-
Nicolaisen, J.: Citation analysis (2007)
0.07
0.066316724 = product of:
0.13263345 = sum of:
0.13263345 = product of:
0.19895017 = sum of:
0.08983724 = weight(_text_:j in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08983724 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15993603 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = 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)
0.10911293 = weight(_text_:22 in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10911293 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
0.176261 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = 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
-
Fiala, J.: Information flood : fiction and reality (1987)
0.07
0.066316724 = product of:
0.13263345 = sum of:
0.13263345 = product of:
0.19895017 = sum of:
0.08983724 = weight(_text_:j in 1080) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08983724 = score(doc=1080,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15993603 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.5617073 = fieldWeight in 1080, 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=1080)
0.10911293 = weight(_text_:22 in 1080) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10911293 = score(doc=1080,freq=2.0), product of:
0.176261 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 1080, 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=1080)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Thermochimica acta. 110(1987), S.11-22
-
Crispo, E.: ¬A new index to use in conjunction with the h-index to account for an author's relative contribution to publications with high impact (2015)
0.06
0.061860077 = sum of:
0.04395038 = product of:
0.17580152 = sum of:
0.17580152 = weight(_text_:author's in 2264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.17580152 = score(doc=2264,freq=2.0), product of:
0.338252 = queryWeight, product of:
6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.51973534 = fieldWeight in 2264, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2264)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.017909698 = product of:
0.053729095 = sum of:
0.053729095 = weight(_text_:h in 2264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.053729095 = score(doc=2264,freq=10.0), product of:
0.1250522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.42965335 = fieldWeight in 2264, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2264)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- The h-index was devised to represent a scholar's contributions to his field with respect to the number of publications and citations. It does not, however, take into consideration the scholar's position in the authorship list. I recommend a new supplementary index to score academics, representing the relative contribution to the papers with impact, be reported alongside the h-index. I call this index the AP-index, and it is simply defined as the average position in which an academic appears in authorship lists, on articles that factor in to that academic's h-index.
- Object
- h-index
-
¬Die deutsche Zeitschrift für Dokumentation, Informationswissenschaft und Informationspraxis von 1950 bis 2011 : eine vorläufige Bilanz in vier Abschnitten (2012)
0.06
0.05884377 = product of:
0.11768754 = sum of:
0.11768754 = sum of:
0.029126795 = weight(_text_:h in 402) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029126795 = score(doc=402,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1250522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.2329171 = fieldWeight in 402, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=402)
0.047643393 = weight(_text_:j in 402) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047643393 = score(doc=402,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15993603 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.2978903 = fieldWeight in 402, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=402)
0.040917348 = weight(_text_:22 in 402) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040917348 = score(doc=402,freq=2.0), product of:
0.176261 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 402, 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=402)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Content
- Vgl.: http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/iwp.2012.63.issue-3/iwp-2012-0037/iwp-2012-0037.xml?format=INT.
- Date
- 22. 7.2012 19:35:26
- Footnote
- Besteht aus 4 Teilen: Teil 1: Eden, D., A. Arndt, A. Hoffer, T. Raschke u. P. Schön: Die Nachrichten für Dokumentation in den Jahren 1950 bis 1962 (S.159-163). Teil 2: Brose, M., E. durst, D. Nitzsche, D. Veckenstedt u. R. Wein: Statistische Untersuchung der Fachzeitschrift "Nachrichten für Dokumentation" (NfD) 1963-1975 (S.164-170). Teil 3: Bösel, J., G. Ebert, P. Garz,, M. Iwanow u. B. Russ: Methoden und Ergebnisse einer statistischen Auswertung der Fachzeitschrift "Nachrichten für Dokumentation" (NfD) 1976 bis 1988 (S.171-174). Teil 4: Engelage, H., S. Jansen, R. Mertins, K. Redel u. S. Ring: Statistische Untersuchung der Fachzeitschrift "Nachrichten für Dokumentation" (NfD) / "Information. Wissenschaft & Praxis" (IWP) 1989-2011 (S.164-170).
- Source
- Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 63(2012) H.3, S.157-182
-
Schlögl, C.: Internationale Sichtbarkeit der europäischen und insbesondere der deutschsprachigen Informationswissenschaft (2013)
0.06
0.05553454 = product of:
0.11106908 = sum of:
0.11106908 = sum of:
0.024028381 = weight(_text_:h in 900) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024028381 = score(doc=900,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1250522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.19214681 = fieldWeight in 900, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=900)
0.03930379 = weight(_text_:j in 900) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03930379 = score(doc=900,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15993603 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.24574696 = fieldWeight in 900, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=900)
0.04773691 = weight(_text_:22 in 900) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04773691 = score(doc=900,freq=2.0), product of:
0.176261 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 900, 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=900)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Content
- Eine englische Version dieses Beitrags erscheint unter dem Titel "International visibility of European and in particular German language publications in library and information science" im Tagungsband des 13. Internationalen Symposiums für Informationswissenschaft (ISI 2013). Vgl.: http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/iwp.2013.64.issue-1/iwp-2013-0001/iwp-2013-0001.xml?format=INT.
- Date
- 22. 3.2013 14:04:09
- Source
- Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 64(2013) H.1, S.1-8
-
Burrell, Q.L.: Formulae for the h-index : a lack of robustness in Lotkaian informetrics? (2013)
0.05
0.05140226 = sum of:
0.037671756 = product of:
0.15068702 = sum of:
0.15068702 = weight(_text_:author's in 977) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.15068702 = score(doc=977,freq=2.0), product of:
0.338252 = queryWeight, product of:
6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.44548744 = fieldWeight in 977, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=977)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.013730503 = product of:
0.041191507 = sum of:
0.041191507 = weight(_text_:h in 977) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041191507 = score(doc=977,freq=8.0), product of:
0.1250522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.32939452 = fieldWeight in 977, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=977)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- In one of the first attempts at providing a mathematical framework for the Hirsch index, Egghe and Rousseau (2006) assumed the standard Lotka model for an author's citation distribution to derive a delightfully simple closed formula for his/her h-index. More recently, the same authors (Egghe & Rousseau, 2012b) have presented a new (implicit) formula based on the so-called shifted Lotka function to allow for the objection that the original model makes no allowance for papers receiving zero citations. Here it is shown, through a small empirical study, that the formulae actually give very similar results whether or not the uncited papers are included. However, and more important, it is found that they both seriously underestimate the true h-index, and we suggest that the reason for this is that this is a context-the citation distribution of an author-in which straightforward Lotkaian informetrics is inappropriate. Indeed, the analysis suggests that even if we restrict attention to the upper tail of the citation distribution, a simple Lotka/Pareto-like model can give misleading results.
- Object
- h-index
-
Zhang, C.; Bu, Y.; Ding, Y.; Xu, J.: Understanding scientific collaboration : homophily, transitivity, and preferential attachment (2018)
0.05
0.048901413 = sum of:
0.037671756 = product of:
0.15068702 = sum of:
0.15068702 = weight(_text_:author's in 4011) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.15068702 = score(doc=4011,freq=2.0), product of:
0.338252 = queryWeight, product of:
6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.44548744 = fieldWeight in 4011, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4011)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.011229656 = product of:
0.033688966 = sum of:
0.033688966 = weight(_text_:j in 4011) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033688966 = score(doc=4011,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15993603 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.21064025 = fieldWeight in 4011, 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=4011)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Scientific collaboration is essential in solving problems and breeding innovation. Coauthor network analysis has been utilized to study scholars' collaborations for a long time, but these studies have not simultaneously taken different collaboration features into consideration. In this paper, we present a systematic approach to analyze the differences in possibilities that two authors will cooperate as seen from the effects of homophily, transitivity, and preferential attachment. Exponential random graph models (ERGMs) are applied in this research. We find that different types of publications one author has written play diverse roles in his/her collaborations. An author's tendency to form new collaborations with her/his coauthors' collaborators is strong, where the more coauthors one author had before, the more new collaborators he/she will attract. We demonstrate that considering the authors' attributes and homophily effects as well as the transitivity and preferential attachment effects of the coauthorship network in which they are embedded helps us gain a comprehensive understanding of scientific collaboration.
-
Jovanovic, M.: ¬Eine kleine Frühgeschichte der Bibliometrie (2012)
0.05
0.047601037 = product of:
0.09520207 = sum of:
0.09520207 = sum of:
0.020595754 = weight(_text_:h in 326) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020595754 = score(doc=326,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1250522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.16469726 = fieldWeight in 326, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=326)
0.033688966 = weight(_text_:j in 326) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033688966 = score(doc=326,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15993603 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.21064025 = fieldWeight in 326, 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=326)
0.040917348 = weight(_text_:22 in 326) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040917348 = score(doc=326,freq=2.0), product of:
0.176261 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 326, 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=326)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Content
- Vgl.: http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/iwp.2012.63.issue-2/iwp-2012-0017/iwp-2012-0017.xml?format=INT.
- Date
- 22. 7.2012 19:23:32
- Source
- Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 63(2012) H.2, S.71-80
-
Epifanio, I.: Mapping the asymmetrical citation relationships between journals by h-plots (2014)
0.03
0.034546908 = product of:
0.069093816 = sum of:
0.069093816 = product of:
0.10364072 = sum of:
0.048056763 = weight(_text_:h in 1294) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048056763 = score(doc=1294,freq=8.0), product of:
0.1250522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.38429362 = fieldWeight in 1294, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1294)
0.055583954 = weight(_text_:j in 1294) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055583954 = score(doc=1294,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15993603 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.34753868 = fieldWeight in 1294, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1294)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- I propose the use of h-plots for visualizing the asymmetric relationships between the citing and cited profiles of journals in a common map. With this exploratory tool, we can understand better the journal's dual roles of citing and being cited in a reference network. The h-plot is introduced and its use is validated with a set of 25 journals belonging to the statistics area. The relatedness factor is considered for describing the relations of citations from a journal "i" to a journal "j," and the citations from the journal "j" to the journal "i." More information has been extracted from the h-plot, compared with other statistical techniques for modelling and representing asymmetric data, such as multidimensional unfolding.
-
H-Index auch im Web of Science (2008)
0.03
0.031802867 = product of:
0.06360573 = sum of:
0.06360573 = product of:
0.095408596 = sum of:
0.054491248 = weight(_text_:h in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054491248 = score(doc=590,freq=14.0), product of:
0.1250522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.435748 = fieldWeight in 590, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=590)
0.040917348 = weight(_text_:22 in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040917348 = score(doc=590,freq=2.0), product of:
0.176261 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Content
- "Zur Kurzmitteilung "Latest enhancements in Scopus: ... h-Index incorporated in Scopus" in den letzten Online-Mitteilungen (Online-Mitteilungen 92, S.31) ist zu korrigieren, dass der h-Index sehr wohl bereits im Web of Science enthalten ist. Allerdings findet man/frau diese Information nicht in der "cited ref search", sondern neben der Trefferliste einer Quick Search, General Search oder einer Suche über den Author Finder in der rechten Navigationsleiste unter dem Titel "Citation Report". Der "Citation Report" bietet für die in der jeweiligen Trefferliste angezeigten Arbeiten: - Die Gesamtzahl der Zitierungen aller Arbeiten in der Trefferliste - Die mittlere Zitationshäufigkeit dieser Arbeiten - Die Anzahl der Zitierungen der einzelnen Arbeiten, aufgeschlüsselt nach Publikationsjahr der zitierenden Arbeiten - Die mittlere Zitationshäufigkeit dieser Arbeiten pro Jahr - Den h-Index (ein h-Index von x sagt aus, dass x Arbeiten der Trefferliste mehr als x-mal zitiert wurden; er ist gegenüber sehr hohen Zitierungen einzelner Arbeiten unempfindlicher als die mittlere Zitationshäufigkeit)."
- Date
- 6. 4.2008 19:04:22
- Object
- H-Index
- Source
- Mitteilungen der Vereinigung Österreichischer Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare. 61(2008) H.1, S.124-125
-
Wettlauf der Wissenschaft (2004)
0.03
0.031734023 = product of:
0.06346805 = sum of:
0.06346805 = sum of:
0.013730504 = weight(_text_:h in 2495) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013730504 = score(doc=2495,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1250522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.10979818 = fieldWeight in 2495, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2495)
0.02245931 = weight(_text_:j in 2495) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02245931 = score(doc=2495,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15993603 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = 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)
0.027278233 = weight(_text_:22 in 2495) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027278233 = score(doc=2495,freq=2.0), product of:
0.176261 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = 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)
- 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]
-
Bar-Ilan, J.; Levene, M.: ¬The hw-rank : an h-index variant for ranking web pages (2015)
0.03
0.030158177 = product of:
0.060316354 = sum of:
0.060316354 = product of:
0.09047453 = sum of:
0.03432626 = weight(_text_:h in 1694) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03432626 = score(doc=1694,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1250522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.27449545 = fieldWeight in 1694, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1694)
0.056148272 = weight(_text_:j in 1694) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056148272 = score(doc=1694,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15993603 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.35106707 = fieldWeight in 1694, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1694)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Dederke, J.; Hirschmann, B.; Johann, D.: ¬Der Data Citation Index von Clarivate : Eine wertvolle Ressource für die Forschung und für Bibliotheken? (2022)
0.03
0.030158177 = product of:
0.060316354 = sum of:
0.060316354 = product of:
0.09047453 = sum of:
0.03432626 = weight(_text_:h in 50) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03432626 = score(doc=50,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1250522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.27449545 = fieldWeight in 50, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=50)
0.056148272 = weight(_text_:j in 50) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056148272 = score(doc=50,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15993603 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.35106707 = fieldWeight in 50, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=50)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- B.I.T. Online. 25(2022) H.1, S.21-
-
Frandsen, T.F.; Nicolaisen, J.: ¬The ripple effect : citation chain reactions of a nobel prize (2013)
0.03
0.029520249 = product of:
0.059040498 = sum of:
0.059040498 = product of:
0.088560745 = sum of:
0.047643393 = weight(_text_:j in 654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047643393 = score(doc=654,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15993603 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.2978903 = fieldWeight in 654, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=654)
0.040917348 = weight(_text_:22 in 654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040917348 = score(doc=654,freq=2.0), product of:
0.176261 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 654, 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=654)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This paper explores the possible citation chain reactions of a Nobel Prize using the mathematician Robert J. Aumann as a case example. The results show that the award of the Nobel Prize in 2005 affected not only the citations to his work, but also affected the citations to the references in his scientific oeuvre. The results indicate that the spillover effect is almost as powerful as the effect itself. We are consequently able to document a ripple effect in which the awarding of the Nobel Prize ignites a citation chain reaction to Aumann's scientific oeuvre and to the references in its nearest citation network. The effect is discussed using innovation decision process theory as a point of departure to identify the factors that created a bandwagon effect leading to the reported observations.
- Date
- 22. 3.2013 16:21:09
-
Egghe, L.: Influence of adding or deleting items and sources on the h-index (2010)
0.03
0.02804602 = product of:
0.05609204 = sum of:
0.05609204 = product of:
0.08413806 = sum of:
0.050449092 = weight(_text_:h in 3336) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050449092 = score(doc=3336,freq=12.0), product of:
0.1250522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.40342426 = fieldWeight in 3336, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3336)
0.033688966 = weight(_text_:j in 3336) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033688966 = score(doc=3336,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15993603 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.21064025 = fieldWeight in 3336, 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=3336)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Adding or deleting items such as self-citations has an influence on the h-index of an author. This influence will be proved mathematically in this article. We hereby prove the experimental finding in E. Gianoli and M.A. Molina-Montenegro ([2009]) that the influence of adding or deleting self-citations on the h-index is greater for low values of the h-index. Why this is logical also is shown by a simple theoretical example. Adding or deleting sources such as adding or deleting minor contributions of an author also has an influence on the h-index of this author; this influence is modeled in this article. This model explains some practical examples found in X. Hu, R. Rousseau, and J. Chen (in press).
- Object
- h-index
-
Zhao, S.X.; Zhang, P.L.; Li, J.; Tan, A.M.; Ye, F.Y.: Abstracting the core subnet of weighted networks based on link strengths (2014)
0.03
0.02804602 = product of:
0.05609204 = sum of:
0.05609204 = product of:
0.08413806 = sum of:
0.050449092 = weight(_text_:h in 1256) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050449092 = score(doc=1256,freq=12.0), product of:
0.1250522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.40342426 = fieldWeight in 1256, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1256)
0.033688966 = weight(_text_:j in 1256) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033688966 = score(doc=1256,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15993603 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.21064025 = fieldWeight in 1256, 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=1256)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Most measures of networks are based on the nodes, although links are also elementary units in networks and represent interesting social or physical connections. In this work we suggest an option for exploring networks, called the h-strength, with explicit focus on links and their strengths. The h-strength and its extensions can naturally simplify a complex network to a small and concise subnetwork (h-subnet) but retains the most important links with its core structure. Its applications in 2 typical information networks, the paper cocitation network of a topic (the h-index) and 5 scientific collaboration networks in the field of "water resources," suggest that h-strength and its extensions could be a useful choice for abstracting, simplifying, and visualizing a complex network. Moreover, we observe that the 2 informetric models, the Glänzel-Schubert model and the Hirsch model, roughly hold in the context of the h-strength for the collaboration networks.
-
Norris, M.; Oppenheim, C.: ¬The h-index : a broad review of a new bibliometric indicator (2010)
0.03
0.027547484 = product of:
0.05509497 = sum of:
0.05509497 = product of:
0.08264245 = sum of:
0.04854466 = weight(_text_:h in 4147) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04854466 = score(doc=4147,freq=16.0), product of:
0.1250522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.3881952 = fieldWeight in 4147, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4147)
0.03409779 = weight(_text_:22 in 4147) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03409779 = score(doc=4147,freq=2.0), product of:
0.176261 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4147, 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=4147)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Purpose - This review aims to show, broadly, how the h-index has become a subject of widespread debate, how it has spawned many variants and diverse applications since first introduced in 2005 and some of the issues in its use. Design/methodology/approach - The review drew on a range of material published in 1990 or so sources published since 2005. From these sources, a number of themes were identified and discussed ranging from the h-index's advantages to which citation database might be selected for its calculation. Findings - The analysis shows how the h-index has quickly established itself as a major subject of interest in the field of bibliometrics. Study of the index ranges from its mathematical underpinning to a range of variants perceived to address the indexes' shortcomings. The review illustrates how widely the index has been applied but also how care must be taken in its application. Originality/value - The use of bibliometric indicators to measure research performance continues, with the h-index as its latest addition. The use of the h-index, its variants and many applications to which it has been put are still at the exploratory stage. The review shows the breadth and diversity of this research and the need to verify the veracity of the h-index by more studies.
- Date
- 8. 1.2011 19:22:13
- Object
- h-index
-
Kim, P.J.; Lee, J.Y.; Park, J.-H.: Developing a new collection-evaluation method : mapping and the user-side h-index (2009)
0.03
0.02744957 = product of:
0.05489914 = sum of:
0.05489914 = product of:
0.08234871 = sum of:
0.054274578 = weight(_text_:h in 3171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054274578 = score(doc=3171,freq=20.0), product of:
0.1250522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.4340154 = fieldWeight in 3171, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3171)
0.028074136 = weight(_text_:j in 3171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028074136 = score(doc=3171,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15993603 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.17553353 = fieldWeight in 3171, 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=3171)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This study proposes a new visualization method and index for collection evaluation. Specifically, it develops a network-based mapping technique and a user-focused Hirsch index (user-side h-index) given the lack of previous studies on collection evaluation methods that have used the h-index. A user-side h-index is developed and compared with previous indices (use factor, difference of percentages, collection-side h-index) that represent the strengths of the subject classes of a library collection. The mapping procedure includes the subject-usage profiling of 63 subject classes and collection-usage map generations through the pathfinder network algorithm. Cluster analyses are then conducted upon the pathfinder network to generate 5 large and 14 small clusters. The nodes represent the strengths of the subject-class usages reflected by the user-side h-index. The user-side h-index was found to have advantages (e.g., better demonstrating the real utility of each subject class) over the other indices. It also can more clearly distinguish the strengths between the subject classes than can collection-side h-index. These results may help to identify actual usage and strengths of subject classes in library collections through visualized maps. This may be a useful rationale for the establishment of the collection-development plan.
- Object
- h-index
-
Thelwall, M.; Ruschenburg, T.: Grundlagen und Forschungsfelder der Webometrie (2006)
0.03
0.027339159 = product of:
0.054678317 = sum of:
0.054678317 = product of:
0.082017474 = sum of:
0.027461007 = weight(_text_:h in 77) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027461007 = score(doc=77,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1250522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.21959636 = fieldWeight in 77, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=77)
0.054556467 = weight(_text_:22 in 77) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054556467 = score(doc=77,freq=2.0), product of:
0.176261 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = 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
- Source
- Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 57(2006) H.8, S.401-406
-
Rostaing, H.; Barts, N.; Léveillé, V.: Bibliometrics: representation instrument of the multidisciplinary positioning of a scientific area : Implementation for an Advisory Scientific Committee (2007)
0.03
0.027339159 = product of:
0.054678317 = sum of:
0.054678317 = product of:
0.082017474 = sum of:
0.027461007 = weight(_text_:h in 1144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027461007 = score(doc=1144,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1250522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = queryNorm
0.21959636 = fieldWeight in 1144, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1144)
0.054556467 = weight(_text_:22 in 1144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054556467 = score(doc=1144,freq=2.0), product of:
0.176261 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050333973 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 30.12.2007 11:22:39
