Search (90 results, page 1 of 5)

  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × theme_ss:"Citation indexing"
  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  1. Mingers, J.; Burrell, Q.L.: Modeling citation behavior in Management Science journals (2006) 0.09 
    0.087198876 = product of:
  0.13079831 = sum of:
    0.01058886 = weight(_text_:information in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01058886 = score(doc=994,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0518325 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 994, 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=994)
    0.120209455 = sum of:
      0.078073926 = weight(_text_:management in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.078073926 = score(doc=994,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0518325 = queryNorm
          0.44688427 = fieldWeight in 994, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=994)
      0.04213553 = weight(_text_:22 in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04213553 = score(doc=994,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18150859 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0518325 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 994, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=994)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Citation rates are becoming increasingly important in judging the research quality of journals, institutions and departments, and individual faculty. This paper looks at the pattern of citations across different management science journals and over time. A stochastic model is proposed which views the generating mechanism of citations as a gamma mixture of Poisson processes generating overall a negative binomial distribution. This is tested empirically with a large sample of papers published in 1990 from six management science journals and found to fit well. The model is extended to include obsolescence, i.e., that the citation rate for a paper varies over its cited lifetime. This leads to the additional citations distribution which shows that future citations are a linear function of past citations with a time-dependent and decreasing slope. This is also verified empirically in a way that allows different obsolescence functions to be fitted to the data. Conclusions concerning the predictability of future citations, and future research in this area are discussed.
    Date
    26.12.2007 19:22:05
    Source
    Information processing and management. 42(2006) no.6, S.1451-1464
  2. Ma, N.; Guan, J.; Zhao, Y.: Bringing PageRank to the citation analysis (2008) 0.06 
    0.06117424 = product of:
  0.09176136 = sum of:
    0.01058886 = weight(_text_:information in 2064) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01058886 = score(doc=2064,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0518325 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2064, 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=2064)
    0.081172496 = sum of:
      0.039036963 = weight(_text_:management in 2064) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.039036963 = score(doc=2064,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0518325 = queryNorm
          0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 2064, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2064)
      0.04213553 = weight(_text_:22 in 2064) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04213553 = score(doc=2064,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18150859 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0518325 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2064, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2064)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Date
    31. 7.2008 14:22:05
    Source
    Information processing and management. 44(2008) no.2, S.800-810
  3. Nicolaisen, J.: Citation analysis (2007) 0.06 
    0.05627845 = product of:
  0.08441767 = sum of:
    0.02823696 = weight(_text_:information in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02823696 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0518325 = queryNorm
        0.3103276 = fieldWeight in 6091, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6091)
    0.056180708 = product of:
      0.112361416 = sum of:
        0.112361416 = weight(_text_:22 in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.112361416 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18150859 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0518325 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 6091, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6091)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Date
    13. 7.2008 19:53:22
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 41(2007), S.xxx-xxx
  4. He, Y.; Hui, S.C.: Mining a web database for author cocitation analysis (2002) 0.05 
    0.046833646 = product of:
  0.07025047 = sum of:
    0.02470734 = weight(_text_:information in 2584) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02470734 = score(doc=2584,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0518325 = queryNorm
        0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 2584, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2584)
    0.045543127 = product of:
      0.09108625 = sum of:
        0.09108625 = weight(_text_:management in 2584) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09108625 = score(doc=2584,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0518325 = queryNorm
            0.521365 = fieldWeight in 2584, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2584)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Source
    Information processing and management. 38(2002) no.4, S.491-508
  5. Van der Veer Martens, B.: Do citation systems represent theories of truth? (2001) 0.04 
    0.044870198 = product of:
  0.0673053 = sum of:
    0.017648099 = weight(_text_:information in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017648099 = score(doc=3925,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0518325 = queryNorm
        0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 3925, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3925)
    0.049657196 = product of:
      0.09931439 = sum of:
        0.09931439 = weight(_text_:22 in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09931439 = score(doc=3925,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18150859 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0518325 = queryNorm
            0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 3925, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3925)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Date
    22. 7.2006 15:22:28
    Source
    Information Research. 6(2001), no.2
  6. Chan, H.C.; Kim, H.-W.; Tan, W.C.: Information systems citation patterns from International Conference on Information Systems articles (2006) 0.03 
    0.03272217 = product of:
  0.049083255 = sum of:
    0.028015489 = weight(_text_:information in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028015489 = score(doc=201,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0518325 = queryNorm
        0.3078936 = fieldWeight in 201, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=201)
    0.021067765 = product of:
      0.04213553 = sum of:
        0.04213553 = weight(_text_:22 in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04213553 = score(doc=201,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18150859 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0518325 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 201, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=201)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Research patterns could enhance understanding of the Information Systems (IS) field. Citation analysis is the methodology commonly used to determine such research patterns. In this study, the citation methodology is applied to one of the top-ranked Information Systems conferences - International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS). Information is extracted from papers in the proceedings of ICIS 2000 to 2002. A total of 145 base articles and 4,226 citations are used. Research patterns are obtained using total citations, citations per journal or conference, and overlapping citations. We then provide the citation ranking of journals and conferences. We also examine the difference between the citation ranking in this study and the ranking of IS journals and IS conferences in other studies. Based on the comparison, we confirm that IS research is a multidisciplinary research area. We also identify the most cited papers and authors in the IS research area, and the organizations most active in producing papers in the top-rated IS conference. We discuss the findings and implications of the study.
