Search (51 results, page 2 of 3)

  • × theme_ss:"Citation indexing"
  1. Bensman, S.J.: Eugene Garfield, Francis Narin, and PageRank : the theoretical bases of the Google search engine (2013) 0.01
    0.00812152 = product of:
      0.02436456 = sum of:
        0.02436456 = product of:
          0.04872912 = sum of:
            0.04872912 = weight(_text_:22 in 1149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04872912 = score(doc=1149,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15743402 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.044957645 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1149, 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=1149)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    17.12.2013 11:02:22
  2. Magri, M.; Solari, A.: ¬The SCI Journal Citation Reports : a potential tool for studying journals? (1996) 0.01
    0.007176996 = product of:
      0.021530988 = sum of:
        0.021530988 = weight(_text_:m in 5076) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021530988 = score(doc=5076,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11187479 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044957645 = queryNorm
            0.19245613 = fieldWeight in 5076, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5076)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
  3. Tsay, M.-Y.: From Science Citation Index to Journal Citation Reports, amd criteria for journals evaluation (1997) 0.01
    0.007176996 = product of:
      0.021530988 = sum of:
        0.021530988 = weight(_text_:m in 657) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021530988 = score(doc=657,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11187479 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044957645 = queryNorm
            0.19245613 = fieldWeight in 657, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=657)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
  4. Leydesdorff, L.: Dynamic and evolutionary updates of classificatory schemes in scientific journal structures (2002) 0.01
    0.007176996 = product of:
      0.021530988 = sum of:
        0.021530988 = weight(_text_:m in 1249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021530988 = score(doc=1249,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11187479 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044957645 = queryNorm
            0.19245613 = fieldWeight in 1249, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1249)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Can the inclusion of new journals in the Science Citation Index be used for the indication of structural change in the database, and how can this change be compared with reorganizations of reiations among previously included journals? Change in the number of journals (n) is distinguished from change in the number of journal categories (m). Although the number of journals can be considered as a given at each moment in time, the number of journal categories is based an a reconstruction that is time-stamped ex post. The reflexive reconstruction is in need of an update when new information becomes available in a next year. Implications of this shift towards an evolutionary perspective are specified.
  5. Thelwall, M.; Harries, G.: ¬The connection between the research of a university and counts of links to its Web pages : an investigation based upon a classification of the relationships of pages to the research of the host university (2003) 0.01
    0.007176996 = product of:
      0.021530988 = sum of:
        0.021530988 = weight(_text_:m in 1676) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021530988 = score(doc=1676,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11187479 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044957645 = queryNorm
            0.19245613 = fieldWeight in 1676, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1676)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
  6. Garfield, E.: Recollections of Irving H. Sher 1924-1996 : Polymath/information scientist extraordinaire (2001) 0.01
    0.0071063302 = product of:
      0.02131899 = sum of:
        0.02131899 = product of:
          0.04263798 = sum of:
            0.04263798 = weight(_text_:22 in 6920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04263798 = score(doc=6920,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15743402 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.044957645 = 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)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    16.12.2001 14:01:22
  7. Van der Veer Martens, B.; Goodrum, G.: ¬The diffusion of theories : a functional approach (2006) 0.01
    0.0071063302 = product of:
      0.02131899 = sum of:
        0.02131899 = product of:
          0.04263798 = sum of:
            0.04263798 = weight(_text_:22 in 5269) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04263798 = score(doc=5269,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15743402 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.044957645 = 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)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    22. 7.2006 15:20:01
  8. Tay, A.: ¬The next generation discovery citation indexes : a review of the landscape in 2020 (2020) 0.01
    0.0071063302 = product of:
      0.02131899 = sum of:
        0.02131899 = product of:
          0.04263798 = sum of:
            0.04263798 = weight(_text_:22 in 40) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04263798 = score(doc=40,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15743402 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.044957645 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 40, 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=40)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    17.11.2020 12:22:59
  9. Brooks, T.A.: How good are the best papers of JASIS? (2000) 0.01
    0.006151711 = product of:
      0.018455133 = sum of:
        0.018455133 = weight(_text_:m in 4593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018455133 = score(doc=4593,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11187479 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044957645 = queryNorm
            0.1649624 = fieldWeight in 4593, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4593)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Content
    Top by numbers of citations: (1) Saracevic, T. et al.: A study of information seeking and retrieving I-III (1988); (2) Bates, M.: Information search tactics (1979); (3) Cooper, W.S.: On selecting a measure of retrieval effectiveness (1973); (4) Marcus, R.S.: A experimental comparison of the effectiveness of computers and humans as search intermediaries (1983); (4) Fidel, R.: Online searching styles (1984)
  10. Prime-Claverie, C.; Beigbeder, M.; Lafouge, T.: Transposition of the cocitation method with a view to classifying Web pages (2004) 0.01
    0.006151711 = product of:
      0.018455133 = sum of:
        0.018455133 = weight(_text_:m in 3095) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018455133 = score(doc=3095,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11187479 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044957645 = queryNorm
            0.1649624 = fieldWeight in 3095, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3095)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
  11. Garfield, E.: Citation indexing : its theory and application in science, technology, and humanities (1979) 0.01
    0.006151711 = product of:
      0.018455133 = sum of:
        0.018455133 = weight(_text_:m in 348) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018455133 = score(doc=348,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11187479 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044957645 = queryNorm
            0.1649624 = fieldWeight in 348, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=348)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Type
    m
  12. Umstätter, W.: Szientometrische Verfahren (2004) 0.01
    0.0061157104 = product of:
      0.018347131 = sum of:
        0.018347131 = product of:
          0.036694262 = sum of:
            0.036694262 = weight(_text_:de in 2920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.036694262 = score(doc=2920,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.193205 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.044957645 = queryNorm
                0.18992399 = fieldWeight in 2920, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2920)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Die Szientometrie beschäftigt sich mit der Messbarkeit wissenschaftlicher Leistungen anhand bibliothekarisch nachweisbarer Publikationsergebnisse. Bei genauer Betrachtung ist es ihr Ziel, die Wissenszunahme der Wissenschaft zu messen. Die wissenschaftliche Produktion in Form von Publikationen wächst seit über dreihundert Jahren konstant mit ca. 3,5% pro Jahr. Das entspricht einerVerdopplungsrate von 20 Jahren, die zuerst dem Bibliothekar Fremont Rider 1948 bei Büchern auffiel und die 1963 von Derek J. de Solla Price auch für das Wachstum von Zeitschriften und Bibliografien bestätigt wurde. Die Konstanz dieser Evolution, unabhängig aller sich ereignenden Katastrophen, ist nur zum Teil verstanden, macht aber den unaufhaltsamen Fortschritt der Wissenschaft deutlich. Alle 20 Jahre wird so viel publiziert wie in allen Jahrhunderten davor. Eine etwa gleiche Zunahme verzeichnen die Wissenschaftler, die damit etwa gleich produktiv bleiben. Von ihnen allen sind damit ca. 87% unsere heutigen Zeitgenossen. Aus diesem Wachstum heraus können wir abschätzen, dass in 100.000 laufenden Zeitschriften heute etwa 10 Mio. Publikationen jährlich erscheinen, die von 10 Mio. Wissenschaftlern verfasst werden. Dabei definieren sich nur die als Wissenschaftler, die durchschnittlich eine Publikation jährlich verfassen. Die gesamte Produktion an Buchtiteln, die bisher erschien, dürfte bei etwa 100 Mio. liegen. Davon sind etwa 20 Mio. als wissenschaftlich einzustufen. Wenn folglich 87% aller Wissenschaftler noch heute leben, so betrug die Gesamtzahl der Wissenschaftler in der Welt bisher 11,5 Mio., die in ihrem Leben durchschnittlich 1,5 Bücher pro Kopf verfassten, und etwa das 10-20fache an Zeitschriftenbeiträgen leisteten. Ein Teil dieser Bücher sind allerdings Neuauflagen und Übersetzungen. Nach Lotka, A. J. ist die Produktivität der Wissenschaftler eine schiefe Verteilung von der Form A/n**2, wobei A die Zahl der Autoren mit nur einer Publikation ist und n die Publikationen pro Autor. Während Price in seinen "Networks of Scientific Papers" Vergleichswerte von n**2,5 bis n**3 angab, zeigten Untersuchungen am Science Citation Index (SCI), die auf die gesamte naturwissenschaftliche Literatur hochgerechnet wurden, eher einen Wert von n**1,7. Auf die Tatsache, dass eine Verdopplungsrate der Wissenschaftler von 20 Jahren und eine solche der Menschheit von etwa 50 Jahren dazu führt, dass eines Tages alle Menschen Wissenschaftler werden, hat Price bereits 1963 hingewiesen. Dieser Zustand müsste bei 10 Mio. Wissenschaftlern und 6 Mrd. Menschen in etwa 300 Jahren eintreten, ein nur scheinbar absurder Gedanke, wenn man bedenkt, dass man sich vor 300 Jahren auch kaum vorstellen konnte, dass alle Menschen Lesen, Schreiben und Rechnen lernen können, und dass wir uns ungebildete Menschen immer weniger leisten können.
  13. Wouters, P.; Vries, R. de: Formally citing the Web (2004) 0.01
    0.0061157104 = product of:
      0.018347131 = sum of:
        0.018347131 = product of:
          0.036694262 = sum of:
            0.036694262 = weight(_text_:de in 3093) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.036694262 = score(doc=3093,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.193205 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.044957645 = queryNorm
                0.18992399 = fieldWeight in 3093, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3093)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
  14. Campanario, J.M.: Have referees rejected some of the most-cited articles of all times? (1996) 0.01
    0.00609114 = product of:
      0.01827342 = sum of:
        0.01827342 = product of:
          0.03654684 = sum of:
            0.03654684 = weight(_text_:22 in 4215) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03654684 = score(doc=4215,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15743402 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.044957645 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4215, 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=4215)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    In this article a quantitative study is reported on the resistance that scientists may encounter when they do innovative work or when they attempt to publish articles that later become highly cited. A set of 205 commentaries by authors of some of the most-cited papers of all times have been examined in order to identify those articles whose authors encountered difficulty in getting his or her work published. There are 22 commentaries (10,7%) in which authors mention some difficulty or resistance in doing or publishing the research reported in the article. Three of the articles which had problems in being published are the most cited from their respective journals. According the authors' commentaries, although sometimes referees' negative evaluations can help improve the articles, in other instances referees and editors wrongly rejected the highly cited articles
  15. Snyder, H.; Bonzi, S.: Patterns of self-citation across disciplines : 1980-1989 (1998) 0.01
    0.00609114 = product of:
      0.01827342 = sum of:
        0.01827342 = product of:
          0.03654684 = sum of:
            0.03654684 = weight(_text_:22 in 3692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03654684 = score(doc=3692,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15743402 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.044957645 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3692, 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=3692)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    22. 5.1999 19:33:24
  16. wst: Cut-and-paste-Wissenschaft (2003) 0.01
    0.00609114 = product of:
      0.01827342 = sum of:
        0.01827342 = product of:
          0.03654684 = sum of:
            0.03654684 = weight(_text_:22 in 1270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03654684 = score(doc=1270,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15743402 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.044957645 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1270, 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=1270)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Content
    "Mikhail Simkin und Vwani Roychowdhury von der University of Califomia, Los Angeles, haben eine in der wissenschaftlichen Gemeinschaft verbreitete Unsitte erstmals quantitativ erfasst. Die Wissenschaftler analysierten die Verbreitung von Druckfehlern in den Literaturlisten wissenschaftlicher Arbeiten (www.arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0212043). 78 Prozent aller zitierten Aufsätze - so schätzen die Forscher - haben die zitierenden Wissenschaftler demnach nicht gelesen, sondern nur per 'cut and paste' von einer Vorlage in ihre eigene Literaturliste übernommen. Das könne man beispielsweise abschätzen aus der Analyse fehlerhafter Seitenangaben in der Literaturliste eines 1973 veröffentlichten Aufsatzes über die Struktur zweidimensionaler Kristalle: Dieser Aufsatz ist rund 4300 mal zitiert worden. In 196 Fällen enthalten die Zitate jedoch Fehler in der Jahreszahl, dem Band der Zeitschrift oder der Seitenzahl, die als Indikatoren für cut and paste genommen werden können, denn man kann, obwohl es Milliarden Möglichkeiten gibt, nur 45 verschiedene Arten von Druckfehlern unterscheiden. In erster Näherung ergibt sich eine Obergrenze für die Zahl der `echten Leser' daher aus der Zahl der unterscheidbaren Druckfehler (45) geteilt durch die Gesamtzahl der Publikationen mit Druckfehler (196), das macht etwa 22 Prozent."
  17. Chan, H.C.; Kim, H.-W.; Tan, W.C.: Information systems citation patterns from International Conference on Information Systems articles (2006) 0.01
    0.00609114 = product of:
      0.01827342 = sum of:
        0.01827342 = product of:
          0.03654684 = sum of:
            0.03654684 = weight(_text_:22 in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03654684 = score(doc=201,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15743402 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.044957645 = 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)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    3. 1.2007 17:22:03
  18. H-Index auch im Web of Science (2008) 0.01
    0.00609114 = product of:
      0.01827342 = sum of:
        0.01827342 = product of:
          0.03654684 = sum of:
            0.03654684 = weight(_text_:22 in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03654684 = score(doc=590,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15743402 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.044957645 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 590, 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=590)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    6. 4.2008 19:04:22
  19. Mingers, J.; Burrell, Q.L.: Modeling citation behavior in Management Science journals (2006) 0.01
    0.00609114 = product of:
      0.01827342 = sum of:
        0.01827342 = product of:
          0.03654684 = sum of:
            0.03654684 = weight(_text_:22 in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03654684 = score(doc=994,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15743402 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.044957645 = 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)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    26.12.2007 19:22:05
  20. Ma, N.; Guan, J.; Zhao, Y.: Bringing PageRank to the citation analysis (2008) 0.01
    0.00609114 = product of:
      0.01827342 = sum of:
        0.01827342 = product of:
          0.03654684 = sum of:
            0.03654684 = weight(_text_:22 in 2064) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03654684 = score(doc=2064,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15743402 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.044957645 = 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)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    31. 7.2008 14:22:05

Languages

  • e 42
  • d 8
  • chi 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 45
  • m 6
  • el 4
  • s 1
  • More… Less…