Search (1377 results, page 1 of 69)

0.21560073 = sum of:
  0.029390492 = product of:
    0.117561966 = sum of:
      0.117561966 = weight(_text_:authors in 3030) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.117561966 = score(doc=3030,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.23577455 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = queryNorm
          0.49862027 = fieldWeight in 3030, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3030)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.009210914 = weight(_text_:a in 3030) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
    0.009210914 = score(doc=3030,freq=6.0), product of:
      0.05963374 = queryWeight, product of:
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.051718395 = queryNorm
      0.1544581 = fieldWeight in 3030, product of:
        2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
          6.0 = termFreq=6.0
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3030)
  0.17699932 = sum of:
    0.12794942 = weight(_text_:de in 3030) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12794942 = score(doc=3030,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.22225924 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051718395 = queryNorm
        0.5756765 = fieldWeight in 3030, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3030)
    0.0490499 = weight(_text_:22 in 3030) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0490499 = score(doc=3030,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18110901 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051718395 = queryNorm
        0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3030, 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=3030)

Abstract

The theory of diffusion can be successfully applied to scientific information dissemination by identifying space with a series of successive authors, and potential (temperature) with the interest of new authors towards earlier published papers, measured by the number of citations. As the total number of citation equals the number of references, the conservation law is fulfilled and Fourier's parabolic differential equation can be applied

Content

Contribution to the 30th anniversary issue of 'Probleme de Informare si Documentare' - Reprint of an article which originally appeared in 'Probleme de Informare si Documentare 13(1978) no.2, S.43-64'

Date

22. 2.1999 16:16:11

Source

Probleme de Informare si Documentare. 31(1997) nos.3/4, S.207-220

Type

a

0.15566769 = product of:
  0.23350154 = sum of:
    0.008595062 = weight(_text_:a in 1144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008595062 = score(doc=1144,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.05963374 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051718395 = queryNorm
        0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 1144, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1144)
    0.22490647 = sum of:
      0.16884944 = weight(_text_:de in 1144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.16884944 = score(doc=1144,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.22225924 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = queryNorm
          0.75969595 = fieldWeight in 1144, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1144)
      0.05605703 = weight(_text_:22 in 1144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05605703 = score(doc=1144,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18110901 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = 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)

Date

30.12.2007 11:22:39

Imprint

León : Universidad de León, Secretariado de Publicaciones

Source

¬La interdisciplinariedad y la transdisciplinariedad en la organización del conocimiento científico : actas del VIII Congreso ISKO-España, León, 18, 19 y 20 de Abril de 2007 : Interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity in the organization of scientific knowledge. Ed.: B. Rodriguez Bravo u. M.L Alvite Diez

Type

a

0.14050187 = sum of:
  0.023751104 = product of:
    0.09500442 = sum of:
      0.09500442 = weight(_text_:authors in 144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.09500442 = score(doc=144,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.23577455 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = queryNorm
          0.40294603 = fieldWeight in 144, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=144)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.004297531 = weight(_text_:a in 144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
    0.004297531 = score(doc=144,freq=4.0), product of:
      0.05963374 = queryWeight, product of:
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.051718395 = queryNorm
      0.072065435 = fieldWeight in 144, product of:
        2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
          4.0 = termFreq=4.0
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=144)
  0.11245324 = sum of:
    0.08442472 = weight(_text_:de in 144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08442472 = score(doc=144,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.22225924 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051718395 = queryNorm
        0.37984797 = fieldWeight in 144, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=144)
    0.028028514 = weight(_text_:22 in 144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028028514 = score(doc=144,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18110901 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051718395 = queryNorm
        0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 144, 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=144)

Abstract

This work identifies and analyzes literature about knowledge organization (KO), expressed in scientific journals' communication of information science (IS). It performs an exploratory study on the Base de Dados Referencial de Artigos de Periódicos em Ciência da Informação (BRAPCI, Reference Database of Journal Articles on Information Science) between the years 2000 and 2010. The descriptors relating to "knowledge organization" are used in order to recover and analyze the corresponding articles and to identify descriptors and concepts which integrate the semantic universe related to KO. Through the analysis of content, based on metrical studies, this article gathers and interprets data relating to documents and authors. Through this, it demonstrates the development of this field and its research fronts according to the observed characteristics, as well as noting the transformation indicative in the production of knowledge. The work describes the influences of the Spanish researchers on Brazilian literature in the fields of knowledge and information organization. As a result, it presents the most cited and productive authors, the theoretical currents which support them, and the most significant relationships of the Spanish-Brazilian authors network. Based on the constant key-words analysis in the cited articles, the co-existence of the French conception current and the incipient Spanish influence in Brazil is observed. Through this, it contributes to the comprehension of the thematic range relating to KO, stimulating both criticism and self-criticism, debate and knowledge creation, based on studies that have been developed and institutionalized in academic contexts in Spain and Brazil.

