-
Larivière, V.; Gingras, Y.; Archambault, E.: ¬The decline in the concentration of citations, 1900-2007 (2009)
0.01
0.01080023 = product of:
0.02160046 = sum of:
0.02160046 = product of:
0.04320092 = sum of:
0.04320092 = weight(_text_:22 in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04320092 = score(doc=2763,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13159116 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03757783 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 3.2009 19:22:35
-
Small, H.; Sweeney, E.: Clustering the Science Citation Index using co-citations (1985)
0.01
0.010250781 = product of:
0.020501561 = sum of:
0.020501561 = product of:
0.041003123 = sum of:
0.041003123 = weight(_text_:h in 1064) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041003123 = score(doc=1064,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09336021 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.03757783 = queryNorm
0.4391927 = fieldWeight in 1064, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1064)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Cronin, B.; Meho, L.I.: Using the h-index to rank influential information scientists (2006)
0.01
0.010250781 = product of:
0.020501561 = sum of:
0.020501561 = product of:
0.041003123 = sum of:
0.041003123 = weight(_text_:h in 196) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041003123 = score(doc=196,freq=8.0), product of:
0.09336021 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.03757783 = queryNorm
0.4391927 = fieldWeight in 196, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=196)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The authors apply a new bibliometric measure, the h-index (Hirsch, 2005), to the literature of information science. Faculty rankings based on raw citation counts are compared with those based on h-counts. There is a strong positive correlation between the two sets of rankings. It is shown how the h-index can be used to express the broad impact of a scholar's research output over time in more nuanced fashion than straight citation counts.
-
Harzing, A.-W.; Wal, R. van der: ¬A Google Scholar h-index for journals : an alternative metric to measure journal impact in economics and business (2009)
0.01
0.010250781 = product of:
0.020501561 = sum of:
0.020501561 = product of:
0.041003123 = sum of:
0.041003123 = weight(_text_:h in 2630) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041003123 = score(doc=2630,freq=8.0), product of:
0.09336021 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.03757783 = queryNorm
0.4391927 = fieldWeight in 2630, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2630)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- We propose a new data source (Google Scholar) and metric (Hirsch's h-index) to assess journal impact in the field of economics and business. A systematic comparison between the Google Scholar h-index and the ISI Journal Impact Factor for a sample of 838 journals in economics and business shows that the former provides a more accurate and comprehensive measure of journal impact.
- Object
- h-index
-
Burrell, Q.L.: Some comments on "A proposal for a dynamic h-Type Index" by Rousseau and Ye (2009)
0.01
0.010250781 = product of:
0.020501561 = sum of:
0.020501561 = product of:
0.041003123 = sum of:
0.041003123 = weight(_text_:h in 2722) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041003123 = score(doc=2722,freq=8.0), product of:
0.09336021 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.03757783 = queryNorm
0.4391927 = fieldWeight in 2722, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2722)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Caution is urged over the adoption of dynamic h-type indexes as advocated by Rousseau and Ye (2008). It is shown that the dynamics are critically dependent upon model assumptions and that practical interpretation might therefore be problematic. However, interesting questions regarding the interrelations between various h-type indexes are raised.
- Object
- h-index
-
Prathap, G.: ¬A thermodynamic explanation for the Glänzel-Schubert model for the h-index (2011)
0.01
0.010250781 = product of:
0.020501561 = sum of:
0.020501561 = product of:
0.041003123 = sum of:
0.041003123 = weight(_text_:h in 4453) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041003123 = score(doc=4453,freq=8.0), product of:
0.09336021 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.03757783 = queryNorm
0.4391927 = fieldWeight in 4453, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4453)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Recently, it was shown that among existing theoretical models for the h-index, the Glänzel-Schubert model provides the best fit for a chosen example involving the research evaluation of universities. In this brief communication, we propose a thermodynamic explanation for the success of the Glänzel-Schubert model of the h-index.
- Object
- h-index
-
Hirsch, J.E.: ¬An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output (2005)
0.01
0.010250781 = product of:
0.020501561 = sum of:
0.020501561 = product of:
0.041003123 = sum of:
0.041003123 = weight(_text_:h in 785) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041003123 = score(doc=785,freq=8.0), product of:
0.09336021 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.03757783 = queryNorm
0.4391927 = fieldWeight in 785, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=785)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- I propose the index h, defined as the number of papers with citation number >=h, as a useful index to characterize the scientific output of a researcher. Vgl. auch die Beschreibung in: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/H-Index.