    Date
    3. 1.2007 17:22:03
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.9, S.1263-1274
  7. Garfield, E.: Recollections of Irving H. Sher 1924-1996 : Polymath/information scientist extraordinaire (2001) 0.03 
    0.028033193 = product of:
  0.042049788 = sum of:
    0.017470727 = weight(_text_:information in 6920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017470727 = score(doc=6920,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0518325 = queryNorm
        0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 6920, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6920)
    0.02457906 = product of:
      0.04915812 = sum of:
        0.04915812 = weight(_text_:22 in 6920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04915812 = score(doc=6920,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18150859 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0518325 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 6920, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6920)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Date
    16.12.2001 14:01:22
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 52(2001) no.14, S.1197-1202
  8. Marion, L.S.; McCain, K.W.: Contrasting views of software engineering journals : author cocitation choices and indexer vocabulary assignments (2001) 0.03 
    0.027101062 = product of:
  0.040651593 = sum of:
    0.01247909 = weight(_text_:information in 5767) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01247909 = score(doc=5767,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0518325 = queryNorm
        0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 5767, 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=5767)
    0.028172504 = product of:
      0.05634501 = sum of:
        0.05634501 = weight(_text_:management in 5767) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05634501 = score(doc=5767,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0518325 = queryNorm
            0.32251096 = fieldWeight in 5767, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5767)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    We explore the intellectual subject structure and research themes in software engineering through the identification and analysis of a core journal literature. We examine this literature via two expert perspectives: that of the author, who identified significant work by citing it (journal cocitation analysis), and that of the professional indexer, who tags published work with subject terms to facilitate retrieval from a bibliographic database (subject profile analysis). The data sources are SCISEARCH (the on-line version of Science Citation Index), and INSPEC (a database covering software engineering, computer science, and information systems). We use data visualization tools (cluster analysis, multidimensional scaling, and PFNets) to show the "intellectual maps" of software engineering. Cocitation and subject profile analyses demonstrate that software engineering is a distinct interdisciplinary field, valuing practical and applied aspects, and spanning a subject continuum from "programming-in-the-smalI" to "programming-in-the-large." This continuum mirrors the software development life cycle by taking the operating system or major application from initial programming through project management, implementation, and maintenance. Object orientation is an integral but distinct subject area in software engineering. Key differences are the importance of management and programming: (1) cocitation analysis emphasizes project management and systems development; (2) programming techniques/languages are more influential in subject profiles; (3) cocitation profiles place object-oriented journals separately and centrally while the subject profile analysis locates these journals with the programming/languages group
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 52(2001) no.4, S.297-308
  9. Larivière, V.; Gingras, Y.; Archambault, E.: ¬The decline in the concentration of citations, 1900-2007 (2009) 0.03 
    0.026922122 = product of:
  0.040383182 = sum of:
    0.01058886 = weight(_text_:information in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01058886 = score(doc=2763,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0518325 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2763, 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=2763)
    0.02979432 = product of:
      0.05958864 = sum of:
        0.05958864 = weight(_text_:22 in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05958864 = score(doc=2763,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18150859 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0518325 = queryNorm
            0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 2763, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2763)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Date
    22. 3.2009 19:22:35
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.4, S.858-862
  10. Kurtz, M.J.; Eichhorn, G.; Accomazzi, A.; Grant, C.; Demleitner, M.; Henneken, E.; Murray, S.S.: ¬The effect of use and access on citations (2005) 0.03 
    0.026762083 = product of:
  0.040143125 = sum of:
    0.01411848 = weight(_text_:information in 1064) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01411848 = score(doc=1064,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0518325 = queryNorm
        0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 1064, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1064)
    0.026024643 = product of:
      0.052049287 = sum of:
        0.052049287 = weight(_text_:management in 1064) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.052049287 = score(doc=1064,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0518325 = queryNorm
            0.29792285 = fieldWeight in 1064, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1064)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Source
    Information processing and management. 41(2005) no.6, S.1395-1402
  11. Lin, X.; White, H.D.; Buzydlowski, J.: Real-time author co-citation mapping for online searching (2003) 0.03 
    0.025239285 = product of:
  0.037858926 = sum of:
    0.018340444 = weight(_text_:information in 1080) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018340444 = score(doc=1080,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0518325 = queryNorm
        0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 1080, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1080)
    0.019518482 = product of:
      0.039036963 = sum of:
        0.039036963 = weight(_text_:management in 1080) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039036963 = score(doc=1080,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0518325 = queryNorm