Content

Beitrag einer Section "Selected Papers from the 1ST Brazilian Conference on Knowledge Organization And Representation, Faculdade de Ciência da Informação, Campus Universitário Darcy Ribeiro Brasília, DF Brasil, October 20-22, 2011" Vgl.: http://www.ergon-verlag.de/isko_ko/downloads/ko_39_2012_3_g.pdf.

Type

a

0.101757996 = product of:
  0.15263699 = sum of:
    0.012155253 = weight(_text_:a in 4942) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012155253 = score(doc=4942,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.05963374 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051718395 = queryNorm
        0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 4942, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4942)
    0.14048174 = sum of:
      0.08442472 = weight(_text_:de in 4942) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08442472 = score(doc=4942,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.22225924 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = queryNorm
          0.37984797 = fieldWeight in 4942, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4942)
      0.05605703 = weight(_text_:22 in 4942) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05605703 = score(doc=4942,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18110901 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4942, 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=4942)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Date

20. 1.2019 11:22:31

Source

Knowledge organization for a sustainable world: challenges and perspectives for cultural, scientific, and technological sharing in a connected society : proceedings of the Fourteenth International ISKO Conference 27-29 September 2016, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil / organized by International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), ISKO-Brazil, São Paulo State University ; edited by José Augusto Chaves Guimarães, Suellen Oliveira Milani, Vera Dodebei

Type

a

0.0922776 = sum of:
  0.020782216 = product of:
    0.08312886 = sum of:
      0.08312886 = weight(_text_:authors in 6388) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08312886 = score(doc=6388,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.23577455 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = queryNorm
          0.35257778 = fieldWeight in 6388, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6388)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.0075206803 = weight(_text_:a in 6388) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
    0.0075206803 = score(doc=6388,freq=4.0), product of:
      0.05963374 = queryWeight, product of:
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.051718395 = queryNorm
      0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 6388, product of:
        2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
          4.0 = termFreq=4.0
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6388)
  0.06397471 = product of:
    0.12794942 = sum of:
      0.12794942 = weight(_text_:de in 6388) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.12794942 = score(doc=6388,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.22225924 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = queryNorm
          0.5756765 = fieldWeight in 6388, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6388)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Reports results of an automated search of the term 'information technology' and 20 related terms in the ERIC database, 1982-1991, which revealed data related to: scientific production relating to information technology; core journals; types of documents; types of authors and their output; sponsoring institutions; publishing output by country; desciptors; and related terms. The following bibliometric laws are applied: Bradford's law; Lotka's law; and Spearman's and Pearson's laws. Provides an insight into the role of bibliometrics as a scientific discipline for the study of the development of new technologies and their impact on information activity

Source

Ciencias de la informacion. 26(1995) no.4, S.162-173

Type

a

0.08060752 = sum of:
  0.039831813 = product of:
    0.15932725 = sum of:
      0.15932725 = weight(_text_:authors in 824) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.15932725 = score(doc=824,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.23577455 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = queryNorm
          0.67576104 = fieldWeight in 824, product of:
            3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
              10.0 = termFreq=10.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=824)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.009116441 = weight(_text_:a in 824) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
    0.009116441 = score(doc=824,freq=8.0), product of:
      0.05963374 = queryWeight, product of:
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.051718395 = queryNorm
      0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 824, product of:
        2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
          8.0 = termFreq=8.0
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=824)
  0.031659268 = product of:
    0.063318536 = sum of:
      0.063318536 = weight(_text_:de in 824) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.063318536 = score(doc=824,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.22225924 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = queryNorm
          0.28488597 = fieldWeight in 824, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=824)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This is a study about the relationships between authors and the main thematic categories in the papers published in the last five International ISKO Conferences, held between 2002 and 2010. The aim is to map the domain as ISKO conferences are considered the most representative forum in the field. The published papers are considered to indicate the relationships between authors and themes. The Classification Scheme for Knowledge Organization Literature (CSKOL) was used to categorize the papers. The theoretical and methodological foundations of the study can be found in the concept of domain analysis proposed by Hjørland. The analysis of the papers (n=146) led to the identification of the most productive authors, the networks representing the relationships between the authors as also the categories that constitute the primary areas of research.