- Object
- h-index
-
Schreiber, M.: Restricting the h-index to a citation time window : a case study of a timed Hirsch index (2014)
0.01
0.010250781 = product of:
0.020501561 = sum of:
0.020501561 = product of:
0.041003123 = sum of:
0.041003123 = weight(_text_:h in 1563) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041003123 = score(doc=1563,freq=8.0), product of:
0.09336021 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.03757783 = queryNorm
0.4391927 = fieldWeight in 1563, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1563)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The h-index has been shown to increase in many cases mostly because of citations to rather old publications. This inertia can be circumvented by restricting the evaluation to a citation time window. Here I report results of an empirical study analyzing the evolution of the thus defined timed h-index in dependence on the length of the citation time window.
- Object
- h-index
-
Li, T.-C.: Reference sources in periodicals : research note (1995)
0.01
0.010182554 = product of:
0.020365108 = sum of:
0.020365108 = product of:
0.040730216 = sum of:
0.040730216 = weight(_text_:22 in 5092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040730216 = score(doc=5092,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13159116 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03757783 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5092, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5092)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Presents a list of 53 periodicals in 22 subject fields which regularly provide bibliographies of theses, research in progress and patents in their particular subject field. The fields of business, economics, history and literature have most periodical listings of dissertations and theses. Also lists 63 periodicals in 25 sub-disciplines which provide rankings or ratings. Rankings and ratings information predominates in the fields of business, sports and games, finance and banking, and library and information science
-
Pichappan, P.; Sangaranachiyar, S.: Ageing approach to scientific eponyms (1996)
0.01
0.010182554 = product of:
0.020365108 = sum of:
0.020365108 = product of:
0.040730216 = sum of:
0.040730216 = weight(_text_:22 in 80) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040730216 = score(doc=80,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13159116 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03757783 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 80, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=80)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Footnote
- Report presented at the 16th National Indian Association of Special Libraries and Information Centres Seminar Special Interest Group Meeting on Informatrics in Bombay, 19-22 Dec 94
-
Mommoh, O.M.: Subject analysis of post-graduate theses in library, archival and information science at Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria (1995/96)
0.01
0.010182554 = product of:
0.020365108 = sum of:
0.020365108 = product of:
0.040730216 = sum of:
0.040730216 = weight(_text_:22 in 673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040730216 = score(doc=673,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13159116 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03757783 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 673, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=673)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Library focus. 13/14(1995/96), S.22-25
-
Chongde, W.; Zhe, W.: Evaluation of the models for Bradford's law (1998)
0.01
0.010182554 = product of:
0.020365108 = sum of:
0.020365108 = product of:
0.040730216 = sum of:
0.040730216 = weight(_text_:22 in 3688) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040730216 = score(doc=3688,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13159116 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03757783 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3688, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3688)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 5.1999 19:12:28
-
Tijssen, R.J.W.; Wijk, E. van: ¬The global science base of information and communication technologies : bibliometric analysis of ICT research papers (1998)
0.01
0.010182554 = product of:
0.020365108 = sum of:
0.020365108 = product of:
0.040730216 = sum of:
0.040730216 = weight(_text_:22 in 3691) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040730216 = score(doc=3691,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13159116 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03757783 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3691, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3691)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 5.1999 19:26:54
-
Scholarly metrics under the microscope : from citation analysis to academic auditing (2015)
0.01
0.010182554 = product of:
0.020365108 = sum of:
0.020365108 = product of:
0.040730216 = sum of:
0.040730216 = weight(_text_:22 in 4654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040730216 = score(doc=4654,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13159116 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03757783 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4654, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4654)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 1.2017 17:12:50
-
Bornmann, L.; Mutz, R.: From P100 to P100' : a new citation-rank approach (2014)
0.01
0.010182554 = product of:
0.020365108 = sum of:
0.020365108 = product of:
0.040730216 = sum of:
0.040730216 = weight(_text_:22 in 1431) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040730216 = score(doc=1431,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13159116 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03757783 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1431, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1431)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 8.2014 17:05:18
-
Ohly, P.: Dimensions of globality : a bibliometric analysis (2016)
0.01
0.010182554 = product of:
0.020365108 = sum of:
0.020365108 = product of:
0.040730216 = sum of:
0.040730216 = weight(_text_:22 in 4942) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040730216 = score(doc=4942,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13159116 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03757783 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4942, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4942)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 20. 1.2019 11:22:31
-
Egghe, L.; Ravichandra Rao, I.K.: ¬The influence of the broadness of a query of a topic on its h-index : models and examples of the h-index of n-grams (2008)
0.01
0.010129942 = product of:
0.020259883 = sum of:
0.020259883 = product of:
0.040519767 = sum of:
0.040519767 = weight(_text_:h in 2009) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040519767 = score(doc=2009,freq=20.0), product of:
0.09336021 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.03757783 = queryNorm
0.4340154 = fieldWeight in 2009, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2009)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The article studies the influence of the query formulation of a topic on its h-index. In order to generate pure random sets of documents, we used N-grams (N variable) to measure this influence: strings of zeros, truncated at the end. The used databases are WoS and Scopus. The formula h=T**1/alpha, proved in Egghe and Rousseau (2006) where T is the number of retrieved documents and is Lotka's exponent, is confirmed being a concavely increasing function of T. We also give a formula for the relation between h and N the length of the N-gram: h=D10**(-N/alpha) where D is a constant, a convexly decreasing function, which is found in our experiments. Nonlinear regression on h=T**1/alpha gives an estimation of , which can then be used to estimate the h-index of the entire database (Web of Science [WoS] and Scopus): h=S**1/alpha, , where S is the total number of documents in the database.
