Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Mayr, P."
  • × type_ss:"el"
  1. Hobert, A.; Jahn, N.; Mayr, P.; Schmidt, B.; Taubert, N.: Open access uptake in Germany 2010-2018 : adoption in a diverse research landscape (2021) 0.03
    0.026478797 = sum of:
      0.011992325 = product of:
        0.0479693 = sum of:
          0.0479693 = weight(_text_:authors in 250) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.0479693 = score(doc=250,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.23809293 = queryWeight, product of:
                4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052226946 = queryNorm
              0.20147301 = fieldWeight in 250, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=250)
        0.25 = coord(1/4)
      0.014486472 = product of:
        0.028972944 = sum of:
          0.028972944 = weight(_text_:b in 250) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.028972944 = score(doc=250,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18503809 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052226946 = queryNorm
              0.15657827 = fieldWeight in 250, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=250)
        0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Content
    This study investigates the development of open access (OA) to journal articles from authors affiliated with German universities and non-university research institutions in the period 2010-2018. Beyond determining the overall share of openly available articles, a systematic classification of distinct categories of OA publishing allowed us to identify different patterns of adoption of OA. Taking into account the particularities of the German research landscape, variations in terms of productivity, OA uptake and approaches to OA are examined at the meso-level and possible explanations are discussed. The development of the OA uptake is analysed for the different research sectors in Germany (universities, non-university research institutes of the Helmholtz Association, Fraunhofer Society, Max Planck Society, Leibniz Association, and government research agencies). Combining several data sources (incl. Web of Science, Unpaywall, an authority file of standardised German affiliation information, the ISSN-Gold-OA 3.0 list, and OpenDOAR), the study confirms the growth of the OA share mirroring the international trend reported in related studies. We found that 45% of all considered articles during the observed period were openly available at the time of analysis. Our findings show that subject-specific repositories are the most prevalent type of OA. However, the percentages for publication in fully OA journals and OA via institutional repositories show similarly steep increases. Enabling data-driven decision-making regarding the implementation of OA in Germany at the institutional level, the results of this study furthermore can serve as a baseline to assess the impact recent transformative agreements with major publishers will likely have on scholarly communication.
  2. Mayr, P.; Zapilko, B.; Sure, Y.: ¬Ein Mehr-Thesauri-Szenario auf Basis von SKOS und Crosskonkordanzen (2010) 0.02
    0.015365225 = product of:
      0.03073045 = sum of:
        0.03073045 = product of:
          0.0614609 = sum of:
            0.0614609 = weight(_text_:b in 3392) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0614609 = score(doc=3392,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.18503809 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052226946 = queryNorm
                0.3321527 = fieldWeight in 3392, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3392)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Im August 2009 wurde SKOS "Simple Knowledge Organization System" als neuer Standard für web-basierte kontrollierte Vokabulare durch das W3C veröffentlicht1. SKOS dient als Datenmodell, um kontrollierte Vokabulare über das Web anzubieten sowie technisch und semantisch interoperabel zu machen. Perspektivisch kann die heterogene Landschaft der Erschließungsvokabulare über SKOS vereinheitlicht und vor allem die Inhalte der klassischen Datenbanken (Bereich Fachinformation) für Anwendungen des Semantic Web, beispielsweise als Linked Open Data2 (LOD), zugänglich und stär-ker miteinander vernetzt werden. Vokabulare im SKOS-Format können dabei eine relevante Funktion einnehmen, indem sie als standardisiertes Brückenvokabular dienen und semantische Verlinkung zwischen erschlossenen, veröffentlichten Daten herstellen. Die folgende Fallstudie skizziert ein Szenario mit drei thematisch verwandten Thesauri, die ins SKOS-Format übertragen und inhaltlich über Crosskonkordanzen aus dem Projekt KoMoHe verbunden werden. Die Mapping Properties von SKOS bieten dazu standardisierte Relationen, die denen der Crosskonkordanzen entsprechen. Die beteiligten Thesauri der Fallstudie sind a) TheSoz (Thesaurus Sozialwissenschaften, GESIS), b) STW (Standard-Thesaurus Wirtschaft, ZBW) und c) IBLK-Thesaurus (SWP).
  3. Momeni, F.; Mayr, P.: Analyzing the research output presented at European Networked Knowledge Organization Systems workshops (2000-2015) (2016) 0.01
    0.014990407 = product of:
      0.029980814 = sum of:
        0.029980814 = product of:
          0.11992326 = sum of:
            0.11992326 = weight(_text_:authors in 3106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.11992326 = score(doc=3106,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.23809293 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052226946 = queryNorm
                0.50368255 = fieldWeight in 3106, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3106)
          0.25 = coord(1/4)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    In this paper we analyze a major part of the research output of the Networked Knowledge Organization Systems (NKOS) community in the period 2000 to 2015 from a network analytical perspective. We fo- cus on the paper output presented at the European NKOS workshops in the last 15 years. Our open dataset, the "NKOS bibliography", includes 14 workshop agendas (ECDL 2000-2010, TPDL 2011-2015) and 4 special issues on NKOS (2001, 2004, 2006 and 2015) which cover 171 papers with 218 distinct authors in total. A focus of the analysis is the visualization of co-authorship networks in this interdisciplinary eld. We used standard network analytic measures like degree and betweenness centrality to de- scribe the co-authorship distribution in our NKOS dataset. We can see in our dataset that 15% (with degree=0) of authors had no co-authorship with others and 53% of them had a maximum of 3 cooperations with other authors. 32% had at least 4 co-authors for all of their papers. The NKOS co-author network in the "NKOS bibliography" is a typical co- authorship network with one relatively large component, many smaller components and many isolated co-authorships or triples.
  4. Daquino, M.; Peroni, S.; Shotton, D.; Colavizza, G.; Ghavimi, B.; Lauscher, A.; Mayr, P.; Romanello, M.; Zumstein, P.: ¬The OpenCitations Data Model (2020) 0.01
    0.010864854 = product of:
      0.021729708 = sum of:
        0.021729708 = product of:
          0.043459415 = sum of:
            0.043459415 = weight(_text_:b in 38) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.043459415 = score(doc=38,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18503809 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052226946 = queryNorm
                0.23486741 = fieldWeight in 38, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=38)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
  5. Mayr, P.; Petras, V.; Walter, A.-K.: Results from a German terminology mapping effort : intra- and interdisciplinary cross-concordances between controlled vocabularies (2007) 0.01
    0.008963048 = product of:
      0.017926097 = sum of:
        0.017926097 = product of:
          0.035852194 = sum of:
            0.035852194 = weight(_text_:b in 542) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.035852194 = score(doc=542,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.18503809 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052226946 = queryNorm
                0.19375575 = fieldWeight in 542, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=542)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    In 2004, the German Federal Ministry for Education and Research funded a major terminology mapping initiative at the GESIS Social Science Information Centre in Bonn (GESIS-IZ), which will find its conclusion this year. The task of this terminology mapping initiative was to organize, create and manage 'crossconcordances' between major controlled vocabularies (thesauri, classification systems, subject heading lists) centred around the social sciences but quickly extending to other subject areas. Cross-concordances are intellectually (manually) created crosswalks that determine equivalence, hierarchy, and association relations between terms from two controlled vocabularies. Most vocabularies have been related bilaterally, that is, there is a cross-concordance relating terms from vocabulary A to vocabulary B as well as a cross-concordance relating terms from vocabulary B to vocabulary A (bilateral relations are not necessarily symmetrical). Till August 2007, 24 controlled vocabularies from 11 disciplines will be connected with vocabulary sizes ranging from 2,000 - 17,000 terms per vocabulary. To date more than 260,000 relations are generated. A database including all vocabularies and cross-concordances was built and a 'heterogeneity service' developed, a web service, which makes the cross-concordances available for other applications. Many cross-concordances are already implemented and utilized for the German Social Science Information Portal Sowiport (www.sowiport.de), which searches bibliographical and other information resources (incl. 13 databases with 10 different vocabularies and ca. 2.5 million references).