Source

Categories, contexts and relations in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the Twelfth International ISKO Conference 6-9 August 2012, Mysore, India. Eds.: Neelameghan, A. u. K.S. Raghavan

Type

a

0.07377139 = sum of:
  0.043633565 = product of:
    0.17453426 = sum of:
      0.17453426 = weight(_text_:authors in 853) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.17453426 = score(doc=853,freq=12.0), product of:
          0.23577455 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = queryNorm
          0.7402591 = fieldWeight in 853, product of:
            3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
              12.0 = termFreq=12.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=853)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.009116441 = weight(_text_:a in 853) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
    0.009116441 = score(doc=853,freq=8.0), product of:
      0.05963374 = queryWeight, product of:
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.051718395 = queryNorm
      0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 853, product of:
        2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
          8.0 = termFreq=8.0
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=853)
  0.021021385 = product of:
    0.04204277 = sum of:
      0.04204277 = weight(_text_:22 in 853) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04204277 = score(doc=853,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18110901 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 853, 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=853)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Reports results of a bibliometric study of the authorship characteristics of articles published in 4 major information science periodicals: JASIS, Information technology and libraries, Journal of information science, and Program. The aim was to determine the details of their authors, such as: sex, occupation, affiliation, geographic distribution, and institutional affiliation. A total of 163 articles published in 1993 and written by 294 authors were analyzed. Results indicate that: men (206 or 70%) publish 3.0 times more articles than women (69 or 23,5%). Schools of library and information science contributed the most authors. The majority of authors came from the USA (148 or 50,3%), with the Midwest region claiming the largest share (110 or 25,0%). Academic libraries (110 or 37,4%) account for the major share of library publication. 12 schools of library and information science, in the USA, contributed 32 authors (50,0%) and assistant professors (25 or 39,1%) publish the most in these library schools. Male school of library and information science authors publish 1,6 times more than their female counterparts

Source

International forum on information and documentation. 22(1997) no.3, S.3-23

Type

a

0.07277879 = sum of:
  0.017813329 = product of:
    0.071253315 = sum of:
      0.071253315 = weight(_text_:authors in 4920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.071253315 = score(doc=4920,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.23577455 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = queryNorm
          0.30220953 = fieldWeight in 4920, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4920)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.010192491 = weight(_text_:a in 4920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
    0.010192491 = score(doc=4920,freq=10.0), product of:
      0.05963374 = queryWeight, product of:
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.051718395 = queryNorm
      0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 4920, product of:
        3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
          10.0 = termFreq=10.0
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4920)
  0.044772968 = product of:
    0.089545935 = sum of:
      0.089545935 = weight(_text_:de in 4920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.089545935 = score(doc=4920,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.22225924 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = queryNorm
          0.4028896 = fieldWeight in 4920, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4920)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The authors propose a bibliometric model for discarding journal volumes at academic libraries, i.e., removal to offsite storage as part of the library's serials collection. The method is based an the volume as the unit of measurement and an user satisfaction with given titles. The discarding age, calculated for each volume, from the year of publication to the year of decision to discard, is dependent an citation half-life, relative productivity, knowledge area, and residual utility (potential consultations). The model makes it possible to predict the approximate size of a collection when a stationary state is reached in which the inflow of journal volumes is equal to the outflow from discarding. The model is also able to determine the rate of growth of the holdings. This information can be used to optimize future use of available space and economic and maintenance resources; thus promoting efficient management of the collection.

Type

a

0.069482386 = sum of:
  0.008906664 = product of:
    0.035626657 = sum of:
      0.035626657 = weight(_text_:authors in 3809) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035626657 = score(doc=3809,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.23577455 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = queryNorm
          0.15110476 = fieldWeight in 3809, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3809)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.007895069 = weight(_text_:a in 3809) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
    0.007895069 = score(doc=3809,freq=24.0), product of:
      0.05963374 = queryWeight, product of:
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.051718395 = queryNorm
      0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 3809, product of:
        4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
          24.0 = termFreq=24.0
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3809)
  0.052680653 = sum of:
    0.031659268 = weight(_text_:de in 3809) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031659268 = score(doc=3809,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22225924 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051718395 = queryNorm
        0.14244299 = fieldWeight in 3809, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3809)
    0.021021385 = weight(_text_:22 in 3809) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021021385 = score(doc=3809,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18110901 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051718395 = queryNorm
        0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 3809, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3809)

Abstract

This year marks 350 years since the inaugural publications of both the Journal des Sçavans and the Philosophical Transactions, first published in 1665 and considered the birth of the peer-reviewed journal article. This form of scholarly communication has not only remained the dominant model for disseminating new knowledge (particularly for science and medicine), but has also increased substantially in volume. Derek de Solla Price - the "father of scientometrics" (Merton and Garfield, 1986, p. vii) - was the first to document the exponential increase in scientific journals and showed that "scientists have always felt themselves to be awash in a sea of the scientific literature" (Price, 1963, p. 15), as, for example, expressed at the 1948 Royal Society's Scientific Information Conference: Not for the first time in history, but more acutely than ever before, there was a fear that scientists would be overwhelmed, that they would be no longer able to control the vast amounts of potentially relevant material that were pouring forth from the world's presses, that science itself was under threat (Bawden and Robinson, 2008, p. 183).
One of the solutions to help scientists filter the most relevant publications and, thus, to stay current on developments in their fields during the transition from "little science" to "big science", was the introduction of citation indexing as a Wellsian "World Brain" (Garfield, 1964) of scientific information: It is too much to expect a research worker to spend an inordinate amount of time searching for the bibliographic descendants of antecedent papers. It would not be excessive to demand that the thorough scholar check all papers that have cited or criticized such papers, if they could be located quickly. The citation index makes this check practicable (Garfield, 1955, p. 108). In retrospective, citation indexing can be perceived as a pre-social web version of crowdsourcing, as it is based on the concept that the community of citing authors outperforms indexers in highlighting cognitive links between papers, particularly on the level of specific ideas and concepts (Garfield, 1983). Over the last 50 years, citation analysis and more generally, bibliometric methods, have developed from information retrieval tools to research evaluation metrics, where they are presumed to make scientific funding more efficient and effective (Moed, 2006). However, the dominance of bibliometric indicators in research evaluation has also led to significant goal displacement (Merton, 1957) and the oversimplification of notions of "research productivity" and "scientific quality", creating adverse effects such as salami publishing, honorary authorships, citation cartels, and misuse of indicators (Binswanger, 2015; Cronin and Sugimoto, 2014; Frey and Osterloh, 2006; Haustein and Larivière, 2015; Weingart, 2005).
Furthermore, the rise of the web, and subsequently, the social web, has challenged the quasi-monopolistic status of the journal as the main form of scholarly communication and citation indices as the primary assessment mechanisms. Scientific communication is becoming more open, transparent, and diverse: publications are increasingly open access; manuscripts, presentations, code, and data are shared online; research ideas and results are discussed and criticized openly on blogs; and new peer review experiments, with open post publication assessment by anonymous or non-anonymous referees, are underway. The diversification of scholarly production and assessment, paired with the increasing speed of the communication process, leads to an increased information overload (Bawden and Robinson, 2008), demanding new filters. The concept of altmetrics, short for alternative (to citation) metrics, was created out of an attempt to provide a filter (Priem et al., 2010) and to steer against the oversimplification of the measurement of scientific success solely on the basis of number of journal articles published and citations received, by considering a wider range of research outputs and metrics (Piwowar, 2013). Although the term altmetrics was introduced in a tweet in 2010 (Priem, 2010), the idea of capturing traces - "polymorphous mentioning" (Cronin et al., 1998, p. 1320) - of scholars and their documents on the web to measure "impact" of science in a broader manner than citations was introduced years before, largely in the context of webometrics (Almind and Ingwersen, 1997; Thelwall et al., 2005):
There will soon be a critical mass of web-based digital objects and usage statistics on which to model scholars' communication behaviors - publishing, posting, blogging, scanning, reading, downloading, glossing, linking, citing, recommending, acknowledging - and with which to track their scholarly influence and impact, broadly conceived and broadly felt (Cronin, 2005, p. 196). A decade after Cronin's prediction and five years after the coining of altmetrics, the time seems ripe to reflect upon the role of social media in scholarly communication. This Special Issue does so by providing an overview of current research on the indicators and metrics grouped under the umbrella term of altmetrics, on their relationships with traditional indicators of scientific activity, and on the uses that are made of the various social media platforms - on which these indicators are based - by scientists of various disciplines.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

