Search (125 results, page 2 of 7)

0.014199109 = product of:
  0.056796435 = sum of:
    0.056796435 = weight(_text_:c in 2267) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056796435 = score(doc=2267,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1505424 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043643 = queryNorm
        0.3772787 = fieldWeight in 2267, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2267)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Various mathematical models have been proposed in the recent literature for estimating the h-index using measures such as number of articles (P) and citations received (C). These models have been previously empirically tested assuming a mathematical model and predetermining the models' parameter values at some fixed constant. The present study, from a statistical modeling viewpoint, investigates alternative distributions commonly used for this type of point data. The study shows that the typical assumptions for the parameters of the h-index mathematical models in such representations are not always realistic, with more suitable specifications being favorable. Prediction of the h-index is also demonstrated.

0.012170665 = product of:
  0.04868266 = sum of:
    0.04868266 = weight(_text_:c in 3591) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04868266 = score(doc=3591,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1505424 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043643 = queryNorm
        0.32338172 = fieldWeight in 3591, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3591)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

A multiple-perspective cocitation analysis method is introduced for characterizing and interpreting the structure and dynamics of cocitation clusters. The method facilitates analytic and sense making tasks by integrating network visualization, spectral clustering, automatic cluster labeling, and text summarization. Cocitation networks are decomposed into cocitation clusters. The interpretation of these clusters is augmented by automatic cluster labeling and summarization. The method focuses on the interrelations between a cocitation cluster's members and their citers. The generic method is applied to a three-part analysis of the field of information science as defined by 12 journals published between 1996 and 2008: (a) a comparative author cocitation analysis (ACA), (b) a progressive ACA of a time series of cocitation networks, and (c) a progressive document cocitation analysis (DCA). Results show that the multiple-perspective method increases the interpretability and accountability of both ACA and DCA networks.

0.011474612 = product of:
  0.04589845 = sum of:
    0.04589845 = weight(_text_:c in 4918) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04589845 = score(doc=4918,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1505424 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043643 = queryNorm
        0.3048872 = fieldWeight in 4918, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4918)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The approach based on "thermodynamic" considerations that can quantify research performance using an exergy term defined as X = iC, where i is the impact and C is the number of citations is now extended to cases where fractionalized counting of citations is used instead of integer counting.

0.011474612 = product of:
  0.04589845 = sum of:
    0.04589845 = weight(_text_:c in 3557) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04589845 = score(doc=3557,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1505424 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043643 = queryNorm
        0.3048872 = fieldWeight in 3557, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3557)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.010142221 = product of:
  0.040568884 = sum of:
    0.040568884 = weight(_text_:c in 4366) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.040568884 = score(doc=4366,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1505424 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043643 = queryNorm
        0.2694848 = fieldWeight in 4366, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4366)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.010142221 = product of:
  0.040568884 = sum of:
    0.040568884 = weight(_text_:c in 4608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.040568884 = score(doc=4608,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1505424 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043643 = queryNorm
        0.2694848 = fieldWeight in 4608, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4608)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This study comprises a suite of analyses of words in article titles in order to reveal the cognitive structure of Library and Information Science (LIS). The use of title words to elucidate the cognitive structure of LIS has been relatively neglected. The present study addresses this gap by performing (a) co-word analysis and hierarchical clustering, (b) multidimensional scaling, and (c) determination of trends in usage of terms. The study is based on 10,344 articles published between 1988 and 2007 in 16 LIS journals. Methodologically, novel aspects of this study are: (a) its large scale, (b) removal of non-specific title words based on the "word concentration" measure (c) identification of the most frequent terms that include both single words and phrases, and (d) presentation of the relative frequencies of terms using "heatmaps". Conceptually, our analysis reveals that LIS consists of three main branches: the traditionally recognized library-related and information-related branches, plus an equally distinct bibliometrics/scientometrics branch. The three branches focus on: libraries, information, and science, respectively. In addition, our study identifies substructures within each branch. We also tentatively identify "information seeking behavior" as a branch that is establishing itself separate from the three main branches. Furthermore, we find that cognitive concepts in LIS evolve continuously, with no stasis since 1992. The most rapid development occurred between 1998 and 2001, influenced by the increased focus on the Internet. The change in the cognitive landscape is found to be driven by the emergence of new information technologies, and the retirement of old ones.

0.010142221 = product of:
  0.040568884 = sum of:
    0.040568884 = weight(_text_:c in 1091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.040568884 = score(doc=1091,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1505424 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043643 = queryNorm
        0.2694848 = fieldWeight in 1091, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1091)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The number of research studies on social tagging has increased rapidly in the past years, but few of them highlight the characteristics and research trends in social tagging. A set of 862 academic documents relating to social tagging and published from 2005 to 2011 was thus examined using bibliometric analysis as well as the social network analysis technique. The results show that social tagging, as a research area, develops rapidly and attracts an increasing number of new entrants. There are no key authors, publication sources, or research groups that dominate the research domain of social tagging. Research on social tagging appears to focus mainly on the following three aspects: (a) components and functions of social tagging (e.g., tags, tagging objects, and tagging network), (b) taggers' behaviors and interface design, and (c) tags' organization and usage in social tagging. The trend suggest that more researchers turn to the latter two integrated with human computer interface and information retrieval, although the first aspect is the fundamental one in social tagging. Also, more studies relating to social tagging pay attention to multimedia tagging objects and not only text tagging. Previous research on social tagging was limited to a few subject domains such as information science and computer science. As an interdisciplinary research area, social tagging is anticipated to attract more researchers from different disciplines. More practical applications, especially in high-tech companies, is an encouraging research trend in social tagging.

0.010142221 = product of:
  0.040568884 = sum of:
    0.040568884 = weight(_text_:c in 1285) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.040568884 = score(doc=1285,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1505424 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043643 = queryNorm
        0.2694848 = fieldWeight in 1285, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1285)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Since its creation in 1991, arXiv has become central to the diffusion of research in a number of fields. Combining data from the entirety of arXiv and the Web of Science (WoS), this article investigates (a) the proportion of papers across all disciplines that are on arXiv and the proportion of arXiv papers that are in the WoS, (b) the elapsed time between arXiv submission and journal publication, and (c) the aging characteristics and scientific impact of arXiv e-prints and their published version. It shows that the proportion of WoS papers found on arXiv varies across the specialties of physics and mathematics, and that only a few specialties make extensive use of the repository. Elapsed time between arXiv submission and journal publication has shortened but remains longer in mathematics than in physics. In physics, mathematics, as well as in astronomy and astrophysics, arXiv versions are cited more promptly and decay faster than WoS papers. The arXiv versions of papers-both published and unpublished-have lower citation rates than published papers, although there is almost no difference in the impact of the arXiv versions of published and unpublished papers.

0.010142221 = product of:
  0.040568884 = sum of:
    0.040568884 = weight(_text_:c in 1505) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.040568884 = score(doc=1505,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1505424 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043643 = queryNorm
        0.2694848 = fieldWeight in 1505, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1505)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

International coauthorship relations have increasingly shaped another dynamic in the natural and life sciences during recent decades. However, much less is known about such internationalization in the social sciences. In this study, we analyze international and domestic coauthorship relations of all citable items in the DVD version of the Social Sciences Citation Index 2011 (SSCI). Network statistics indicate 4 groups of nations: (a) an Asian-Pacific one to which all Anglo-Saxon nations (including the United Kingdom and Ireland) are attributed, (b) a continental European one including also the Latin-American countries, (c) the Scandinavian nations, and (d) a community of African nations. Within the EU-28, 11 of the EU-15 states have dominant positions. In many respects, the network parameters are not so different from the Science Citation Index. In addition to these descriptive statistics, we address the question of the relative weights of the international versus domestic networks. An information-theoretical test is proposed at the level of organizational addresses within each nation; the results are mixed, but the international dimension is more important than the national one in the aggregated sets (as in the Science Citation Index). In some countries (e.g., France), however, the national distribution is leading more than the international one. Decomposition of the United States in terms of states shows a similarly mixed result; more U.S. states are domestically oriented in the SSCI and more internationally in the SCI. The international networks have grown during the last decades in addition to the national ones but not by replacing them.

0.010040285 = product of:
  0.04016114 = sum of:
    0.04016114 = weight(_text_:c in 154) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04016114 = score(doc=154,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1505424 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043643 = queryNorm
        0.2667763 = fieldWeight in 154, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=154)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.010040285 = product of:
  0.04016114 = sum of:
    0.04016114 = weight(_text_:c in 243) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04016114 = score(doc=243,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1505424 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043643 = queryNorm
        0.2667763 = fieldWeight in 243, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=243)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Based on earlier results about the shifted Lotka function, we prove an implicit functional relation between the Hirsch index (h-index) and the total number of sources (T). It is shown that the corresponding function, h(T), is concavely increasing. Next, we construct an implicit relation between the h-index and the impact factor IF (an average number of items per source). The corresponding function h(IF) is increasing and we show that if the parameter C in the numerator of the shifted Lotka function is high, then the relation between the h-index and the impact factor is almost linear.

0.010040285 = product of:
  0.04016114 = sum of:
    0.04016114 = weight(_text_:c in 373) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04016114 = score(doc=373,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1505424 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043643 = queryNorm
        0.2667763 = fieldWeight in 373, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=373)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This article presents a new open-source software tool, SciMAT, which performs science mapping analysis within a longitudinal framework. It provides different modules that help the analyst to carry out all the steps of the science mapping workflow. In addition, SciMAT presents three key features that are remarkable in respect to other science mapping software tools: (a) a powerful preprocessing module to clean the raw bibliographical data, (b) the use of bibliometric measures to study the impact of each studied element, and (c) a wizard to configure the analysis.

0.010040285 = product of:
  0.04016114 = sum of:
    0.04016114 = weight(_text_:c in 4571) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04016114 = score(doc=4571,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1505424 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043643 = queryNorm
        0.2667763 = fieldWeight in 4571, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4571)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

An innovative approach is proposed for a rating system for academic publications based on a categorization into ratings comparable to financial ratings such as Moody's and S&P ratings (AAA, AA, A, BA, BBB, BB, B, C). The categorization makes use of a variable percentile approach based on recently developed h-related indices. Building on this categorization, a new index is proposed for researchers, the fame-index or f2-index. This new index integrates some qualitative elements related to the influence of a researcher's articles. It better mitigates than the classic h-index.

0.008869536 = product of:
  0.035478145 = sum of:
    0.035478145 = product of:
      0.07095629 = sum of:
        0.07095629 = weight(_text_:22 in 1239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07095629 = score(doc=1239,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15283036 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043643 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 1239, 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=1239)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

18. 3.2014 19:13:22

0.00860596 = product of:
  0.03442384 = sum of:
    0.03442384 = weight(_text_:c in 3418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03442384 = score(doc=3418,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1505424 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043643 = queryNorm
        0.22866541 = fieldWeight in 3418, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3418)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.00860596 = product of:
  0.03442384 = sum of:
    0.03442384 = weight(_text_:c in 3574) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03442384 = score(doc=3574,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1505424 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043643 = queryNorm
        0.22866541 = fieldWeight in 3574, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3574)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.00860596 = product of:
  0.03442384 = sum of:
    0.03442384 = weight(_text_:c in 4467) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03442384 = score(doc=4467,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1505424 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043643 = queryNorm
        0.22866541 = fieldWeight in 4467, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4467)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.00860596 = product of:
  0.03442384 = sum of:
    0.03442384 = weight(_text_:c in 4735) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03442384 = score(doc=4735,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1505424 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043643 = queryNorm
        0.22866541 = fieldWeight in 4735, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4735)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.00860596 = product of:
  0.03442384 = sum of:
    0.03442384 = weight(_text_:c in 58) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03442384 = score(doc=58,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1505424 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043643 = queryNorm
        0.22866541 = fieldWeight in 58, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=58)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.00860596 = product of:
  0.03442384 = sum of:
    0.03442384 = weight(_text_:c in 535) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03442384 = score(doc=535,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1505424 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043643 = queryNorm
        0.22866541 = fieldWeight in 535, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=535)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)