- Object
- h-index
-
Kim, P.J.; Lee, J.Y.; Park, J.-H.: Developing a new collection-evaluation method : mapping and the user-side h-index (2009)
0.01
0.010129942 = product of:
0.020259883 = sum of:
0.020259883 = product of:
0.040519767 = sum of:
0.040519767 = weight(_text_:h in 3171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040519767 = score(doc=3171,freq=20.0), product of:
0.09336021 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.03757783 = queryNorm
0.4340154 = fieldWeight in 3171, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3171)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This study proposes a new visualization method and index for collection evaluation. Specifically, it develops a network-based mapping technique and a user-focused Hirsch index (user-side h-index) given the lack of previous studies on collection evaluation methods that have used the h-index. A user-side h-index is developed and compared with previous indices (use factor, difference of percentages, collection-side h-index) that represent the strengths of the subject classes of a library collection. The mapping procedure includes the subject-usage profiling of 63 subject classes and collection-usage map generations through the pathfinder network algorithm. Cluster analyses are then conducted upon the pathfinder network to generate 5 large and 14 small clusters. The nodes represent the strengths of the subject-class usages reflected by the user-side h-index. The user-side h-index was found to have advantages (e.g., better demonstrating the real utility of each subject class) over the other indices. It also can more clearly distinguish the strengths between the subject classes than can collection-side h-index. These results may help to identify actual usage and strengths of subject classes in library collections through visualized maps. This may be a useful rationale for the establishment of the collection-development plan.
- Object
- h-index
-
Egghe, L.: ¬The influence of transformations on the h-index and the g-index (2008)
0.01
0.010028131 = product of:
0.020056263 = sum of:
0.020056263 = product of:
0.040112525 = sum of:
0.040112525 = weight(_text_:h in 1881) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040112525 = score(doc=1881,freq=10.0), product of:
0.09336021 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.03757783 = queryNorm
0.42965335 = fieldWeight in 1881, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1881)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- In a previous article, we introduced a general transformation on sources and one on items in an arbitrary information production process (IPP). In this article, we investigate the influence of these transformations on the h-index and on the g-index. General formulae that describe this influence are presented. These are applied to the case that the size-frequency function is Lotkaian (i.e., is a decreasing power function). We further show that the h-index of the transformed IPP belongs to the interval bounded by the two transformations of the h-index of the original IPP, and we also show that this property is not true for the g-index.
- Object
- h-index
-
Crispo, E.: ¬A new index to use in conjunction with the h-index to account for an author's relative contribution to publications with high impact (2015)
0.01
0.010028131 = product of:
0.020056263 = sum of:
0.020056263 = product of:
0.040112525 = sum of:
0.040112525 = weight(_text_:h in 2264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040112525 = score(doc=2264,freq=10.0), product of:
0.09336021 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.03757783 = queryNorm
0.42965335 = fieldWeight in 2264, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2264)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The h-index was devised to represent a scholar's contributions to his field with respect to the number of publications and citations. It does not, however, take into consideration the scholar's position in the authorship list. I recommend a new supplementary index to score academics, representing the relative contribution to the papers with impact, be reported alongside the h-index. I call this index the AP-index, and it is simply defined as the average position in which an academic appears in authorship lists, on articles that factor in to that academic's h-index.
- Object
- h-index
