-
Nicolaisen, J.: Citation analysis (2007)
0.06
0.059740834 = product of:
0.11948167 = sum of:
0.11948167 = product of:
0.1792225 = sum of:
0.08092907 = weight(_text_:j in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08092907 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14407694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = queryNorm
0.5617073 = fieldWeight in 6091, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6091)
0.098293416 = weight(_text_:22 in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.098293416 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15878315 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 13. 7.2008 19:53:22
-
Egghe, L.: Empirical and combinatorial study of country occurrences in multi-authored papers (2006)
0.04
0.03918711 = product of:
0.07837422 = sum of:
0.07837422 = product of:
0.117561325 = sum of:
0.060696803 = weight(_text_:j in 81) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.060696803 = score(doc=81,freq=18.0), product of:
0.14407694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = queryNorm
0.42128047 = fieldWeight in 81, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=81)
0.056864522 = weight(_text_:m in 81) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056864522 = score(doc=81,freq=42.0), product of:
0.11283351 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = queryNorm
0.5039684 = fieldWeight in 81, product of:
6.4807405 = tf(freq=42.0), with freq of:
42.0 = termFreq=42.0
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=81)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Papers written by several authors can be classified according to the countries of the author affiliations. The empirical part of this paper consists of two datasets. One dataset consists of 1,035 papers retrieved via the search "pedagog*" in the years 2004 and 2005 (up to October) in Academic Search Elite which is a case where phi(m) = the number of papers with m =1, 2,3 ... authors is decreasing, hence most of the papers have a low number of authors. Here we find that #, m = the number of times a country occurs j times in a m-authored paper, j =1, ..., m-1 is decreasing and that # m, m is much higher than all the other #j, m values. The other dataset consists of 3,271 papers retrieved via the search "enzyme" in the year 2005 (up to October) in the same database which is a case of a non-decreasing phi(m): most papers have 3 or 4 authors and we even find many papers with a much higher number of authors. In this case we show again that # m, m is much higher than the other #j, m values but that #j, m is not decreasing anymore in j =1, ..., m-1, although #1, m is (apart from # m, m) the largest number amongst the #j,m. The combinatorial part gives a proof of the fact that #j,m decreases for j = 1, m-1, supposing that all cases are equally possible. This shows that the first dataset is more conform with this model than the second dataset. Explanations for these findings are given. From the data we also find the (we think: new) distribution of number of papers with n =1, 2,3,... countries (i.e. where there are n different countries involved amongst the m (a n) authors of a paper): a fast decreasing function e.g. as a power law with a very large Lotka exponent.
-
Chen, C.-M.: Classification of scientific networks using aggregated journal-journal citation relations in the Journal Citation Reports (2008)
0.03
0.02581983 = product of:
0.05163966 = sum of:
0.05163966 = product of:
0.07745949 = sum of:
0.06194842 = weight(_text_:j in 2690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06194842 = score(doc=2690,freq=12.0), product of:
0.14407694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = queryNorm
0.4299676 = fieldWeight in 2690, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2690)
0.015511071 = weight(_text_:m in 2690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015511071 = score(doc=2690,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11283351 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = queryNorm
0.13746867 = fieldWeight in 2690, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2690)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- I propose an approach to classifying scientific networks in terms of aggregated journal-journal citation relations of the ISI Journal Citation Reports using the affinity propagation method. This algorithm is applied to obtain the classification of SCI and SSCI journals by minimizing intracategory journal-journal (J-J) distances in the database, where distance between journals is calculated from the similarity of their annual citation patterns with a cutoff parameter, t, to restrain the maximal J-J distance. As demonstrated in the classification of SCI journals, classification of scientific networks with different resolution is possible by choosing proper values of t. Twenty journal categories in SCI are found to be stable despite a difference of an order of magnitude in t. In our classifications, the level of specificity of a category can be found by looking at its value of RJ (the average distance of members of a category to its representative journal), and relatedness of category members is implied by the value of DJ-J (the average DJ-J distance within a category). Our results are consistent with the ISI classification scheme, and the level of relatedness for most categories in our classification is higher than their counterpart in the ISI classification scheme.
-
Thelwall, M.; Ruschenburg, T.: Grundlagen und Forschungsfelder der Webometrie (2006)
0.02
0.02465481 = product of:
0.04930962 = sum of:
0.04930962 = product of:
0.073964424 = sum of:
0.024817714 = weight(_text_:m in 77) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024817714 = score(doc=77,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11283351 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = queryNorm
0.21994986 = fieldWeight in 77, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=77)
0.049146708 = weight(_text_:22 in 77) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049146708 = score(doc=77,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15878315 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 4.12.2006 12:12:22
-
Mingers, J.; Burrell, Q.L.: Modeling citation behavior in Management Science journals (2006)
0.02
0.022402812 = product of:
0.044805624 = sum of:
0.044805624 = product of:
0.06720843 = sum of:
0.030348403 = weight(_text_:j in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030348403 = score(doc=994,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14407694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = queryNorm
0.21064025 = fieldWeight in 994, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=994)
0.03686003 = weight(_text_:22 in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03686003 = score(doc=994,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15878315 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 994, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=994)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 26.12.2007 19:22:05
-
Camacho-Miñano, M.-del-Mar; Núñez-Nickel, M.: ¬The multilayered nature of reference selection (2009)
0.02
0.021061063 = product of:
0.042122126 = sum of:
0.042122126 = product of:
0.06318319 = sum of:
0.026323162 = weight(_text_:m in 2751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026323162 = score(doc=2751,freq=4.0), product of:
0.11283351 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = queryNorm
0.23329206 = fieldWeight in 2751, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2751)
0.03686003 = weight(_text_:22 in 2751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03686003 = score(doc=2751,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15878315 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2751, 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=2751)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 3.2009 19:05:07
-
Levitt, J.M.; Thelwall, M.: Citation levels and collaboration within library and information science (2009)
0.02
0.019650346 = product of:
0.03930069 = sum of:
0.03930069 = product of:
0.058951035 = sum of:
0.015511071 = weight(_text_:m in 2734) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015511071 = score(doc=2734,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11283351 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = queryNorm
0.13746867 = fieldWeight in 2734, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2734)
0.043439962 = weight(_text_:22 in 2734) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043439962 = score(doc=2734,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15878315 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
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
-
Raan, A.F.J. van: Scaling rules in the science system : influence of field-specific citation characteristics on the impact of research groups (2008)
0.02
0.018491106 = product of:
0.036982212 = sum of:
0.036982212 = product of:
0.055473316 = sum of:
0.018613286 = weight(_text_:m in 2758) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018613286 = score(doc=2758,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11283351 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = queryNorm
0.1649624 = fieldWeight in 2758, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2758)
0.03686003 = weight(_text_:22 in 2758) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03686003 = score(doc=2758,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15878315 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2758, 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=2758)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 3.2009 19:03:12
- Footnote
- Vgl. auch: Costas, R., M. Bordons u. T.N. van Leeuwen u.a.: Scaling rules in the science system: Influence of field-specific citation characteristics on the impact of individual researchers. In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.4, S.740-753.
-
Schlögl, C.; Gorraiz, J.; Bart, C.; Bargmann, M.: Messen und gemessen werden : Möglichkeiten und Grenzen quantitativer Forschungsevaluierungen am Beispiel eines Institutsvergleichs (2001)
0.02
0.016320564 = product of:
0.032641128 = sum of:
0.032641128 = product of:
0.04896169 = sum of:
0.030348403 = weight(_text_:j in 5958) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030348403 = score(doc=5958,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14407694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = queryNorm
0.21064025 = fieldWeight in 5958, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5958)
0.018613286 = weight(_text_:m in 5958) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018613286 = score(doc=5958,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11283351 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = queryNorm
0.1649624 = fieldWeight in 5958, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5958)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Sarabia, J.M.; Sarabia, M.: Explicit expressions for the Leimkuhler curve in parametric families (2008)
0.02
0.0157421 = product of:
0.0314842 = sum of:
0.0314842 = product of:
0.047226302 = sum of:
0.025290335 = weight(_text_:j in 2120) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025290335 = score(doc=2120,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14407694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = queryNorm
0.17553353 = fieldWeight in 2120, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2120)
0.021935968 = weight(_text_:m in 2120) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021935968 = score(doc=2120,freq=4.0), product of:
0.11283351 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = queryNorm
0.19441006 = fieldWeight in 2120, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2120)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- In this paper we obtain the Leimkuhler curve in the case of some important statistical distributions proposed in the informetrics and econometrics literature. In this way, we complete the previous work of Burrell [Burrell, Q. L. (2005). Symmetry and other transformation features of Lorenz/Leimkuhler representations of informetric data. Information Processing and Management, 41, 1317-1329], where several open problems were stated. To do this, we use a recent and general definition of the Leimkuhler curve proposed by Sarabia [Sarabia, J. M. (2008a). A general definition of the Leimkuhler curve. Journal of Informetrics, 2, 156-163], and a new representation of the Leimkuhler curve in terms of the first-moment distribution of the population. Specifically, we obtain the Leimkuhler curve of the following distributions: classical and exponentiated Pareto distributions; three-parameter lognormal distribution; generalized gamma distribution, which includes to the exponential and classical gamma distributions among others; generalized beta distribution of the first kind and generalized beta distribution of the second kind, which includes as particular or limiting cases next important families like beta distribution of the second kind, Singh-Maddala, Dagum, Fisk or Lomax distributions. All the obtained Leimkuhler curves can be computed easily.
-
Kousha, K.; Thelwall, M.: How is science cited on the Web? : a classification of google unique Web citations (2007)
0.02
0.015409255 = product of:
0.03081851 = sum of:
0.03081851 = product of:
0.046227764 = sum of:
0.015511071 = weight(_text_:m in 586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015511071 = score(doc=586,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11283351 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = queryNorm
0.13746867 = fieldWeight in 586, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=586)
0.030716693 = weight(_text_:22 in 586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030716693 = score(doc=586,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15878315 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
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.
-
Costas, R.; Bordons, M.; Leeuwen, T.N. van; Raan, A.F.J. van: Scaling rules in the science system : Influence of field-specific citation characteristics on the impact of individual researchers (2009)
0.02
0.015409255 = product of:
0.03081851 = sum of:
0.03081851 = product of:
0.046227764 = sum of:
0.015511071 = weight(_text_:m in 2759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015511071 = score(doc=2759,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11283351 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = queryNorm
0.13746867 = fieldWeight in 2759, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2759)
0.030716693 = weight(_text_:22 in 2759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030716693 = score(doc=2759,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15878315 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2759, 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=2759)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 3.2009 19:02:48
-
Wettlauf der Wissenschaft (2004)
0.01
0.0149352085 = product of:
0.029870417 = sum of:
0.029870417 = product of:
0.044805624 = sum of:
0.020232268 = weight(_text_:j in 2495) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020232268 = score(doc=2495,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14407694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = queryNorm
0.14042683 = fieldWeight in 2495, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2495)
0.024573354 = weight(_text_:22 in 2495) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024573354 = score(doc=2495,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15878315 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Footnote
- Vgl.: http://www.i-med.ac.at/mypoint/news/2004051201.xml (cf) (Quelle: U.S. Is Losing Its Dominance In the Sciences, by WI LLIAM J. BROAD, New York Times, May 3, 2004)
- Source
- Online Mitteilungen. 2004, Nr.79, S.22-23 [=Mitteilungen VÖB 57(2004) H.2]
-
Van der Veer Martens, B.: Do citation systems represent theories of truth? (2001)
0.01
0.014479987 = product of:
0.028959975 = sum of:
0.028959975 = product of:
0.086879924 = sum of:
0.086879924 = weight(_text_:22 in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.086879924 = score(doc=3925,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15878315 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = 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)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 15:22:28
-
De Bellis, N.: Bibliometrics and citation analysis : from the Science citation index to cybermetrics (2008)
0.01
0.012593681 = product of:
0.025187362 = sum of:
0.025187362 = product of:
0.03778104 = sum of:
0.020232268 = weight(_text_:j in 3585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020232268 = score(doc=3585,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14407694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = queryNorm
0.14042683 = fieldWeight in 3585, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3585)
0.017548773 = weight(_text_:m in 3585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017548773 = score(doc=3585,freq=4.0), product of:
0.11283351 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = queryNorm
0.15552804 = fieldWeight in 3585, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3585)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Footnote
- Rez. in: JASIS 61(2010) no.1, S.205-207 (Jeppe Nicolaisen) Weitere Rez. in: Mitt VÖB 63(2010) H.1/2, S.134-135 (J. Gorraiz u. M. Wieland): "Das Buch entwickelte sich aus einem mehrjährigen Forschungsprojekt mit dem Ziel, den schwer verständlichen quantitativen Kern der Bibliometrie in einem für primär italienische Bibliothekare leichteren historischen und philosophischen Kontext zu vermitteln, wie der Autor im Vorwort erklärt. Dank einer Empfehlung von Eugene Garfield steht dieses Werk nun auch in englischer Übersetzung einer internationalen Leserschaft zur Verfügung. Die über 400 Seiten lange Monografie von de Bellis gibt in acht Kapiteln einen detaillierten und sehr präzisen Überblick über die Bibliometrie und die Zitationsanalyse, ihre Natur und Entwicklung, ihre Kontroverse und Prognose. . . . Das Buch von de Bellis ist sehr empfehlenswert für alle die beabsichtigen, sich mit dieser neuen Wissenschaft zu beschäftigen. Es endet mit folgendem Statement: "Scientometricians have to learn to live in a multidimensional world". Und genau hier liegt die Herausforderung und Schönheit dieses Metiers."
- Type
- m
-
Lewison, G.: ¬The work of the Bibliometrics Research Group (City University) and associates (2005)
0.01
0.012286677 = product of:
0.024573354 = sum of:
0.024573354 = product of:
0.07372006 = sum of:
0.07372006 = weight(_text_:22 in 4890) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07372006 = score(doc=4890,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15878315 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = 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)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 20. 1.2007 17:02:22
-
Nicolaisen, J.: ¬The J-shaped distribution of citedness (2002)
0.01
0.011681106 = product of:
0.023362212 = sum of:
0.023362212 = product of:
0.070086636 = sum of:
0.070086636 = weight(_text_:j in 3765) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.070086636 = score(doc=3765,freq=6.0), product of:
0.14407694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = queryNorm
0.48645282 = fieldWeight in 3765, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3765)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- A new approach for investigating the correlation between research quality and citation counts is presented and applied to a case study of the relationship between peer evaluations reflected in scholarly book reviews and the citation frequencies of reviewed books. Results of the study designate a J-shaped distribution between the considered variables, presumably caused by a skewed allocation of negative citations. The paper concludes with suggestions for further research.
-
Egghe, L.: Relations between the continuous and the discrete Lotka power function (2005)
0.01
0.008760829 = product of:
0.017521659 = sum of:
0.017521659 = product of:
0.052564975 = sum of:
0.052564975 = weight(_text_:j in 3464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.052564975 = score(doc=3464,freq=6.0), product of:
0.14407694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = queryNorm
0.3648396 = fieldWeight in 3464, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3464)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The discrete Lotka power function describes the number of sources (e.g., authors) with n = 1, 2, 3, ... items (e.g., publications). As in econometrics, informetrics theory requires functions of a continuous variable j, replacing the discrete variable n. Now j represents item densities instead of number of items. The continuous Lotka power function describes the density of sources with item density j. The discrete Lotka function one obtains from data, obtained empirically; the continuous Lotka function is the one needed when one wants to apply Lotkaian informetrics, i.e., to determine properties that can be derived from the (continuous) model. It is, hence, important to know the relations between the two models. We show that the exponents of the discrete Lotka function (if not too high, i.e., within limits encountered in practice) and of the continuous Lotka function are approximately the same. This is important to know in applying theoretical results (from the continuous model), derived from practical data.
-
Raan, A.F.J. van: Statistical properties of bibliometric indicators : research group indicator distributions and correlations (2006)
0.01
0.0086879935 = product of:
0.017375987 = sum of:
0.017375987 = product of:
0.05212796 = sum of:
0.05212796 = weight(_text_:22 in 5275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05212796 = score(doc=5275,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15878315 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = 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)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 16:20:22
-
Larivière, V.; Gingras, Y.; Archambault, E.: ¬The decline in the concentration of citations, 1900-2007 (2009)
0.01
0.0086879935 = product of:
0.017375987 = sum of:
0.017375987 = product of:
0.05212796 = sum of:
0.05212796 = weight(_text_:22 in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05212796 = score(doc=2763,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15878315 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534291 = 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)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 3.2009 19:22:35