            0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 1080, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1080)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Author searching is traditionally based on the matching of name strings. Special characteristics of authors as personal names and subject indicators are not considered. This makes it difficult to identify a set of related authors or to group authors by subjects in retrieval systems. In this paper, we describe the design and implementation of a prototype visualization system to enhance author searching. The system, called AuthorLink, is based on author co-citation analysis and visualization mapping algorithms such as Kohonen's feature maps and Pathfinder networks. AuthorLink produces interactive author maps in real time from a database of 1.26 million records supplied by the Institute for Scientific Information. The maps show subject groupings and more fine-grained intellectual connections among authors. Through the interactive interface the user can take advantage of such information to refine queries and retrieve documents through point-and-click manipulation of the authors' names.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 39(2003) no.5, S.689-706
  12. Lai, K.-K.; Wu, S.-J.: Using the patent co-citation approach to establish a new patent classification system (2005) 0.02 
    0.02466437 = product of:
  0.036996555 = sum of:
    0.0088240495 = weight(_text_:information in 1013) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0088240495 = score(doc=1013,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0518325 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 1013, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1013)
    0.028172504 = product of:
      0.05634501 = sum of:
        0.05634501 = weight(_text_:management in 1013) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05634501 = score(doc=1013,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0518325 = queryNorm
            0.32251096 = fieldWeight in 1013, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1013)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    The paper proposes a new approach to create a patent classification system to replace the IPC or UPC system for conducting patent analysis and management. The new approach is based on co-citation analysis of bibliometrics. The traditional approach for management of patents, which is based on either the IPC or UPC, is too general to meet the needs of specific industries. In addition, some patents are placed in incorrect categories, making it difficult for enterprises to carry out R&D planning, technology positioning, patent strategy-making and technology forecasting. Therefore, it is essential to develop a patent classification system that is adaptive to the characteristics of a specific industry. The analysis of this approach is divided into three phases. Phase I selects appropriate databases to conduct patent searches according to the subject and objective of this study and then select basic patents. Phase II uses the co-cited frequency of the basic patent pairs to assess their similarity. Phase III uses factor analysis to establish a classification system and assess the efficiency of the proposed approach. The main contribution of this approach is to develop a patent classification system based on patent similarities to assist patent manager in understanding the basic patents for a specific industry, the relationships among categories of technologies and the evolution of a technology category.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 41(2005) no.2, S.313-330
  13. Van der Veer Martens, B.; Goodrum, G.: ¬The diffusion of theories : a functional approach (2006) 0.02 
    0.02462182 = product of:
  0.03693273 = sum of:
    0.01235367 = weight(_text_:information in 5269) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01235367 = score(doc=5269,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0518325 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 5269, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5269)
    0.02457906 = product of:
      0.04915812 = sum of:
        0.04915812 = weight(_text_:22 in 5269) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04915812 = score(doc=5269,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18150859 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0518325 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5269, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5269)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Date
    22. 7.2006 15:20:01
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.3, S.330-341
  14. Zhao, D.: Challenges of scholarly publications on the Web to the evaluation of science : a comparison of author visibility on the Web and in print journals (2005) 0.02 
    0.023416823 = product of:
  0.035125233 = sum of:
    0.01235367 = weight(_text_:information in 1065) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01235367 = score(doc=1065,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0518325 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 1065, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1065)
    0.022771563 = product of:
      0.045543127 = sum of:
        0.045543127 = weight(_text_:management in 1065) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045543127 = score(doc=1065,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0518325 = queryNorm
            0.2606825 = fieldWeight in 1065, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1065)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Source
    Information processing and management. 41(2005) no.6, S.1403-1418
  15. Tho, Q.T.; Hui, S.C.; Fong, A.C.M.: ¬A citation-based document retrieval system for finding research expertise (2007) 0.02 
    0.022995595 = product of:
  0.03449339 = sum of:
    0.014974909 = weight(_text_:information in 956) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014974909 = score(doc=956,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0518325 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 956, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=956)
    0.019518482 = product of:
      0.039036963 = sum of:
        0.039036963 = weight(_text_:management in 956) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039036963 = score(doc=956,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0518325 = queryNorm
            0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 956, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=956)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Current citation-based document retrieval systems generally offer only limited search facilities, such as author search. In order to facilitate more advanced search functions, we have developed a significantly improved system that employs two novel techniques: Context-based Cluster Analysis (CCA) and Context-based Ontology Generation frAmework (COGA). CCA aims to extract relevant information from clusters originally obtained from disparate clustering methods by building relationships between them. The built relationships are then represented as formal context using the Formal Concept Analysis (FCA) technique. COGA aims to generate ontology from clusters relationship built by CCA. By combining these two techniques, we are able to perform ontology learning from a citation database using clustering results. We have implemented the improved system and have demonstrated its use for finding research domain expertise. We have also conducted performance evaluation on the system and the results are encouraging.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 43(2007) no.1, S.248-264
