Search (105 results, page 1 of 6)

0.08253631 = sum of:
  0.018147085 = product of:
    0.07258834 = sum of:
      0.07258834 = weight(_text_:authors in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07258834 = score(doc=201,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.24019209 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.30220953 = fieldWeight in 201, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=201)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.06438923 = sum of:
    0.021558736 = weight(_text_:h in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021558736 = score(doc=201,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13089918 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052687407 = queryNorm
        0.16469726 = fieldWeight in 201, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=201)
    0.042830497 = weight(_text_:22 in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042830497 = score(doc=201,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18450232 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052687407 = 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)

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

0.05770942 = sum of:
  0.03629417 = product of:
    0.14517668 = sum of:
      0.14517668 = weight(_text_:authors in 4215) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.14517668 = score(doc=4215,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.24019209 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.60441905 = fieldWeight in 4215, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4215)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.021415249 = product of:
    0.042830497 = sum of:
      0.042830497 = weight(_text_:22 in 4215) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042830497 = score(doc=4215,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18450232 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = 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)

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

0.053657696 = product of:
  0.10731539 = sum of:
    0.10731539 = sum of:
      0.03593123 = weight(_text_:h in 613) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03593123 = score(doc=613,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13089918 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.27449545 = fieldWeight in 613, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=613)
      0.07138416 = weight(_text_:22 in 613) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07138416 = score(doc=613,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18450232 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Password. 2002, H.6, S.22-25

0.049934775 = product of:
  0.09986955 = sum of:
    0.09986955 = sum of:
      0.057039056 = weight(_text_:h in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.057039056 = score(doc=590,freq=14.0), product of:
          0.13089918 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.435748 = fieldWeight in 590, product of:
            3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
              14.0 = termFreq=14.0
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=590)
      0.042830497 = weight(_text_:22 in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042830497 = score(doc=590,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18450232 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = 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)

Content

"Zur Kurzmitteilung "Latest enhancements in Scopus: ... h-Index incorporated in Scopus" in den letzten Online-Mitteilungen (Online-Mitteilungen 92, S.31) ist zu korrigieren, dass der h-Index sehr wohl bereits im Web of Science enthalten ist. Allerdings findet man/frau diese Information nicht in der "cited ref search", sondern neben der Trefferliste einer Quick Search, General Search oder einer Suche über den Author Finder in der rechten Navigationsleiste unter dem Titel "Citation Report". Der "Citation Report" bietet für die in der jeweiligen Trefferliste angezeigten Arbeiten: - Die Gesamtzahl der Zitierungen aller Arbeiten in der Trefferliste - Die mittlere Zitationshäufigkeit dieser Arbeiten - Die Anzahl der Zitierungen der einzelnen Arbeiten, aufgeschlüsselt nach Publikationsjahr der zitierenden Arbeiten - Die mittlere Zitationshäufigkeit dieser Arbeiten pro Jahr - Den h-Index (ein h-Index von x sagt aus, dass x Arbeiten der Trefferliste mehr als x-mal zitiert wurden; er ist gegenüber sehr hohen Zitierungen einzelner Arbeiten unempfindlicher als die mittlere Zitationshäufigkeit)."

Date

6. 4.2008 19:04:22

Object

H-Index

Source

Mitteilungen der Vereinigung Österreichischer Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare. 61(2008) H.1, S.124-125

0.042769507 = product of:
  0.08553901 = sum of:
    0.08553901 = sum of:
      0.0355701 = weight(_text_:h in 6920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0355701 = score(doc=6920,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.13089918 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.27173662 = fieldWeight in 6920, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6920)
      0.049968913 = weight(_text_:22 in 6920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049968913 = score(doc=6920,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18450232 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = 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)

Abstract

Over a 35-year period, Irving H. Sher played a critical role in the development and implementation of the Science Citation Index and other ISI products. Trained as a biochemist, statistician, and linguist, Sher brought a unique combination of talents to ISI as Director of Quality Control and Director of Research and Development. His talents as a teacher and mentor evoked loyalty. He was a particularly inventive but self-taught programmer. In addition to the SCI, Social Sciences Citation Index, and Arts and Humanities Citation Index,

