-
Nicolaisen, J.: Citation analysis (2007)
0.02
0.024431534 = product of:
0.04886307 = sum of:
0.04886307 = product of:
0.09772614 = sum of:
0.09772614 = weight(_text_:22 in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09772614 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15786676 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04508122 = 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
-
Van der Veer Martens, B.: Do citation systems represent theories of truth? (2001)
0.02
0.021594629 = product of:
0.043189257 = sum of:
0.043189257 = product of:
0.086378515 = sum of:
0.086378515 = weight(_text_:22 in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.086378515 = score(doc=3925,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15786676 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04508122 = 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
-
Lewison, G.: ¬The work of the Bibliometrics Research Group (City University) and associates (2005)
0.02
0.018323649 = product of:
0.036647297 = sum of:
0.036647297 = product of:
0.073294595 = sum of:
0.073294595 = weight(_text_:22 in 4890) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.073294595 = score(doc=4890,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15786676 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04508122 = 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
-
Száva-Kováts, E.: Indirect-collective referencing (ICR) in the elite journal literature of physics : I: a literature science study on the journal level (2001)
0.02
0.016263176 = product of:
0.03252635 = sum of:
0.03252635 = product of:
0.0650527 = sum of:
0.0650527 = weight(_text_:1997 in 5180) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0650527 = score(doc=5180,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1637463 = queryWeight, product of:
3.6322508 = idf(docFreq=3179, maxDocs=44218)
0.04508122 = queryNorm
0.3972774 = fieldWeight in 5180, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.6322508 = idf(docFreq=3179, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5180)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- In the second bibliometric paper SzavaKovtas uses ``indirectcollective references, ICR'' to mean such instances as those in which an author refers to, ``the references contained therein,'' when referring to another source. Having previously shown a high instance of occurrences in Physical Reviews, he now uses the January 1997 issues of 40 journals from the ISI physics category plus two optics journals, an instrumentation journal, and a physics journal launched in 1997, to locate ICR. The phenomena exists in all but one of the sampled journals and in the next, but unsampled, issue of that journal. Overall 17% of papers sampled display ICR with little fluctuation within internal categories.
-
Thelwall, M.; Vaughan, L.; Björneborn, L.: Webometrics (2004)
0.01
0.014227318 = product of:
0.028454635 = sum of:
0.028454635 = product of:
0.05690927 = sum of:
0.05690927 = weight(_text_:1997 in 4279) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05690927 = score(doc=4279,freq=6.0), product of:
0.1637463 = queryWeight, product of:
3.6322508 = idf(docFreq=3179, maxDocs=44218)
0.04508122 = queryNorm
0.3475454 = fieldWeight in 4279, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.6322508 = idf(docFreq=3179, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4279)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Webometrics, the quantitative study of Web-related phenomena, emerged from the realization that methods originally designed for bibliometric analysis of scientific journal article citation patterns could be applied to the Web, with commercial search engines providing the raw data. Almind and Ingwersen (1997) defined the field and gave it its name. Other pioneers included Rodriguez Gairin (1997) and Aguillo (1998). Larson (1996) undertook exploratory link structure analysis, as did Rousseau (1997). Webometrics encompasses research from fields beyond information science such as communication studies, statistical physics, and computer science. In this review we concentrate on link analysis, but also cover other aspects of webometrics, including Web log fle analysis. One theme that runs through this chapter is the messiness of Web data and the need for data cleansing heuristics. The uncontrolled Web creates numerous problems in the interpretation of results, for instance, from the automatic creation or replication of links. The loose connection between top-level domain specifications (e.g., com, edu, and org) and their actual content is also a frustrating problem. For example, many .com sites contain noncommercial content, although com is ostensibly the main commercial top-level domain. Indeed, a skeptical researcher could claim that obstacles of this kind are so great that all Web analyses lack value. As will be seen, one response to this view, a view shared by critics of evaluative bibliometrics, is to demonstrate that Web data correlate significantly with some non-Web data in order to prove that the Web data are not wholly random. A practical response has been to develop increasingly sophisticated data cleansing techniques and multiple data analysis methods.
-
Vaughan, L.; Shaw , D.: Bibliographic and Web citations : what Is the difference? (2003)
0.01
0.014227318 = product of:
0.028454635 = sum of:
0.028454635 = product of:
0.05690927 = sum of:
0.05690927 = weight(_text_:1997 in 5176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05690927 = score(doc=5176,freq=6.0), product of:
0.1637463 = queryWeight, product of:
3.6322508 = idf(docFreq=3179, maxDocs=44218)
0.04508122 = queryNorm
0.3475454 = fieldWeight in 5176, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.6322508 = idf(docFreq=3179, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5176)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Vaughn, and Shaw look at the relationship between traditional citation and Web citation (not hyperlinks but rather textual mentions of published papers). Using English language research journals in ISI's 2000 Journal Citation Report - Information and Library Science category - 1209 full length papers published in 1997 in 46 journals were identified. Each was searched in Social Science Citation Index and on the Web using Google phrase search by entering the title in quotation marks, and followed for distinction where necessary with sub-titles, author's names, and journal title words. After removing obvious false drops, the number of web sites was recorded for comparison with the SSCI counts. A second sample from 1992 was also collected for examination. There were a total of 16,371 web citations to the selected papers. The top and bottom ranked four journals were then examined and every third citation to every third paper was selected and classified as to source type, domain, and country of origin. Web counts are much higher than ISI citation counts. Of the 46 journals from 1997, 26 demonstrated a significant correlation between Web and traditional citation counts, and 11 of the 15 in the 1992 sample also showed significant correlation. Journal impact factor in 1998 and 1999 correlated significantly with average Web citations per journal in the 1997 data, but at a low level. Thirty percent of web citations come from other papers posted on the web, and 30percent from listings of web based bibliographic services, while twelve percent come from class reading lists. High web citation journals often have web accessible tables of content.
-
Raan, A.F.J. van: Statistical properties of bibliometric indicators : research group indicator distributions and correlations (2006)
0.01
0.012956778 = product of:
0.025913555 = sum of:
0.025913555 = product of:
0.05182711 = sum of:
0.05182711 = weight(_text_:22 in 5275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05182711 = score(doc=5275,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15786676 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04508122 = 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
-
Larivière, V.; Gingras, Y.; Archambault, E.: ¬The decline in the concentration of citations, 1900-2007 (2009)
0.01
0.012956778 = product of:
0.025913555 = sum of:
0.025913555 = product of:
0.05182711 = sum of:
0.05182711 = weight(_text_:22 in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05182711 = score(doc=2763,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15786676 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04508122 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 3.2009 19:22:35
-
Thelwall, M.; Ruschenburg, T.: Grundlagen und Forschungsfelder der Webometrie (2006)
0.01
0.012215767 = product of:
0.024431534 = sum of:
0.024431534 = product of:
0.04886307 = sum of:
0.04886307 = weight(_text_:22 in 77) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04886307 = score(doc=77,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15786676 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04508122 = 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
-
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
0.012215767 = product of:
0.024431534 = sum of:
0.024431534 = product of:
0.04886307 = sum of:
0.04886307 = weight(_text_:22 in 1144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04886307 = score(doc=1144,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15786676 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04508122 = 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
-
Ivancheva, L.E.: ¬The non-Gaussian nature of bibliometric and scientometric distributions : a new approach to interpretation (2001)
0.01
0.011499803 = product of:
0.022999605 = sum of:
0.022999605 = product of:
0.04599921 = sum of:
0.04599921 = weight(_text_:1997 in 6846) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04599921 = score(doc=6846,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1637463 = queryWeight, product of:
3.6322508 = idf(docFreq=3179, maxDocs=44218)
0.04508122 = queryNorm
0.28091756 = fieldWeight in 6846, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.6322508 = idf(docFreq=3179, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6846)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- An attempt has been made to give an answer to the question: Why do most bibliometric and scientometric laws reveal characters of Non-Gaussian distributions, i.e., have unduly long "tails"? We tried to apply the approach of the so-called "Universal Law," discovered by G. Stankov (1997, 1998). The basic principle we have used here is that of the reciprocity of energy and space. A new "wave concept" of scientific information has been propounded, in which terms the well-known bibliometric and scientometric distributions find a rather satisfactory explanation. One of the made corollaries is that a = 1 is the most reasonable value for the family of Zipf laws, applied to information or social phenomena.
-
Levitt, J.M.; Thelwall, M.: Citation levels and collaboration within library and information science (2009)
0.01
0.010797314 = product of:
0.021594629 = sum of:
0.021594629 = product of:
0.043189257 = sum of:
0.043189257 = weight(_text_:22 in 2734) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043189257 = score(doc=2734,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15786676 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04508122 = 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
-
Burrell, Q.L.: Predicting future citation behavior (2003)
0.01
0.010688796 = product of:
0.021377591 = sum of:
0.021377591 = product of:
0.042755183 = sum of:
0.042755183 = weight(_text_:22 in 3837) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042755183 = score(doc=3837,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15786676 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04508122 = 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
-
Burrell, Q.L.: "Ambiguity" ans scientometric measurement : a dissenting view (2001)
0.01
0.009856974 = product of:
0.019713948 = sum of:
0.019713948 = product of:
0.039427895 = sum of:
0.039427895 = weight(_text_:1997 in 6981) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.039427895 = score(doc=6981,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1637463 = queryWeight, product of:
3.6322508 = idf(docFreq=3179, maxDocs=44218)
0.04508122 = queryNorm
0.2407865 = fieldWeight in 6981, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.6322508 = idf(docFreq=3179, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6981)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Abe Bookstein has long been a persuasive advocate of the central role of the classical Lotka-Bradford-Zipf "laws" in bibliometrics and, subsequently, scientometrics and informetrics. In a series of often-quoted papers (Bookstein, 1977, 1990a, 1990b, 1997), he has sought to demonstrate that "Lotka-type" laws have a unique resilience to various forms of reporting, which leads inevitably and naturally to their observance in empirical informetric data collected under a wide variety of circumstances. A general statement of his position was featured in the recent JASIST Special Topic Issue on Information Science at the Millennium (Bookstein, 2001). We shall argue that there are grounds to dispute some of the logic, the mathematics, and the reality of the development. The contention is on the one hand that Bookstein's development lacks a rigorous mathematical basis, and on the other, that, in general, informetric processes are adequately described within a standard probabilistic framework with stochastic modelling offering the more productive approach.
-
Borgman, C.L.; Furner, J.: Scholarly communication and bibliometrics (2002)
0.01
0.009856974 = product of:
0.019713948 = sum of:
0.019713948 = product of:
0.039427895 = sum of:
0.039427895 = weight(_text_:1997 in 4291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.039427895 = score(doc=4291,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1637463 = queryWeight, product of:
3.6322508 = idf(docFreq=3179, maxDocs=44218)
0.04508122 = queryNorm
0.2407865 = fieldWeight in 4291, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.6322508 = idf(docFreq=3179, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4291)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Why devote an ARIST chapter to scholarly communication and bibliometrics, and why now? Bibliometrics already is a frequently covered ARIST topic, with chapters such as that by White and McCain (1989) on bibliometrics generally, White and McCain (1997) on visualization of literatures, Wilson and Hood (2001) on informetric laws, and Tabah (2001) on literature dynamics. Similarly, scholarly communication has been addressed in other ARIST chapters such as Bishop and Star (1996) on social informatics and digital libraries, Schamber (1994) on relevance and information behavior, and many earlier chapters on information needs and uses. More than a decade ago, the first author addressed the intersection of scholarly communication and bibliometrics with a journal special issue and an edited book (Borgman, 1990; Borgman & Paisley, 1989), and she recently examined interim developments (Borgman, 2000a, 2000c). This review covers the decade (1990-2000) since the comprehensive 1990 volume, citing earlier works only when necessary to explain the foundation for recent developments.
-
McDonald, J.D.: Understanding journal usage : a statistical analysis of citation and use (2007)
0.01
0.009856974 = product of:
0.019713948 = sum of:
0.019713948 = product of:
0.039427895 = sum of:
0.039427895 = weight(_text_:1997 in 83) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.039427895 = score(doc=83,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1637463 = queryWeight, product of:
3.6322508 = idf(docFreq=3179, maxDocs=44218)
0.04508122 = queryNorm
0.2407865 = fieldWeight in 83, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.6322508 = idf(docFreq=3179, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=83)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This study examined the relationship between print journal use, online journal use, and online journal discovery tools with local journal citations. Local use measures were collected from 1997 to 2004, and negative binomial regression models were designed to test the effect that local use, online availability, and access enhancements have on citation behaviors of academic research authors. Models are proposed and tested to determine whether multiple locally recorded usage measures can predict citations and if locally controlled access enhancements influence citation. The regression results indicated that print journal use was a significant predictor of local journal citations prior to the adoption of online journals. Publisher-provided and locally recorded online journal use measures were also significant predictors of local citations. Online availability of a journal was found to significantly increase local citations, and, for some disciplines, a new access tool like an OpenURL resolver significantly impacts citations and publisherprovided journal usage measures.
-
Chua, A.Y.K.; Yang, C.C.: ¬The shift towards multi-disciplinarity in information science (2008)
0.01
0.009856974 = product of:
0.019713948 = sum of:
0.019713948 = product of:
0.039427895 = sum of:
0.039427895 = weight(_text_:1997 in 2389) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.039427895 = score(doc=2389,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1637463 = queryWeight, product of:
3.6322508 = idf(docFreq=3179, maxDocs=44218)
0.04508122 = queryNorm
0.2407865 = fieldWeight in 2389, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.6322508 = idf(docFreq=3179, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2389)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This article analyzes the collaboration trends, authorship and keywords of all research articles published in the Journal of American Society for Information Science and Technology (JASIST). Comparing the articles between two 10-year periods, namely, 1988-1997 and 1998-2007, the three-fold objectives are to analyze the shifts in (a) authors' collaboration trends (b) top authors, their affiliations as well as the pattern of coauthorship among them, and (c) top keywords and the subdisciplines from which they emerge. The findings reveal a distinct tendency towards collaboration among authors, with external collaborations becoming more prevalent. Top authors have grown in diversity from those being affiliated predominantly with library/information-related departments to include those from information systems management, information technology, businesss, and the humanities. Amid heterogeneous clusters of collaboration among top authors, strongly connected cross-disciplinary coauthor pairs have become more prevalent. Correspondingly, the distribution of top keywords' occurrences that leans heavily on core information science has shifted towards other subdisciplines such as information technology and sociobehavioral science.
-
Leydesdorff, L.: Can networks of journal-journal citations be used as indicators of change in the social sciences? (2003)
0.01
0.009161824 = product of:
0.018323649 = sum of:
0.018323649 = product of:
0.036647297 = sum of:
0.036647297 = weight(_text_:22 in 4460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036647297 = score(doc=4460,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15786676 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04508122 = 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
-
Asonuma, A.; Fang, Y.; Rousseau, R.: Reflections on the age distribution of Japanese scientists (2006)
0.01
0.009161824 = product of:
0.018323649 = sum of:
0.018323649 = product of:
0.036647297 = sum of:
0.036647297 = weight(_text_:22 in 5270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036647297 = score(doc=5270,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15786676 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04508122 = 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
-
Haycock, L.A.: Citation analysis of education dissertations for collection development (2004)
0.01
0.009161824 = product of:
0.018323649 = sum of:
0.018323649 = product of:
0.036647297 = sum of:
0.036647297 = weight(_text_:22 in 135) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036647297 = score(doc=135,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15786676 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04508122 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