  16. Sidiropoulos, A.; Manolopoulos, Y.: ¬A new perspective to automatically rank scientific conferences using digital libraries (2005) 0.02 
    0.022995595 = product of:
  0.03449339 = sum of:
    0.014974909 = weight(_text_:information in 1011) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014974909 = score(doc=1011,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0518325 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 1011, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1011)
    0.019518482 = product of:
      0.039036963 = sum of:
        0.039036963 = weight(_text_:management in 1011) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039036963 = score(doc=1011,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0518325 = queryNorm
            0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 1011, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1011)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Citation analysis is performed in order to evaluate authors and scientific collections, such as journals and conference proceedings. Currently, two major systems exist that perform citation analysis: Science Citation Index (SCI) by the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) and CiteSeer by the NEC Research Institute. The SCI, mostly a manual system up until recently, is based on the notion of the ISI Impact Factor, which has been used extensively for citation analysis purposes. On the other hand the CiteSeer system is an automatically built digital library using agents technology, also based on the notion of ISI Impact Factor. In this paper, we investigate new alternative notions besides the ISI impact factor, in order to provide a novel approach aiming at ranking scientific collections. Furthermore, we present a web-based system that has been built by extracting data from the Databases and Logic Programming (DBLP) website of the University of Trier. Our system, by using the new citation metrics, emerges as a useful tool for ranking scientific collections. In this respect, some first remarks are presented, e.g. on ranking conferences related to databases.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 41(2005) no.2, S.289-312
  17. Marshakova-Shaikevich, I.: Bibliometric maps of field of science (2005) 0.02 
    0.022995595 = product of:
  0.03449339 = sum of:
    0.014974909 = weight(_text_:information in 1069) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014974909 = score(doc=1069,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0518325 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 1069, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1069)
    0.019518482 = product of:
      0.039036963 = sum of:
        0.039036963 = weight(_text_:management in 1069) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039036963 = score(doc=1069,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0518325 = queryNorm
            0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 1069, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1069)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    The present paper is devoted to two directions in algorithmic classificatory procedures: the journal co-citation analysis as an example of citation networks and lexical analysis of keywords in the titles and texts. What is common to those approaches is the general idea of normalization of deviations of the observed data from the mathematical expectation. The application of the same formula leads to discovery of statistically significant links between objects (journals in one case, keywords - in the other). The results of the journal co-citation analysis are reflected in tables and map for field "Women's Studies" and for field "Information Science and Library Science". An experimental attempt at establishing textual links between words was carried out on two samples from SSCI Data base: (1) EDUCATION and (2) ETHICS. The EDUCATION file included 2180 documents (of which 751 had abstracts); the ETHICS file included 807 documents (289 abstracts). Some examples of the results of this pilot study are given in tabular form . The binary links between words discovered in this way may form triplets or other groups with more than two member words.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 41(2005) no.6, S.1534-1547
  18. Joint, N.: Bemused by bibliometrics : using citation analysis to evaluate research quality (2008) 0.02 
    0.019162996 = product of:
  0.028744493 = sum of:
    0.01247909 = weight(_text_:information in 1900) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01247909 = score(doc=1900,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0518325 = queryNorm
        0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 1900, 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=1900)
    0.016265402 = product of:
      0.032530803 = sum of:
        0.032530803 = weight(_text_:management in 1900) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032530803 = score(doc=1900,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0518325 = queryNorm
            0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 1900, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1900)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to examine the way in which library and information science (LIS) issues have been handled in the formulation of recent UK Higher Education policy concerned with research quality evaluation. Design/methodology/approach - A chronological review of decision making about digital rights arrangements for the 2008 Research Assessment Exercise (RAE), and of recent announcements about the new shape of metrics-based assessment in the Research Excellence Framework, which supersedes the RAE. Against this chronological framework, the likely nature of LIS practitioner reactions to the flow of decision making is suggested. Findings - It was found that a weak grasp of LIS issues by decision makers undermines the process whereby effective research evaluation models are created. LIS professional opinion should be sampled before key decisions are made. Research limitations/implications - This paper makes no sophisticated comments on the complex research issues underlying advanced bibliometric research evaluation models. It does point out that sophisticated and expensive bibliometric consultancies arrive at many conclusions about metrics-based research assessment that are common knowledge amongst LIS practitioners. Practical implications - Practical difficulties arise when one announces a decision to move to a new and specific type of research evaluation indicator before one has worked out anything very specific about that indicator. Originality/value - In this paper, the importance of information management issues to the mainstream issues of government and public administration is underlined. The most valuable conclusion of this paper is that, because LIS issues are now at the heart of democratic decision making, LIS practitioners and professionals should be given some sort of role in advising on such matters.
  19. Ahlgren, P.; Jarneving, B.; Rousseau, R.: Requirements for a cocitation similarity measure, with special reference to Pearson's correlation coefficient (2003) 0.02 
    0.016018968 = product of:
  0.02402845 = sum of:
    0.009983272 = weight(_text_:information in 5171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009983272 = score(doc=5171,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0518325 = queryNorm
        0.10971737 = fieldWeight in 5171, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5171)
    0.014045177 = product of:
      0.028090354 = sum of:
        0.028090354 = weight(_text_:22 in 5171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028090354 = score(doc=5171,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18150859 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0518325 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 5171, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5171)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Ahlgren, Jarneving, and. Rousseau review accepted procedures for author co-citation analysis first pointing out that since in the raw data matrix the row and column values are identical i,e, the co-citation count of two authors, there is no clear choice for diagonal values. They suggest the number of times an author has been co-cited with himself excluding self citation rather than the common treatment as zeros or as missing values. When the matrix is converted to a similarity matrix the normal procedure is to create a matrix of Pearson's r coefficients between data vectors. Ranking by r and by co-citation frequency and by intuition can easily yield three different orders. It would seem necessary that the adding of zeros to the matrix will not affect the value or the relative order of similarity measures but it is shown that this is not the case with Pearson's r. Using 913 bibliographic descriptions form the Web of Science of articles form JASIS and Scientometrics, authors names were extracted, edited and 12 information retrieval authors and 12 bibliometric authors each from the top 100 most cited were selected. Co-citation and r value (diagonal elements treated as missing) matrices were constructed, and then reconstructed in expanded form. Adding zeros can both change the r value and the ordering of the authors based upon that value. A chi-squared distance measure would not violate these requirements, nor would the cosine coefficient. It is also argued that co-citation data is ordinal data since there is no assurance of an absolute zero number of co-citations, and thus Pearson is not appropriate. The number of ties in co-citation data make the use of the Spearman rank order coefficient problematic.
    Date
    9. 7.2006 10:22:35
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 54(2003) no.6, S.549-568
  20. De Bellis, N.: Bibliometrics and citation analysis : from the Science citation index to cybermetrics (2008) 0.02 
    0.015330397 = product of:
  0.022995595 = sum of:
    0.009983272 = weight(_text_:information in 3585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009983272 = score(doc=3585,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09099081 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0518325 = queryNorm
        0.10971737 = fieldWeight in 3585, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3585)
    0.013012322 = product of:
      0.026024643 = sum of:
        0.026024643 = weight(_text_:management in 3585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026024643 = score(doc=3585,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17470726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0518325 = queryNorm
            0.14896142 = fieldWeight in 3585, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3585)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Content
    Inhalt: Biblio/sciento/infor-metrics : terminological issues and early historical developments -- The empirical foundations of bibliometrics : the Science citation index -- The philosophical foundations of bibliometrics : Bernal, Merton, Price, Garfield, and Small -- The mathematical foundations of bibliometrics -- Maps and paradigms : bibliographic citations at the service of the history and sociology of science -- Impact factor and the evaluation of scientists : bibliographic citations at the service of science policy and management -- On the shoulders of dwarfs : citation as rhetorical device and the criticisms to the normative model -- Measuring scientific communication in the twentieth century : from bibliometrics to cybermetrics.
    LCSH
    Information science / Statistical methods
    Subject
    Information science / Statistical methods

Authors

Types

  • a 87
  • el 3
  • m 3
  • s 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications