Search (10 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Informetrie"
  • × type_ss:"a"
  • × type_ss:"el"
  1. Momeni, F.; Mayr, P.: Analyzing the research output presented at European Networked Knowledge Organization Systems workshops (2000-2015) (2016) 0.01
    0.008037162 = product of:
      0.07233446 = sum of:
        0.07233446 = weight(_text_:germany in 3106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07233446 = score(doc=3106,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21956629 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.963546 = idf(docFreq=308, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036818076 = queryNorm
            0.32944247 = fieldWeight in 3106, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.963546 = idf(docFreq=308, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3106)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Source
    Proceedings of the 15th European Networked Knowledge Organization Systems Workshop (NKOS 2016) co-located with the 20th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Digital Libraries 2016 (TPDL 2016), Hannover, Germany, September 9, 2016. Edi. by Philipp Mayr et al. [http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1676/=urn:nbn:de:0074-1676-5]
  2. Lamb, I.; Larson, C.: Shining a light on scientific data : building a data catalog to foster data sharing and reuse (2016) 0.01
    0.0076693306 = product of:
      0.069023974 = sum of:
        0.069023974 = weight(_text_:data in 3195) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.069023974 = score(doc=3195,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.11642061 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036818076 = queryNorm
            0.5928845 = fieldWeight in 3195, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3195)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    The scientific community's growing eagerness to make research data available to the public provides libraries - with our expertise in metadata and discovery - an interesting new opportunity. This paper details the in-house creation of a "data catalog" which describes datasets ranging from population-level studies like the US Census to small, specialized datasets created by researchers at our own institution. Based on Symfony2 and Solr, the data catalog provides a powerful search interface to help researchers locate the data that can help them, and an administrative interface so librarians can add, edit, and manage metadata elements at will. This paper will outline the successes, failures, and total redos that culminated in the current manifestation of our data catalog.
  3. Williams, B.: Dimensions & VOSViewer bibliometrics in the reference interview (2020) 0.01
    0.0063268747 = product of:
      0.05694187 = sum of:
        0.05694187 = weight(_text_:data in 5719) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05694187 = score(doc=5719,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.11642061 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036818076 = queryNorm
            0.48910472 = fieldWeight in 5719, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5719)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    The VOSviewer software provides easy access to bibliometric mapping using data from Dimensions, Scopus and Web of Science. The properly formatted and structured citation data, and the ease in which it can be exported open up new avenues for use during citation searches and eference interviews. This paper details specific techniques for using advanced searches in Dimensions, exporting the citation data, and drawing insights from the maps produced in VOS Viewer. These search techniques and data export practices are fast and accurate enough to build into reference interviews for graduate students, faculty, and post-PhD researchers. The search results derived from them are accurate and allow a more comprehensive view of citation networks embedded in ordinary complex boolean searches.
  4. Gutierres Castanha, R.C.; Hilário, C.M.; Araújo, P.C. de; Cabrini Grácio, M.C.: Citation analysis of North American Symposium on Knowledge Organization (NASKO) Proceedings (2007-2015) (2017) 0.00
    0.004843811 = product of:
      0.0435943 = sum of:
        0.0435943 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 3863) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0435943 = score(doc=3863,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14333439 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036818076 = queryNorm
            0.30414405 = fieldWeight in 3863, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3863)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    Knowledge Organization (KO) theoretical foundations are still being developed in a continuous process of epistemological, theoretical and methodological consolidation. The remarkable growth of scientific records has stimulated the analysis of this production and the creation of instruments to evaluate the behavior of science became indispensable. We propose the Domain Analysis of KO in North America through the citation analysis of North American Symposium on Knowledge Organization (NASKO) proceedings (2007 - 2015). We present the citation, co-citation and bibliographic coupling analysis to visualize and recognize the researchers that influence the scholarly communication in this domain. The most prolific authors through NASKO conferences are Smiraglia, Tennis, Green, Dousa, Grant Campbell, Pimentel, Beak, La Barre, Kipp and Fox. Regarding their theoretical references, Hjørland, Olson, Smiraglia, and Ranganathan are the authors who most inspired the event's studies. The co-citation network shows the highest frequency is between Olson and Mai, followed by Hjørland and Mai and Beghtol and Mai, consolidating Mai and Hjørland as the central authors of the theoretical references in NASKO. The strongest theoretical proximity in author bibliographic coupling network occurs between Fox and Tennis, Dousa and Tennis, Tennis and Smiraglia, Dousa and Beak, and Pimentel and Tennis, highlighting Tennis as central author, that interconnects the others in relation to KO theoretical references in NASKO. The North American chapter has demonstrated a strong scientific production as well as a high level of concern with theoretical and epistemological questions, gathering researchers from different countries, universities and knowledge areas.
  5. Van der Veer Martens, B.: Do citation systems represent theories of truth? (2001) 0.00
    0.0039192108 = product of:
      0.035272896 = sum of:
        0.035272896 = product of:
          0.07054579 = sum of:
            0.07054579 = weight(_text_:22 in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07054579 = score(doc=3925,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.12893063 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.036818076 = 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)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Date
    22. 7.2006 15:22:28
  6. Herb, U.: Überwachungskapitalismus und Wissenschaftssteuerung (2019) 0.00
    0.003615357 = product of:
      0.032538213 = sum of:
        0.032538213 = weight(_text_:data in 5624) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032538213 = score(doc=5624,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11642061 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036818076 = queryNorm
            0.2794884 = fieldWeight in 5624, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5624)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Content
    Der Text ist eine überarbeitete Version des von Herb, U. (2018): Zwangsehen und Bastarde : Wohin steuert Big Data die Wissenschaft? In: Information - Wissenschaft & Praxis, 69(2-3), S. 81-88. DOI:10.1515/iwp-2018-0021.
  7. Krattenthaler, C.: Was der h-Index wirklich aussagt (2021) 0.00
    0.003615357 = product of:
      0.032538213 = sum of:
        0.032538213 = weight(_text_:data in 407) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032538213 = score(doc=407,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11642061 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036818076 = queryNorm
            0.2794884 = fieldWeight in 407, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=407)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Content
    Vgl.: DOI: 10.1515/dmvm-2021-0050. Auch abgedruckt u.d.T.: 'Der h-Index - "ein nutzloser bibliometrischer Index"' in Open Password Nr. 1007 vom 06.12.2021 unter: https://www.password-online.de/?mailpoet_router&endpoint=view_in_browser&action=view&data=WzM3NCwiZDI3MzMzOTEwMzUzIiwwLDAsMzQ4LDFd.
  8. Harzing, A.-W.: Comparing the Google Scholar h-index with the ISI Journal Impact Factor (2008) 0.00
    0.0031634374 = product of:
      0.028470935 = sum of:
        0.028470935 = weight(_text_:data in 855) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028470935 = score(doc=855,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11642061 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036818076 = queryNorm
            0.24455236 = fieldWeight in 855, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=855)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    Publication in academic journals is a key criterion for appointment, tenure and promotion in universities. Many universities weigh publications according to the quality or impact of the journal. Traditionally, journal quality has been assessed through the ISI Journal Impact Factor (JIF). This paper proposes an alternative metric - Hirsch's h-index - and data source - Google Scholar - to assess journal impact. Using a systematic comparison between the Google Scholar h-index and the ISI JIF for a sample of 838 journals in Economics & Business, we argue that the former provides a more accurate and comprehensive measure of journal impact.
  9. Klein, A.: Von der Schneeflocke zur Lawine : Möglichkeiten der Nutzung freier Zitationsdaten in Bibliotheken (2017) 0.00
    0.0031634374 = product of:
      0.028470935 = sum of:
        0.028470935 = weight(_text_:data in 4002) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028470935 = score(doc=4002,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11642061 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036818076 = queryNorm
            0.24455236 = fieldWeight in 4002, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4002)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    Zitationen spielen eine wichtige Rolle im wissenschaftlichen Diskurs, in der Recherchepraxis sowie im Bereich der Bibliometrie. In jüngster Zeit gibt es zunehmend Initiativen, die Zitationen als Open Data zur freien Nachnutzung verfügbar machen. Der Beitrag beschreibt den Stand der Entwicklung dieser Initiativen und zeigt, dass in nächster Zeit eine kritische Masse von Daten entstehen könnte, aus denen sich gerade für Bibliotheken neue Perspektiven ergeben. Als konkrete Möglichkeit zur Partizipation für Bibliotheken wird das DFG-Projekt Linked Open Citation Database (LOC-DB) vorgestellt.
  10. Braun, S.: Manifold: a custom analytics platform to visualize research impact (2015) 0.00
    0.0027115175 = product of:
      0.024403658 = sum of:
        0.024403658 = weight(_text_:data in 2906) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024403658 = score(doc=2906,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11642061 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036818076 = queryNorm
            0.2096163 = fieldWeight in 2906, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2906)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    The use of research impact metrics and analytics has become an integral component to many aspects of institutional assessment. Many platforms currently exist to provide such analytics, both proprietary and open source; however, the functionality of these systems may not always overlap to serve uniquely specific needs. In this paper, I describe a novel web-based platform, named Manifold, that I built to serve custom research impact assessment needs in the University of Minnesota Medical School. Built on a standard LAMP architecture, Manifold automatically pulls publication data for faculty from Scopus through APIs, calculates impact metrics through automated analytics, and dynamically generates report-like profiles that visualize those metrics. Work on this project has resulted in many lessons learned about challenges to sustainability and scalability in developing a system of such magnitude.