Search (9 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Schreiber, M."
  • × theme_ss:"Informetrie"
  • × type_ss:"a"
  1. Schreiber, M.: Inconsistencies of recently proposed citation impact indicators and how to avoid them (2012) 0.02 
    0.016073458 = product of:
  0.032146916 = sum of:
    0.032146916 = product of:
      0.048220374 = sum of:
        0.04525219 = weight(_text_:k in 459) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04525219 = score(doc=459,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16225883 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04545348 = queryNorm
            0.2788889 = fieldWeight in 459, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=459)
        0.0029681858 = weight(_text_:s in 459) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0029681858 = score(doc=459,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.049418733 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04545348 = queryNorm
            0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 459, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=459)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    It is shown that under certain circumstances in particular for small data sets, the recently proposed citation impact indicators I3(6PR) and R(6,k) behave inconsistently when additional papers or citations are taken into consideration. Three simple examples are presented, in which the indicators fluctuate strongly and the ranking of scientists in the evaluated group is sometimes completely mixed up by minor changes in the database. The erratic behavior is traced to the specific way in which weights are attributed to the six percentile rank classes, specifically for the tied papers. For 100 percentile rank classes, the effects will be less serious. For the six classes, it is demonstrated that a different way of assigning weights avoids these problems, although the nonlinearity of the weights for the different percentile rank classes can still lead to (much less frequent) changes in the ranking. This behavior is not undesired because it can be used to correct for differences in citation behavior in different fields. Remaining deviations from the theoretical value R(6,k) = 1.91 can be avoided by a new scoring rule: the fractional scoring. Previously proposed consistency criteria are amended by another property of strict independence at which a performance indicator should aim.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.10, S.2062-2073
  2. Schreiber, M.: Revisiting the g-index : the average number of citations in the g-core (2009) 0.00 
    7.915163E-4 = product of:
  0.0015830325 = sum of:
    0.0015830325 = product of:
      0.0047490974 = sum of:
        0.0047490974 = weight(_text_:s in 3313) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0047490974 = score(doc=3313,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.049418733 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04545348 = queryNorm
            0.09609913 = fieldWeight in 3313, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3313)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.1, S.169-174
  3. Schreiber, M.: Inconsistencies in the highly cited publications indicator (2013) 0.00 
    7.915163E-4 = product of:
  0.0015830325 = sum of:
    0.0015830325 = product of:
      0.0047490974 = sum of:
        0.0047490974 = weight(_text_:s in 815) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0047490974 = score(doc=815,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.049418733 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04545348 = queryNorm
            0.09609913 = fieldWeight in 815, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=815)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.6, S.1298-1302
  4. Schreiber, M.: Do we need the g-index? (2013) 0.00 
    7.915163E-4 = product of:
  0.0015830325 = sum of:
    0.0015830325 = product of:
      0.0047490974 = sum of:
        0.0047490974 = weight(_text_:s in 1113) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0047490974 = score(doc=1113,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.049418733 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04545348 = queryNorm
            0.09609913 = fieldWeight in 1113, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1113)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.11, S.2396-2399
  5. Schreiber, M.: ¬A case study of the modified Hirsch index hm accounting for multiple coauthors (2009) 0.00 
    6.9257664E-4 = product of:
  0.0013851533 = sum of:
    0.0013851533 = product of:
      0.00415546 = sum of:
        0.00415546 = weight(_text_:s in 2858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00415546 = score(doc=2858,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.049418733 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04545348 = queryNorm
            0.08408674 = fieldWeight in 2858, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2858)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.6, S.1274-1282
  6. Schreiber, M.: ¬A variant of the h-index to measure recent performance (2015) 0.00 
    6.9257664E-4 = product of:
  0.0013851533 = sum of:
    0.0013851533 = product of:
      0.00415546 = sum of:
        0.00415546 = weight(_text_:s in 2262) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00415546 = score(doc=2262,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.049418733 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04545348 = queryNorm
            0.08408674 = fieldWeight in 2262, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2262)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.11, S.2373-2380
  7. Schreiber, M.: Fractionalized counting of publications for the g-Index (2009) 0.00 
    5.936372E-4 = product of:
  0.0011872743 = sum of:
    0.0011872743 = product of:
      0.003561823 = sum of:
        0.003561823 = weight(_text_:s in 3125) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.003561823 = score(doc=3125,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.049418733 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04545348 = queryNorm
            0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 3125, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3125)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.10, S.2145-2150
  8. Waltman, L.; Schreiber, M.: On the calculation of percentile-based bibliometric indicators (2013) 0.00 
    5.936372E-4 = product of:
  0.0011872743 = sum of:
    0.0011872743 = product of:
      0.003561823 = sum of:
        0.003561823 = weight(_text_:s in 616) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.003561823 = score(doc=616,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.049418733 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04545348 = queryNorm
            0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 616, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=616)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.2, S.372-379
  9. Schreiber, M.: ¬An empirical investigation of the g-index for 26 physicists in comparison with the h-index, the A-index, and the R-index (2008) 0.00 
    4.9469766E-4 = product of:
  9.893953E-4 = sum of:
    9.893953E-4 = product of:
      0.0029681858 = sum of:
        0.0029681858 = weight(_text_:s in 1968) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0029681858 = score(doc=1968,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.049418733 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04545348 = queryNorm
            0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 1968, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1968)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.9, S.1513-1522

Years