Date

16.12.2001 14:01:22

0.041328907 = sum of:
  0.027052077 = product of:
    0.108208306 = sum of:
      0.108208306 = weight(_text_:authors in 5171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.108208306 = score(doc=5171,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.24019209 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.45050737 = fieldWeight in 5171, product of:
            3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
              10.0 = termFreq=10.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5171)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.014276832 = product of:
    0.028553665 = sum of:
      0.028553665 = weight(_text_:22 in 5171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.028553665 = score(doc=5171,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18450232 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = 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)

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

0.032194614 = product of:
  0.06438923 = sum of:
    0.06438923 = sum of:
      0.021558736 = weight(_text_:h in 3692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.021558736 = score(doc=3692,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13089918 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.16469726 = fieldWeight in 3692, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3692)
      0.042830497 = weight(_text_:22 in 3692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042830497 = score(doc=3692,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18450232 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = 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)

Date

22. 5.1999 19:33:24

0.032194614 = product of:
  0.06438923 = sum of:
    0.06438923 = sum of:
      0.021558736 = weight(_text_:h in 1270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.021558736 = score(doc=1270,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13089918 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.16469726 = fieldWeight in 1270, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1270)
      0.042830497 = weight(_text_:22 in 1270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042830497 = score(doc=1270,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18450232 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = 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)

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."

Source

c't. 2003, H.1, S.38

0.028926453 = sum of:
  0.018147085 = product of:
    0.07258834 = sum of:
      0.07258834 = weight(_text_:authors in 1825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07258834 = score(doc=1825,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.24019209 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.30220953 = fieldWeight in 1825, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1825)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.010779368 = product of:
    0.021558736 = sum of:
      0.021558736 = weight(_text_:h in 1825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.021558736 = score(doc=1825,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13089918 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.16469726 = fieldWeight in 1825, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1825)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Reports results of a study to investigate the place and role of citation analysis in selected disciplines in the social sciences, including library and information science. 5 core library and information science periodicals: Journal of documentation; Library quarterly; Journal of the American Society for Information Science; College and research libraries; and the Journal of information science, were studed to determine the percentage of articles devoted to citation analysis and develop an indictive typology to categorize the major foci of research being conducted under the rubric of citation analysis. Similar analysis was conducted for periodicals in other social sciences disciplines. Demonstrates how the rubric can be used to dertermine how citatiion analysis is applied within library and information science and other disciplines. By isolating citation from bibliometrics in general, this work is differentiated from other, previous studies. Analysis of data from a 10 year sample of transdisciplinary social sciences literature suggests that 2 application areas predominate: the validity of citation as an evaluation tool; and impact or performance studies of authors, periodicals, and institutions

0.028553665 = product of:
  0.05710733 = sum of:
    0.05710733 = product of:
      0.11421466 = sum of:
        0.11421466 = weight(_text_:22 in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11421466 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18450232 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052687407 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

13. 7.2008 19:53:22

0.028553665 = product of:
  0.05710733 = sum of:
    0.05710733 = product of:
      0.11421466 = sum of:
        0.11421466 = weight(_text_:22 in 4604) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11421466 = score(doc=4604,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18450232 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052687407 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

7. 2.2005 14:10:22

0.026828848 = product of:
  0.053657696 = sum of:
    0.053657696 = sum of:
      0.017965615 = weight(_text_:h in 1934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.017965615 = score(doc=1934,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13089918 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.13724773 = fieldWeight in 1934, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1934)
      0.03569208 = weight(_text_:22 in 1934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03569208 = score(doc=1934,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18450232 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1934, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1934)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 6.2008 12:54:12

Source

Mitteilungen der Vereinigung Österreichischer Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare. 61(2008) H.2, S.14-20

0.025238112 = product of:
  0.050476223 = sum of:
    0.050476223 = product of:
      0.10095245 = sum of:
        0.10095245 = weight(_text_:22 in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10095245 = score(doc=3925,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18450232 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052687407 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 7.2006 15:22:28

