Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Stuart, D."
  1. Thelwall, M.; Stuart, D.: Web crawling ethics revisited : cost, privacy, and denial of service (2006) 0.03
    0.031786613 = product of:
      0.06357323 = sum of:
        0.00823978 = product of:
          0.03295912 = sum of:
            0.03295912 = weight(_text_:based in 6098) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03295912 = score(doc=6098,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14144066 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04694356 = queryNorm
                0.23302436 = fieldWeight in 6098, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6098)
          0.25 = coord(1/4)
        0.055333447 = product of:
          0.11066689 = sum of:
            0.11066689 = weight(_text_:assessment in 6098) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.11066689 = score(doc=6098,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.25917634 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.52102 = idf(docFreq=480, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04694356 = queryNorm
                0.4269946 = fieldWeight in 6098, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.52102 = idf(docFreq=480, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6098)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Ethical aspects of the employment of Web crawlers for information science research and other contexts are reviewed. The difference between legal and ethical uses of communications technologies is emphasized as well as the changing boundary between ethical and unethical conduct. A review of the potential impacts on Web site owners is used to underpin a new framework for ethical crawling, and it is argued that delicate human judgment is required for each individual case, with verdicts likely to change over time. Decisions can be based upon an approximate cost-benefit analysis, but it is crucial that crawler owners find out about the technological issues affecting the owners of the sites being crawled in order to produce an informed assessment.
  2. Oppenheim, C.; Stuart, D.: Is there a correlation between investment in an academic library and a higher education institution's ratings in the Research Assessment Exercise? (2004) 0.02
    0.01676857 = product of:
      0.06707428 = sum of:
        0.06707428 = product of:
          0.13414855 = sum of:
            0.13414855 = weight(_text_:assessment in 668) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.13414855 = score(doc=668,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.25917634 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.52102 = idf(docFreq=480, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04694356 = queryNorm
                0.51759565 = fieldWeight in 668, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  5.52102 = idf(docFreq=480, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=668)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Investigates whether a correlation exists between a UK university's academic excellence, as judged by its Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) ratings, and the amount spent on its library. Considers both macro and micro levels, looking at institutions as a whole, and on a departmental level within the area of archaeology. As well as comparing all the higher education institutions, this group is broken down further, comparing the ratings and spending of the Russell and 94 Groups. There are correlations between the different groups of higher education institutions and RAE ratings. However, rather than high RAE ratings causing high library spending or high library spending causing high RAE ratings, it is likely that they are indirectly linked, good universities having both high RAE ratings and good libraries and poor universities having low RAE ratings and less money spent on libraries. Also describes how libraries in universities with archaeology departments allocate budgets.
  3. Thelwall, M.; Klitkou, A.; Verbeek, A.; Stuart, D.; Vincent, C.: Policy-relevant Webometrics for individual scientific fields (2010) 0.00
    0.0017656671 = product of:
      0.0070626684 = sum of:
        0.0070626684 = product of:
          0.028250674 = sum of:
            0.028250674 = weight(_text_:based in 3574) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.028250674 = score(doc=3574,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14144066 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04694356 = queryNorm
                0.19973516 = fieldWeight in 3574, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3574)
          0.25 = coord(1/4)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Despite over 10 years of research there is no agreement on the most suitable roles for Webometric indicators in support of research policy and almost no field-based Webometrics. This article partly fills these gaps by analyzing the potential of policy-relevant Webometrics for individual scientific fields with the help of 4 case studies. Although Webometrics cannot provide robust indicators of knowledge flows or research impact, it can provide some evidence of networking and mutual awareness. The scope of Webometrics is also relatively wide, including not only research organizations and firms but also intermediary groups like professional associations, Web portals, and government agencies. Webometrics can, therefore, provide evidence about the research process to compliment peer review, bibliometric, and patent indicators: tracking the early, mainly prepublication development of new fields and research funding initiatives, assessing the role and impact of intermediary organizations and the need for new ones, and monitoring the extent of mutual awareness in particular research areas.