, S.429

0.019367408 = sum of:
  0.016683448 = product of:
    0.06673379 = sum of:
      0.06673379 = weight(_text_:authors in 5226) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06673379 = score(doc=5226,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.26498353 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05812554 = queryNorm
          0.25184128 = fieldWeight in 5226, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5226)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.0026839594 = product of:
    0.005367919 = sum of:
      0.005367919 = weight(_text_:s in 5226) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.005367919 = score(doc=5226,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.06319627 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05812554 = queryNorm
          0.08494043 = fieldWeight in 5226, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5226)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Aims to inform researchers about metrics so that they become aware of the evaluative techniques being applied to their scientific output. Understanding these concepts will help them during their funding initiatives, and in hiring and tenure. The book not only describes what indicators do (or are designed to do, which is not always the same thing), but also gives precise mathematical formulae so that indicators can be properly understood and evaluated. Metrics have become a critical issue in science, with widespread international discussion taking place on the subject across scientific journals and organizations. As researchers should know the publication-citation context, the mathematical formulae of indicators being used by evaluating committees and their consequences, and how such indicators might be misused, this book provides an ideal tome on the topic. Provides researchers with a detailed understanding of bibliometric indicators and their applications. Empowers researchers looking to understand the indicators relevant to their work and careers. Presents an informed and rounded picture of bibliometrics, including the strengths and shortcomings of particular indicators. Supplies the mathematics behind bibliometric indicators so they can be properly understood. Written by authors with longstanding expertise who are considered global leaders in the field of bibliometrics

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 70(2019) no.5, S.530-532 (I. Dorsch)

Pages

xv, 385 S

0.0023010161 = product of:
  0.0046020322 = sum of:
    0.0046020322 = product of:
      0.0092040645 = sum of:
        0.0092040645 = weight(_text_:s in 2717) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0092040645 = score(doc=2717,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.06319627 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05812554 = queryNorm
            0.14564252 = fieldWeight in 2717, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2717)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Temporal growth of the h-index in a diachronous cumulative time series is predicted to be linear by Hirsch (2005), whereas other models predict a concave increase. Actual data generally yield a linear growth or S-shaped growth. We study the h-index's growth in computer simulations of the publication-citation process. In most simulations the h-index grows linearly in time. Only occasionally does an S-shape occur, while in our simulations a concave increase is very rare. The latter is often signalled by the occurrence of plateaus - periods of h-index stagnation. Several parameters and their influence on the h-index's growth are determined and discussed.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.2, S.410-417

0.0016103757 = product of:
  0.0032207514 = sum of:
    0.0032207514 = product of:
      0.006441503 = sum of:
        0.006441503 = weight(_text_:s in 4994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006441503 = score(doc=4994,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.06319627 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05812554 = queryNorm
            0.101928525 = fieldWeight in 4994, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4994)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Vgl.: Erratum. In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.2, S.429.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.8, S.1637-1644