Search (119 results, page 1 of 6)

  • × theme_ss:"Informetrie"
  • × type_ss:"a"
  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  1. Van der Veer Martens, B.: Do citation systems represent theories of truth? (2001) 0.08
    0.07520176 = product of:
      0.15040351 = sum of:
        0.15040351 = sum of:
          0.049956903 = weight(_text_:2 in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.049956903 = score(doc=3925,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                0.05242341 = queryNorm
              0.38587365 = fieldWeight in 3925, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3925)
          0.10044661 = weight(_text_:22 in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.10044661 = score(doc=3925,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.05242341 = 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)
    
    Date
    22. 7.2006 15:22:28
    Footnote
    Auch unter: http:\\www.shef.ac.uk/--is/publications/infres/6-2/ paper92a.html
    Source
    Information Research. 6(2001), no.2
  2. Larivière, V.; Gingras, Y.; Archambault, E.: ¬The decline in the concentration of citations, 1900-2007 (2009) 0.04
    0.040731445 = product of:
      0.08146289 = sum of:
        0.08146289 = sum of:
          0.021194918 = weight(_text_:2 in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.021194918 = score(doc=2763,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                0.05242341 = queryNorm
              0.16371232 = fieldWeight in 2763, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2763)
          0.060267974 = weight(_text_:22 in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.060267974 = score(doc=2763,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.05242341 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This article challenges recent research (Evans, 2008) reporting that the concentration of cited scientific literature increases with the online availability of articles and journals. Using Thomson Reuters' Web of Science, the present article analyses changes in the concentration of citations received (2- and 5-year citation windows) by papers published between 1900 and 2005. Three measures of concentration are used: the percentage of papers that received at least one citation (cited papers); the percentage of papers needed to account for 20%, 50%, and 80% of the citations; and the Herfindahl-Hirschman index (HHI). These measures are used for four broad disciplines: natural sciences and engineering, medical fields, social sciences, and the humanities. All these measures converge and show that, contrary to what was reported by Evans, the dispersion of citations is actually increasing.
    Date
    22. 3.2009 19:22:35
  3. Haycock, L.A.: Citation analysis of education dissertations for collection development (2004) 0.03
    0.031905405 = product of:
      0.06381081 = sum of:
        0.06381081 = sum of:
          0.021194918 = weight(_text_:2 in 135) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.021194918 = score(doc=135,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                0.05242341 = queryNorm
              0.16371232 = fieldWeight in 135, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=135)
          0.04261589 = weight(_text_:22 in 135) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.04261589 = score(doc=135,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.05242341 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 135, 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=135)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 48(2004) no.2, S.102-106
  4. Nicolaisen, J.: Citation analysis (2007) 0.03
    0.028410593 = product of:
      0.056821186 = sum of:
        0.056821186 = product of:
          0.11364237 = sum of:
            0.11364237 = weight(_text_:22 in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.11364237 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05242341 = 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
  5. Kousha, K.; Thelwall, M.: How is science cited on the Web? : a classification of google unique Web citations (2007) 0.03
    0.026587836 = product of:
      0.053175673 = sum of:
        0.053175673 = sum of:
          0.017662432 = weight(_text_:2 in 586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.017662432 = score(doc=586,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                0.05242341 = queryNorm
              0.13642694 = fieldWeight in 586, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=586)
          0.03551324 = weight(_text_:22 in 586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03551324 = score(doc=586,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.05242341 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 586, 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=586)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Although the analysis of citations in the scholarly literature is now an established and relatively well understood part of information science, not enough is known about citations that can be found on the Web. In particular, are there new Web types, and if so, are these trivial or potentially useful for studying or evaluating research communication? We sought evidence based upon a sample of 1,577 Web citations of the URLs or titles of research articles in 64 open-access journals from biology, physics, chemistry, and computing. Only 25% represented intellectual impact, from references of Web documents (23%) and other informal scholarly sources (2%). Many of the Web/URL citations were created for general or subject-specific navigation (45%) or for self-publicity (22%). Additional analyses revealed significant disciplinary differences in the types of Google unique Web/URL citations as well as some characteristics of scientific open-access publishing on the Web. We conclude that the Web provides access to a new and different type of citation information, one that may therefore enable us to measure different aspects of research, and the research process in particular; but to obtain good information, the different types should be separated.
  6. Ball, R.: Wissenschaftsindikatoren im Zeitalter digitaler Wissenschaft (2007) 0.03
    0.026587836 = product of:
      0.053175673 = sum of:
        0.053175673 = sum of:
          0.017662432 = weight(_text_:2 in 875) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.017662432 = score(doc=875,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                0.05242341 = queryNorm
              0.13642694 = fieldWeight in 875, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=875)
          0.03551324 = weight(_text_:22 in 875) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03551324 = score(doc=875,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.05242341 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 875, 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=875)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    23.12.2007 19:22:21
    Source
    B.I.T.online. 10(2007) H.2, S.xxx-xxx
  7. Hayer, L.: Lazarsfeld zitiert : eine bibliometrische Analyse (2008) 0.03
    0.026587836 = product of:
      0.053175673 = sum of:
        0.053175673 = sum of:
          0.017662432 = weight(_text_:2 in 1934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.017662432 = score(doc=1934,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                0.05242341 = queryNorm
              0.13642694 = fieldWeight in 1934, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1934)
          0.03551324 = weight(_text_:22 in 1934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03551324 = score(doc=1934,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.05242341 = 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
  8. Lewison, G.: ¬The work of the Bibliometrics Research Group (City University) and associates (2005) 0.02
    0.021307945 = product of:
      0.04261589 = sum of:
        0.04261589 = product of:
          0.08523178 = sum of:
            0.08523178 = weight(_text_:22 in 4890) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08523178 = score(doc=4890,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05242341 = queryNorm
                0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 4890, 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=4890)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    20. 1.2007 17:02:22
  9. Wettlauf der Wissenschaft (2004) 0.02
    0.02127027 = product of:
      0.04254054 = sum of:
        0.04254054 = sum of:
          0.014129946 = weight(_text_:2 in 2495) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.014129946 = score(doc=2495,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                0.05242341 = queryNorm
              0.10914155 = fieldWeight in 2495, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2495)
          0.028410593 = weight(_text_:22 in 2495) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.028410593 = score(doc=2495,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.05242341 = queryNorm
              0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2495, 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=2495)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Online Mitteilungen. 2004, Nr.79, S.22-23 [=Mitteilungen VÖB 57(2004) H.2]
  10. Raan, A.F.J. van: Statistical properties of bibliometric indicators : research group indicator distributions and correlations (2006) 0.02
    0.015066993 = product of:
      0.030133987 = sum of:
        0.030133987 = product of:
          0.060267974 = sum of:
            0.060267974 = weight(_text_:22 in 5275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.060267974 = score(doc=5275,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05242341 = queryNorm
                0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 5275, 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=5275)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 7.2006 16:20:22
  11. Thelwall, M.; Ruschenburg, T.: Grundlagen und Forschungsfelder der Webometrie (2006) 0.01
    0.0142052965 = product of:
      0.028410593 = sum of:
        0.028410593 = product of:
          0.056821186 = sum of:
            0.056821186 = weight(_text_:22 in 77) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.056821186 = score(doc=77,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05242341 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 77, 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=77)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    4.12.2006 12:12:22
  12. Rostaing, H.; Barts, N.; Léveillé, V.: Bibliometrics: representation instrument of the multidisciplinary positioning of a scientific area : Implementation for an Advisory Scientific Committee (2007) 0.01
    0.0142052965 = product of:
      0.028410593 = sum of:
        0.028410593 = product of:
          0.056821186 = sum of:
            0.056821186 = weight(_text_:22 in 1144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.056821186 = score(doc=1144,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05242341 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1144, 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=1144)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    30.12.2007 11:22:39
  13. Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.: ¬The influence of publication delays on the observed aging distribution of scientific literature (2000) 0.01
    0.014129946 = product of:
      0.028259892 = sum of:
        0.028259892 = product of:
          0.056519784 = sum of:
            0.056519784 = weight(_text_:2 in 4385) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.056519784 = score(doc=4385,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05242341 = queryNorm
                0.4365662 = fieldWeight in 4385, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4385)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Observed aging curves are influenced by publication delays. In this article, we show how the 'undisturbed' aging function and the publication delay combine to give the observed aging function. This combination is performed by a mathematical operation known as convolution. Examples are given, such as the convolution of 2 Poisson distributions, 2 exponential distributions, a 2 lognormal distributions. A paradox is observed between theory and real data
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 51(2000) no.2, S.158-165
  14. Levitt, J.M.; Thelwall, M.: Citation levels and collaboration within library and information science (2009) 0.01
    0.012555826 = product of:
      0.025111653 = sum of:
        0.025111653 = product of:
          0.050223306 = sum of:
            0.050223306 = weight(_text_:22 in 2734) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.050223306 = score(doc=2734,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05242341 = queryNorm
                0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2734, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2734)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Collaboration is a major research policy objective, but does it deliver higher quality research? This study uses citation analysis to examine the Web of Science (WoS) Information Science & Library Science subject category (IS&LS) to ascertain whether, in general, more highly cited articles are more highly collaborative than other articles. It consists of two investigations. The first investigation is a longitudinal comparison of the degree and proportion of collaboration in five strata of citation; it found that collaboration in the highest four citation strata (all in the most highly cited 22%) increased in unison over time, whereas collaboration in the lowest citation strata (un-cited articles) remained low and stable. Given that over 40% of the articles were un-cited, it seems important to take into account the differences found between un-cited articles and relatively highly cited articles when investigating collaboration in IS&LS. The second investigation compares collaboration for 35 influential information scientists; it found that their more highly cited articles on average were not more highly collaborative than their less highly cited articles. In summary, although collaborative research is conducive to high citation in general, collaboration has apparently not tended to be essential to the success of current and former elite information scientists.
    Date
    22. 3.2009 12:43:51
  15. Burrell, Q.L.: Predicting future citation behavior (2003) 0.01
    0.012429634 = product of:
      0.024859268 = sum of:
        0.024859268 = product of:
          0.049718536 = sum of:
            0.049718536 = weight(_text_:22 in 3837) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.049718536 = score(doc=3837,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05242341 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3837, 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=3837)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    29. 3.2003 19:22:48
  16. Glänzel, W.; Moed, H.F.: Journal impact measures in bibliometric research (2002) 0.01
    0.012363703 = product of:
      0.024727406 = sum of:
        0.024727406 = product of:
          0.049454812 = sum of:
            0.049454812 = weight(_text_:2 in 2904) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.049454812 = score(doc=2904,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05242341 = queryNorm
                0.38199544 = fieldWeight in 2904, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2904)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Scientometrics. 53(2002) no.2, S.171-193
  17. Leydesdorff, L.: Can networks of journal-journal citations be used as indicators of change in the social sciences? (2003) 0.01
    0.010653973 = product of:
      0.021307945 = sum of:
        0.021307945 = product of:
          0.04261589 = sum of:
            0.04261589 = weight(_text_:22 in 4460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04261589 = score(doc=4460,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05242341 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4460, 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=4460)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    6.11.2005 19:02:22
  18. Asonuma, A.; Fang, Y.; Rousseau, R.: Reflections on the age distribution of Japanese scientists (2006) 0.01
    0.010653973 = product of:
      0.021307945 = sum of:
        0.021307945 = product of:
          0.04261589 = sum of:
            0.04261589 = weight(_text_:22 in 5270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04261589 = score(doc=5270,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05242341 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5270, 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=5270)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 7.2006 15:26:24
  19. Chan, H.C.; Kim, H.-W.; Tan, W.C.: Information systems citation patterns from International Conference on Information Systems articles (2006) 0.01
    0.010653973 = product of:
      0.021307945 = sum of:
        0.021307945 = product of:
          0.04261589 = sum of:
            0.04261589 = weight(_text_:22 in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04261589 = score(doc=201,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05242341 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    3. 1.2007 17:22:03
  20. H-Index auch im Web of Science (2008) 0.01
    0.010653973 = product of:
      0.021307945 = sum of:
        0.021307945 = product of:
          0.04261589 = sum of:
            0.04261589 = weight(_text_:22 in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04261589 = score(doc=590,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05242341 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    6. 4.2008 19:04:22

Languages

  • e 106
  • d 13