Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

2.848226E-4 = product of:
  0.004272339 = sum of:
    0.004272339 = product of:
      0.008544678 = sum of:
        0.008544678 = weight(_text_:information in 1223) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008544678 = score(doc=1223,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 1223, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1223)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Abstract

This paper introduces the Bison-Futé model, a conceptual generalization of the OpenURL framework for open and context-sensitive reference linking in the web-based scholarly information environment. The Bison-Futé model is an abstract framework that identifies and defines components that are required to enable open and context-sensitive linking on the web in general. It is derived from experience gathered from the deployment of the OpenURL framework over the course of the past year. It is a generalization of the current OpenURL framework in several aspects. It aims to extend the scope of open and context-sensitive linking beyond web-based scholarly information. In addition, it offers a generalization of the manner in which referenced items -- as well as the context in which these items are referenced -- can be described for the specific purpose of open and context-sensitive linking. The Bison-Futé model is not suggested as a replacement of the OpenURL framework. On the contrary: it confirms the conceptual foundations of the OpenURL framework and, at the same time, it suggests directions and guidelines as to how the current OpenURL specifications could be extended to become applicable beyond the scholarly information environment.

2.3255666E-4 = product of:
  0.0034883497 = sum of:
    0.0034883497 = product of:
      0.0069766995 = sum of:
        0.0069766995 = weight(_text_:information in 1346) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0069766995 = score(doc=1346,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 1346, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1346)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Abstract

There exist ample demonstrations that indicators of scholarly impact analogous to the citation-based ISI Impact Factor can be derived from usage data; however, so far, usage can practically be recorded only at the level of distinct information services. This leads to community-specific assessments of scholarly impact that are difficult to generalize to the global scholarly community. In contrast, the ISI Impact Factor is based on citation data and thereby represents the global community of scholarly authors. The objective of this study is to examine the effects of community characteristics on assessments of scholarly impact from usage. We define a journal Usage Impact Factor that mimics the definition of the Thomson Scientific ISI Impact Factor. Usage Impact Factor rankings are calculated on the basis of a large-scale usage dataset recorded by the linking servers of the California State University system from 2003 to 2005. The resulting journal rankings are then compared to the Thomson Scientific ISI Impact Factor that is used as a reference indicator of general impact. Our results indicate that the particular scientific and demographic characteristics of a discipline have a strong effect on resulting usage-based assessments of scholarly impact. In particular, we observed that as the number of graduate students and faculty increases in a particular discipline, Usage Impact Factor rankings will converge more strongly with the ISI Impact Factor.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.1, S.136-149

1.9733087E-4 = product of:
  0.002959963 = sum of:
    0.002959963 = product of:
      0.005919926 = sum of:
        0.005919926 = weight(_text_:information in 4771) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005919926 = score(doc=4771,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4771, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4771)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Abstract

The authors, who jointly serve as the Open Archives Initiative (OAI) executive, reflect an the three-year history of the OAI. Three years of technical work recently culminated in the release of a stabie production version 2 of the OAI Protocol for Metadata Harvesting (OAI-PMH). This technical product, the work that led up to it, and the process that made it possible have attracted some favor from the digital library and information community. The paper explores a number of factors in the history of the OAI that the authors believe have contributed to this positive response. The factors include focus an a defined problem Statement, an operational model in which strong leadership is balanced with solicited participation, a healthy dose of community building and Support, and sensible technical decisions.