Search (95 results, page 5 of 5)

  • × theme_ss:"Elektronisches Publizieren"
  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Zeilmann, K.; Beer, K.; dpa: Tablet statt Lehrbuch : wie die Digitalisierung die Unis verändert (2016) 0.00 
    0.0040975055 = product of:
  0.032780044 = sum of:
    0.016390022 = weight(_text_:und in 2699) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016390022 = score(doc=2699,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06693185 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030198902 = queryNorm
        0.24487628 = fieldWeight in 2699, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2699)
    0.016390022 = weight(_text_:und in 2699) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016390022 = score(doc=2699,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06693185 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030198902 = queryNorm
        0.24487628 = fieldWeight in 2699, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2699)
  0.125 = coord(2/16)
    Abstract
    Die Digitalisierung verändert den Hochschulalltag. Studenten verfolgen Vorlesungen online, Texte stehen im Netz. Es entsteht aber eine Kluft zwischen Studierenden mit vielen technischen Mitteln und denen ohne.
  2. Herb, U.: Kostenpflichtiger Open Access : auch Open Access kann zu mehr Konzentration und höheren Kosten führen (2016) 0.00 
    0.004056324 = product of:
  0.03245059 = sum of:
    0.016225295 = weight(_text_:und in 959) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016225295 = score(doc=959,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06693185 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030198902 = queryNorm
        0.24241515 = fieldWeight in 959, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=959)
    0.016225295 = weight(_text_:und in 959) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016225295 = score(doc=959,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06693185 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030198902 = queryNorm
        0.24241515 = fieldWeight in 959, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=959)
  0.125 = coord(2/16)
    Abstract
    Open Access kennt verschiedene Spielarten. Der grüne Open Access ist in der Regel kostenfrei, denn hier werden Nutzern bereits in wissenschaftlichen Journalen publizierte Artikel in einer Art Zweitverwertung auf Open-Access-Servern entgeltfrei bereitgestellt. Im goldenen Open Access hingegen finden sich Journale, die Artikel ohne Publikationsgebühren im Open Access veröffentlichen, und solche, die für die Veröffentlichung der Texte eine sogenannte Article Processing Charge (APC) erheben. Daneben existiert noch der hybride Open Access: Dabei werden einzelne Artikel aus Journalen, die nicht im Open Access erscheinen, gegen entsprechende Zahlungen für die entgeltfreie Verfügbarkeit freigekauft.
  3. Bauer, B.; Stieg, K.: Open Access Publishing in Österreich 2010 (2010) 0.00 
    0.004056324 = product of:
  0.03245059 = sum of:
    0.016225295 = weight(_text_:und in 3683) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016225295 = score(doc=3683,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06693185 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030198902 = queryNorm
        0.24241515 = fieldWeight in 3683, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3683)
    0.016225295 = weight(_text_:und in 3683) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016225295 = score(doc=3683,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06693185 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030198902 = queryNorm
        0.24241515 = fieldWeight in 3683, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3683)
  0.125 = coord(2/16)
    Abstract
    Der folgende Beitrag bietet einen Überblick über die Situation von Open Access Publishing in Österreich im Jahr 2010. Zunächst werden die österreichische Beteiligung an Open-Access-Deklarationen sowie wichtige Open-Access-Veranstaltungen in Österreich dargestellt. Dann werden die Beiträge Österreichs für den Goldenen Weg zu Open Access (OA-Zeitschriften) und für den Grünen Weg zu Open Access (Repositorien) skizziert. Es folgt eine Darstellung der Open Access Policies der wichtigsten Forschungsförderungsorganisation, der größten Universität des Landes sowie der Österreichischen Universitätenkonferenz. Den Abschluss bilden die Frage nach der Finanzierung von Open Access und eine Beschreibung der geänderten gesetzlichen Rahmenbedingungen für Open Access in Österreich.
  4. Grenzebach, G.: Sichtbarkeit und Auffindbarkeit von wissenschaftlichen Artikeln in Repositorien (2018) 0.00 
    0.004056324 = product of:
  0.03245059 = sum of:
    0.016225295 = weight(_text_:und in 4969) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016225295 = score(doc=4969,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06693185 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030198902 = queryNorm
        0.24241515 = fieldWeight in 4969, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4969)
    0.016225295 = weight(_text_:und in 4969) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016225295 = score(doc=4969,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06693185 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030198902 = queryNorm
        0.24241515 = fieldWeight in 4969, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4969)
  0.125 = coord(2/16)
    Abstract
    An vielen wissenschaftlichen Institutionen gibt es Dokumentenserver (Repositorien), auf welchen Forschungsarbeiten veröffentlicht werden können. Diese sind in der Regel im Internet frei zugänglich (Open Access). Allerdings existiert kein zentrales Verzeichnis für die Publikationen, die auf solchen Repositorien veröffentlicht sind, so dass nicht von vornherein klar ist, inwieweit diese Forschungsartikel bei einer Recherche aufgefunden werden können. Dieser Aufsatz enthält Grundsätzliches zum Datenaustausch zwischen Repositorien und Suchdiensten sowie eine exemplarische Untersuchung zur Auffindbarkeit wissenschaftlicher Artikel in Repositorien anhand einiger Beispiele. Ergänzend wird zum Vergleich in kleinerem Umfang die Auffindbarkeit von Artikeln aus wissenschaftlichen Zeitschriften betrachtet.
  5. Lorenz, D.: Occupy Publishing! : Wie veröffentlichen wir in Zukunft? (2012) 0.00 
    0.0034768488 = product of:
  0.02781479 = sum of:
    0.013907395 = weight(_text_:und in 5596) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013907395 = score(doc=5596,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06693185 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030198902 = queryNorm
        0.20778441 = fieldWeight in 5596, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5596)
    0.013907395 = weight(_text_:und in 5596) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013907395 = score(doc=5596,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06693185 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030198902 = queryNorm
        0.20778441 = fieldWeight in 5596, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5596)
  0.125 = coord(2/16)
    Abstract
    "Über 1000 Mathematikerinnen und Mathematiker aus aller Welt erklären öffentlich ihren Boykott des Elsevier-Verlages auf der Webseite http://thecostofknowledge.com, und unter dem gleichen Namen veröffentlichen 34 namhafte Mathematiker einen offenen Brief, in dem sie in klarer Sprache den Verlag kritisieren (siehe auch die deutsche Übersetzung des offenen Briefes ab Seite 16 dieses Heftes): "What all the signatories do agree on is that Elsevier is an exemplar of everything that is wrong with the current system of commercial publication of mathematics journals, and we will no longer acquiesce to Elsevier's harvesting of the value of our and our colleagues' work." Wie konnte es dazu kommen? Die Geschichte beginnt wahrscheinlich schon dent Ende der 90er Jahre von Rob Kirby, doch mit Hilfe des Web 2.0 hat vor langer Zeit, zuminmit einem offenen Brief sie in den vergangenen Monaten erstaunlich an Fahrt gewonnen. Der Beitrag bietet eine kurze Chronologie der Ereignisse."
  6. Loos, A.: ¬Die Million ist geknackt (2015) 0.00 
    0.0015343253 = product of:
  0.024549205 = sum of:
    0.024549205 = product of:
      0.04909841 = sum of:
        0.04909841 = weight(_text_:22 in 4208) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04909841 = score(doc=4208,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10575141 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030198902 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 4208, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4208)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.0625 = coord(1/16)
    Date
    7. 4.2015 17:22:03
  7. Shen, W.; Stempfhuber, M.: Embedding discussion in online publications (2013) 0.00 
    0.0013142423 = product of:
  0.021027876 = sum of:
    0.021027876 = weight(_text_:wissenschaft in 940) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021027876 = score(doc=940,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.119870074 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.969352 = idf(docFreq=2269, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030198902 = queryNorm
        0.17542224 = fieldWeight in 940, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.969352 = idf(docFreq=2269, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=940)
  0.0625 = coord(1/16)
    Source
    Wissen - Wissenschaft - Organisation: Proceedings der 12. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation Bonn, 19. bis 21. Oktober 2009. Hrsg.: H.P. Ohly
  8. Benoit, G.; Hussey, L.: Repurposing digital objects : case studies across the publishing industry (2011) 0.00 
    8.950231E-4 = product of:
  0.01432037 = sum of:
    0.01432037 = product of:
      0.02864074 = sum of:
        0.02864074 = weight(_text_:22 in 4198) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02864074 = score(doc=4198,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10575141 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030198902 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4198, 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=4198)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.0625 = coord(1/16)
    Date
    22. 1.2011 14:23:07
  9. Walters, W.H.; Linvill, A.C.: Bibliographic index coverage of open-access journals in six subject areas (2011) 0.00 
    6.3930225E-4 = product of:
  0.010228836 = sum of:
    0.010228836 = product of:
      0.020457672 = sum of:
        0.020457672 = weight(_text_:22 in 4635) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020457672 = score(doc=4635,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10575141 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030198902 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4635, 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=4635)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.0625 = coord(1/16)
    Abstract
    We investigate the extent to which open-access (OA) journals and articles in biology, computer science, economics, history, medicine, and psychology are indexed in each of 11 bibliographic databases. We also look for variations in index coverage by journal subject, journal size, publisher type, publisher size, date of first OA issue, region of publication, language of publication, publication fee, and citation impact factor. Two databases, Biological Abstracts and PubMed, provide very good coverage of the OA journal literature, indexing 60 to 63% of all OA articles in their disciplines. Five databases provide moderately good coverage (22-41%), and four provide relatively poor coverage (0-12%). OA articles in biology journals, English-only journals, high-impact journals, and journals that charge publication fees of $1,000 or more are especially likely to be indexed. Conversely, articles from OA publishers in Africa, Asia, or Central/South America are especially unlikely to be indexed. Four of the 11 databases index commercially published articles at a substantially higher rate than articles published by universities, scholarly societies, nonprofit publishers, or governments. Finally, three databases-EBSCO Academic Search Complete, ProQuest Research Library, and Wilson OmniFile-provide less comprehensive coverage of OA articles than of articles in comparable subscription journals.
  10. Li, X.; Thelwall, M.; Kousha, K.: ¬The role of arXiv, RePEc, SSRN and PMC in formal scholarly communication (2015) 0.00 
    6.3930225E-4 = product of:
  0.010228836 = sum of:
    0.010228836 = product of:
      0.020457672 = sum of:
        0.020457672 = weight(_text_:22 in 2593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020457672 = score(doc=2593,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10575141 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030198902 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2593, 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=2593)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.0625 = coord(1/16)
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
  11. Moed, H.F.; Halevi, G.: On full text download and citation distributions in scientific-scholarly journals (2016) 0.00 
    6.3930225E-4 = product of:
  0.010228836 = sum of:
    0.010228836 = product of:
      0.020457672 = sum of:
        0.020457672 = weight(_text_:22 in 2646) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020457672 = score(doc=2646,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10575141 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030198902 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2646, 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=2646)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.0625 = coord(1/16)
    Date
    22. 1.2016 14:11:17
  12. Ortega, J.L.: ¬The presence of academic journals on Twitter and its relationship with dissemination (tweets) and research impact (citations) (2017) 0.00 
    6.3930225E-4 = product of:
  0.010228836 = sum of:
    0.010228836 = product of:
      0.020457672 = sum of:
        0.020457672 = weight(_text_:22 in 4410) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020457672 = score(doc=4410,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10575141 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030198902 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4410, 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=4410)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.0625 = coord(1/16)
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
  13. Somers, J.: Torching the modern-day library of Alexandria : somewhere at Google there is a database containing 25 million books and nobody is allowed to read them. (2017) 0.00 
    5.114418E-4 = product of:
  0.008183069 = sum of:
    0.008183069 = product of:
      0.016366137 = sum of:
        0.016366137 = weight(_text_:22 in 3608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016366137 = score(doc=3608,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10575141 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030198902 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 3608, 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=3608)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.0625 = coord(1/16)
    Abstract
    You were going to get one-click access to the full text of nearly every book that's ever been published. Books still in print you'd have to pay for, but everything else-a collection slated to grow larger than the holdings at the Library of Congress, Harvard, the University of Michigan, at any of the great national libraries of Europe-would have been available for free at terminals that were going to be placed in every local library that wanted one. At the terminal you were going to be able to search tens of millions of books and read every page of any book you found. You'd be able to highlight passages and make annotations and share them; for the first time, you'd be able to pinpoint an idea somewhere inside the vastness of the printed record, and send somebody straight to it with a link. Books would become as instantly available, searchable, copy-pasteable-as alive in the digital world-as web pages. It was to be the realization of a long-held dream. "The universal library has been talked about for millennia," Richard Ovenden, the head of Oxford's Bodleian Libraries, has said. "It was possible to think in the Renaissance that you might be able to amass the whole of published knowledge in a single room or a single institution." In the spring of 2011, it seemed we'd amassed it in a terminal small enough to fit on a desk. "This is a watershed event and can serve as a catalyst for the reinvention of education, research, and intellectual life," one eager observer wrote at the time. On March 22 of that year, however, the legal agreement that would have unlocked a century's worth of books and peppered the country with access terminals to a universal library was rejected under Rule 23(e)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. When the library at Alexandria burned it was said to be an "international catastrophe." When the most significant humanities project of our time was dismantled in court, the scholars, archivists, and librarians who'd had a hand in its undoing breathed a sigh of relief, for they believed, at the time, that they had narrowly averted disaster.
  14. Costas, R.; Perianes-Rodríguez, A.; Ruiz-Castillo, J.: On the quest for currencies of science : field "exchange rates" for citations and Mendeley readership (2017) 0.00 
    5.114418E-4 = product of:
  0.008183069 = sum of:
    0.008183069 = product of:
      0.016366137 = sum of:
        0.016366137 = weight(_text_:22 in 4051) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016366137 = score(doc=4051,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10575141 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030198902 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 4051, 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=4051)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.0625 = coord(1/16)
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
  15. Engels, T.C.E; Istenic Starcic, A.; Kulczycki, E.; Pölönen, J.; Sivertsen, G.: Are book publications disappearing from scholarly communication in the social sciences and humanities? (2018) 0.00 
    5.114418E-4 = product of:
  0.008183069 = sum of:
    0.008183069 = product of:
      0.016366137 = sum of:
        0.016366137 = weight(_text_:22 in 4631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016366137 = score(doc=4631,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10575141 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030198902 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 4631, 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=4631)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.0625 = coord(1/16)
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22

Authors

Languages

  • d 83
  • e 10

Types

  • a 80
  • el 32
  • m 4
  • s 3
  • r 1
  • x 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications