Search (24 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × theme_ss:"Citation indexing"
  1. Ding, Y.; Zhang, G.; Chambers, T.; Song, M.; Wang, X.; Zhai, C.: Content-based citation analysis : the next generation of citation analysis (2014) 0.10 
    0.09744447 = product of:
  0.19488893 = sum of:
    0.14405231 = weight(_text_:assess in 1521) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14405231 = score(doc=1521,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.36863554 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.8947687 = idf(docFreq=330, maxDocs=44218)
          0.062536046 = queryNorm
        0.39077166 = fieldWeight in 1521, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.8947687 = idf(docFreq=330, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1521)
    0.050836623 = weight(_text_:22 in 1521) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050836623 = score(doc=1521,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21899058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.062536046 = queryNorm
        0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1521, 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=1521)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Traditional citation analysis has been widely applied to detect patterns of scientific collaboration, map the landscapes of scholarly disciplines, assess the impact of research outputs, and observe knowledge transfer across domains. It is, however, limited, as it assumes all citations are of similar value and weights each equally. Content-based citation analysis (CCA) addresses a citation's value by interpreting each one based on its context at both the syntactic and semantic levels. This paper provides a comprehensive overview of CAA research in terms of its theoretical foundations, methodical approaches, and example applications. In addition, we highlight how increased computational capabilities and publicly available full-text resources have opened this area of research to vast possibilities, which enable deeper citation analysis, more accurate citation prediction, and increased knowledge discovery.
    Date
    22. 8.2014 16:52:04
  2. Lai, K.-K.; Wu, S.-J.: Using the patent co-citation approach to establish a new patent classification system (2005) 0.04 
    0.04244182 = product of:
  0.16976728 = sum of:
    0.16976728 = weight(_text_:assess in 1013) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16976728 = score(doc=1013,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.36863554 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.8947687 = idf(docFreq=330, maxDocs=44218)
          0.062536046 = queryNorm
        0.4605288 = fieldWeight in 1013, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.8947687 = idf(docFreq=330, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1013)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    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.
  3. Brody, T.; Harnad, S.; Carr, L.: Earlier Web usage statistics as predictors of later citation impact (2006) 0.04 
    0.04201526 = product of:
  0.16806103 = sum of:
    0.16806103 = weight(_text_:assess in 165) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16806103 = score(doc=165,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.36863554 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.8947687 = idf(docFreq=330, maxDocs=44218)
          0.062536046 = queryNorm
        0.45590025 = fieldWeight in 165, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.8947687 = idf(docFreq=330, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=165)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    The use of citation counts to assess the impact of research articles is well established. However, the citation impact of an article can only be measured several years after it has been published. As research articles are increasingly accessed through the Web, the number of times an article is downloaded can be instantly recorded and counted. One would expect the number of times an article is read to be related both to the number of times it is cited and to how old the article is. The authors analyze how short-term Web usage impact predicts medium-term citation impact. The physics e-print archive-arXiv.org-is used to test this.
  4. Sombatsompop, N.; Markpin, T.: Making an equality of ISI impact factors for different subject fields (2005) 0.04 
    0.036013078 = product of:
  0.14405231 = sum of:
    0.14405231 = weight(_text_:assess in 3467) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14405231 = score(doc=3467,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.36863554 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.8947687 = idf(docFreq=330, maxDocs=44218)
          0.062536046 = queryNorm
        0.39077166 = fieldWeight in 3467, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.8947687 = idf(docFreq=330, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3467)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    The journal impact factors, published by the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI; Philadelphia, PA), are widely known and are used to evaluate overall journal quality and the quality of the papers published therein. However, when making comparisons between subject fields, the work of individual scientists and their research institutions as reflected in their articles' ISI impact factors can become meaningless. This inequality will remain as long as ISI impact factors are employed as an instrument to assess the quality of international research. Here we propose a new mathematical index entitled Impact Factor PointAverage (IFPA) for assessment of the quality of individual research work in different subject fields. The index is established based an a normalization of differences in impact factors, rankings, and number of journal titles in different subject fields. The proposed index is simple and enables the ISI impact factors to be used with equality, especially when evaluating the quality of research work in different subject fields.
  5. Nicolaisen, J.: Citation analysis (2007) 0.03 
    0.033891086 = product of:
  0.13556434 = sum of:
    0.13556434 = weight(_text_:22 in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13556434 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21899058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.062536046 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    13. 7.2008 19:53:22
  6. Døsen, K.: One more reference on self-reference (1992) 0.03 
    0.033891086 = product of:
  0.13556434 = sum of:
    0.13556434 = weight(_text_:22 in 4604) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13556434 = score(doc=4604,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21899058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.062536046 = queryNorm
        0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 4604, 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=4604)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    7. 2.2005 14:10:22
  7. Van der Veer Martens, B.: Do citation systems represent theories of truth? (2001) 0.03 
    0.029955769 = product of:
  0.119823076 = sum of:
    0.119823076 = weight(_text_:22 in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.119823076 = score(doc=3925,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.21899058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.062536046 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    22. 7.2006 15:22:28
  8. Frohlich, C.; Resler, L.: Analysis of publications and citations from a geophysics research institute (2001) 0.02 
    0.02400872 = product of:
  0.09603488 = sum of:
    0.09603488 = weight(_text_:assess in 5797) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09603488 = score(doc=5797,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.36863554 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.8947687 = idf(docFreq=330, maxDocs=44218)
          0.062536046 = queryNorm
        0.26051444 = fieldWeight in 5797, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.8947687 = idf(docFreq=330, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5797)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    We here perform an analysis of all 1128 publications produced by scientists during their employment at the University of Texas Institute for Geophysics, a geophysical research laboratory founded in 1972 that currently employs 23 Ph.D.-level scientists. We thus assess research performance using as bibliometric indicators such statistics as publications per year, citations per paper, and cited half-lives. To characterize the research style of individual scientists and to obtain insight into the origin of certain publication-counting discrepancies, we classified the 1128 publications into four categories that differed significantly with respect to statistics such as lifetime citation rates, fraction of papers never-cited after 10 years, and cited half-life. The categories were: mainstream (prestige journal) publications -32.6 lifetime cit/pap, 2.4% never cited, and 6.9 year half-life; archival (other refereed)-12.0 lifetime cit/pap. 21.5% never cited, and 9.5 years half-life; articles published as proceedings of conferences-5.4 lifetime cit/pap, 26.6% never cited, and 5.4 years half-life; and "other" publications (news articles, book reviews, etc.)-4.2 lifetime cit/pap, 57.1% never cited, and 1.9 years half-life. Because determining cited half-lives is highly similar to a well-studied phenomenon in earthquake seismology, which was familiar to us, we thoroughly evaluate five different methods for determining the cited half-life and discuss the robustness and limitations of the various methods. Unfortunately, even when data are numerous the various methods often obtain very different values for the half-life. Our preferred method determines halflife from the ratio of citations appearing in back-to-back 5-year periods. We also evaluate the reliability of the citation count data used for these kinds of analysis and conclude that citation count data are often imprecise. All observations suggest that reported differences in cited half-lives must be quite large to be significant
  9. Garfield, E.; Stock, W.G.: Citation Consciousness : Interview with Eugene Garfiels, chairman emeritus of ISI; Philadelphia (2002) 0.02 
    0.021181928 = product of:
  0.08472771 = sum of:
    0.08472771 = weight(_text_:22 in 613) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08472771 = score(doc=613,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21899058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.062536046 = queryNorm
        0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 613, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=613)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Password. 2002, H.6, S.22-25
  10. Larivière, V.; Gingras, Y.; Archambault, E.: ¬The decline in the concentration of citations, 1900-2007 (2009) 0.02 
    0.017973462 = product of:
  0.07189385 = sum of:
    0.07189385 = weight(_text_:22 in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07189385 = score(doc=2763,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.21899058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.062536046 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    22. 3.2009 19:22:35
  11. Bensman, S.J.: Eugene Garfield, Francis Narin, and PageRank : the theoretical bases of the Google search engine (2013) 0.02 
    0.016945543 = product of:
  0.06778217 = sum of:
    0.06778217 = weight(_text_:22 in 1149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06778217 = score(doc=1149,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21899058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.062536046 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    17.12.2013 11:02:22
  12. Garfield, E.: Recollections of Irving H. Sher 1924-1996 : Polymath/information scientist extraordinaire (2001) 0.01 
    0.014827349 = product of:
  0.059309397 = sum of:
    0.059309397 = weight(_text_:22 in 6920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.059309397 = score(doc=6920,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21899058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.062536046 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    16.12.2001 14:01:22
  13. Van der Veer Martens, B.; Goodrum, G.: ¬The diffusion of theories : a functional approach (2006) 0.01 
    0.014827349 = product of:
  0.059309397 = sum of:
    0.059309397 = weight(_text_:22 in 5269) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.059309397 = score(doc=5269,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21899058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.062536046 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    22. 7.2006 15:20:01
  14. Tay, A.: ¬The next generation discovery citation indexes : a review of the landscape in 2020 (2020) 0.01 
    0.014827349 = product of:
  0.059309397 = sum of:
    0.059309397 = weight(_text_:22 in 40) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.059309397 = score(doc=40,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21899058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.062536046 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    17.11.2020 12:22:59
  15. Campanario, J.M.: Have referees rejected some of the most-cited articles of all times? (1996) 0.01 
    0.012709156 = product of:
  0.050836623 = sum of:
    0.050836623 = weight(_text_:22 in 4215) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050836623 = score(doc=4215,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21899058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.062536046 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    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
  16. Snyder, H.; Bonzi, S.: Patterns of self-citation across disciplines : 1980-1989 (1998) 0.01 
    0.012709156 = product of:
  0.050836623 = sum of:
    0.050836623 = weight(_text_:22 in 3692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050836623 = score(doc=3692,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21899058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.062536046 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    22. 5.1999 19:33:24
  17. wst: Cut-and-paste-Wissenschaft (2003) 0.01 
    0.012709156 = product of:
  0.050836623 = sum of:
    0.050836623 = weight(_text_:22 in 1270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050836623 = score(doc=1270,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21899058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.062536046 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    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."
  18. Chan, H.C.; Kim, H.-W.; Tan, W.C.: Information systems citation patterns from International Conference on Information Systems articles (2006) 0.01 
    0.012709156 = product of:
  0.050836623 = sum of:
    0.050836623 = weight(_text_:22 in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050836623 = score(doc=201,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21899058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.062536046 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    3. 1.2007 17:22:03
  19. H-Index auch im Web of Science (2008) 0.01 
    0.012709156 = product of:
  0.050836623 = sum of:
    0.050836623 = weight(_text_:22 in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050836623 = score(doc=590,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21899058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.062536046 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    6. 4.2008 19:04:22
  20. Mingers, J.; Burrell, Q.L.: Modeling citation behavior in Management Science journals (2006) 0.01 
    0.012709156 = product of:
  0.050836623 = sum of:
    0.050836623 = weight(_text_:22 in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050836623 = score(doc=994,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21899058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.062536046 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    26.12.2007 19:22:05

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 19
  • d 5

Types

Themes