0.02419611 = product of:
  0.04839222 = sum of:
    0.04839222 = product of:
      0.19356889 = sum of:
        0.19356889 = weight(_text_:authors in 6903) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.19356889 = score(doc=6903,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24019209 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052687407 = queryNorm
            0.80589205 = fieldWeight in 6903, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6903)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.024105377 = sum of:
  0.01512257 = product of:
    0.06049028 = sum of:
      0.06049028 = weight(_text_:authors in 3998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06049028 = score(doc=3998,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.24019209 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.25184128 = fieldWeight in 3998, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3998)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.008982807 = product of:
    0.017965615 = sum of:
      0.017965615 = weight(_text_:h in 3998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.017965615 = score(doc=3998,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13089918 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.13724773 = fieldWeight in 3998, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3998)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In this study, reference standards and reference multipliers are suggested as a means to compare the citation impact of earlier research publications in physics (from the period of "Little Science" in the early 20th century) with that of contemporary papers (from the period of "Big Science," beginning around 1960). For the development of time-specific reference standards, the authors determined (a) the mean citation rates of papers in selected physics journals as well as (b) the mean citation rates of all papers in physics published in 1900 (Little Science) and in 2000 (Big Science); this was accomplished by relying on the processes of field-specific standardization in bibliometry. For the sake of developing reference multipliers with which the citation impact of earlier papers can be adjusted to the citation impact of contemporary papers, they combined the reference standards calculated for 1900 and 2000 into their ratio. The use of reference multipliers is demonstrated by means of two examples involving the time adjusted h index values for Max Planck and Albert Einstein.

0.021463078 = product of:
  0.042926155 = sum of:
    0.042926155 = sum of:
      0.014372491 = weight(_text_:h in 5034) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.014372491 = score(doc=5034,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13089918 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.10979818 = fieldWeight in 5034, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5034)
      0.028553665 = weight(_text_:22 in 5034) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.028553665 = score(doc=5034,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18450232 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052687407 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 5034, 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=5034)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

4. 6.2006 17:22:15

Source

Online Mitteilungen. 2006, Nr.85, S.18-20 [=Mitteilungen VÖB 59(2006) H.1]

0.021386545 = product of:
  0.04277309 = sum of:
    0.04277309 = product of:
      0.17109236 = sum of:
        0.17109236 = weight(_text_:authors in 3293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.17109236 = score(doc=3293,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.24019209 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052687407 = queryNorm
            0.7123147 = fieldWeight in 3293, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3293)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Citing authors' names in indexes and references can cause great difficulties, as ghosts, subterfuges, and collaborative teamwork may often obscure the true begetters of published works. Presents a collection of facts and findings about authors that relate in one way or another to their names

0.020289056 = product of:
  0.040578112 = sum of:
    0.040578112 = product of:
      0.16231245 = sum of:
        0.16231245 = weight(_text_:authors in 1080) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.16231245 = score(doc=1080,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.24019209 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052687407 = queryNorm
            0.67576104 = fieldWeight in 1080, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1080)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

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.

0.018335143 = product of:
  0.036670286 = sum of:
    0.036670286 = product of:
      0.14668114 = sum of:
        0.14668114 = weight(_text_:authors in 1259) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14668114 = score(doc=1259,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.24019209 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052687407 = queryNorm
            0.61068267 = fieldWeight in 1259, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1259)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The increasing availability of digital libraries with cross-citation data on the Internet enables new studies in bibliometrics. The paper focuses on the list of 10.000 top-cited authors in computer science available as part of CiteSeer. Using data from several consecutive lists a model of how authors accrue citations with time is constructed. By comparing the rate at which individual authors accrue citations with the average rate, predictions are made of how their ranking in the list will change in the future.

0.01778505 = product of:
  0.0355701 = sum of:
    0.0355701 = product of:
      0.0711402 = sum of:
        0.0711402 = weight(_text_:h in 4378) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0711402 = score(doc=4378,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13089918 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052687407 = queryNorm
            0.54347324 = fieldWeight in 4378, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4378)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Online Mitteilungen. 1999, Nr.65, S.3-6 [=Mitteilungen VÖB 52(1999) H.3/4]