Type

a

0.06880867 = sum of:
  0.04198642 = product of:
    0.16794568 = sum of:
      0.16794568 = weight(_text_:authors in 4150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.16794568 = score(doc=4150,freq=16.0), product of:
          0.23577455 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = queryNorm
          0.7123147 = fieldWeight in 4150, product of:
            4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
              16.0 = termFreq=16.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4150)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.0093044285 = weight(_text_:a in 4150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
    0.0093044285 = score(doc=4150,freq=12.0), product of:
      0.05963374 = queryWeight, product of:
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.051718395 = queryNorm
      0.15602624 = fieldWeight in 4150, product of:
        3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
          12.0 = termFreq=12.0
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4150)
  0.017517822 = product of:
    0.035035644 = sum of:
      0.035035644 = weight(_text_:22 in 4150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035035644 = score(doc=4150,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18110901 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4150, 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=4150)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The domain of knowledge organization (KO) represents a foundational area of information science. One way to better understand the intellectual structure of the KO domain is to apply bibliometric methods to key contributors to the literature. This study analyzes the most prolific contributing authors to the journal Knowledge Organization, the sources they cite and the citations they receive for the period 1993 to 2016. The analyses were conducted using visualization outcomes of citation, co-citation and author bibliographic coupling analysis to reveal theoretical points of reference among authors and the most prominent research themes that constitute this scientific community. Birger Hjørland was the most cited author, and was situated at or near the middle of each of the maps based on different citation relationships. The proximities between authors resulting from the different citation relationships demonstrate how authors situate themselves intellectually through the citations they give and how other authors situate them through the citations received. There is a consistent core of theoretical references as well among the most productive authors. We observed a close network of scholarly communication between the authors cited in this core, which indicates the actual role of the journal Knowledge Organization as a space for knowledge construction in the area of knowledge organization.

Source

Knowledge organization. 45(2018) no.1, S.13-22

Type

a

0.06704361 = sum of:
  0.025191851 = product of:
    0.100767404 = sum of:
      0.100767404 = weight(_text_:authors in 3332) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.100767404 = score(doc=3332,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.23577455 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = queryNorm
          0.42738882 = fieldWeight in 3332, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3332)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.010192491 = weight(_text_:a in 3332) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
    0.010192491 = score(doc=3332,freq=10.0), product of:
      0.05963374 = queryWeight, product of:
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.051718395 = queryNorm
      0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 3332, product of:
        3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
          10.0 = termFreq=10.0
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3332)
  0.031659268 = product of:
    0.063318536 = sum of:
      0.063318536 = weight(_text_:de in 3332) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.063318536 = score(doc=3332,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.22225924 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = queryNorm
          0.28488597 = fieldWeight in 3332, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3332)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The specific impact index, or s-index, is introduced as a measure of a scientist's projected impact per paper. The index is complementary to other indices that measure overall impact as it can distinguish between authors maximizing the quantity of their output and authors maximizing the quality of their output. It also can be used to monitor career progress. The main advantage of the new index is that it reduces age bias from older papers that have more time to accumulate citations than do more recent papers. The index was tested on 24 scientists in different fields and of different statures. The overall projected impact estimated from the index correlates well with Hirsch's h-index squared (r**2=0.99). The impact of different aging models was evaluated as well.

Type

a

0.065376036 = sum of:
  0.029688882 = product of:
    0.11875553 = sum of:
      0.11875553 = weight(_text_:authors in 3106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.11875553 = score(doc=3106,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.23577455 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = queryNorm
          0.50368255 = fieldWeight in 3106, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3106)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.0093044285 = weight(_text_:a in 3106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
    0.0093044285 = score(doc=3106,freq=12.0), product of:
      0.05963374 = queryWeight, product of:
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.051718395 = queryNorm
      0.15602624 = fieldWeight in 3106, product of:
        3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
          12.0 = termFreq=12.0
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3106)
  0.026382726 = product of:
    0.05276545 = sum of:
      0.05276545 = weight(_text_:de in 3106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05276545 = score(doc=3106,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.22225924 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = queryNorm
          0.23740499 = fieldWeight in 3106, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3106)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In this paper we analyze a major part of the research output of the Networked Knowledge Organization Systems (NKOS) community in the period 2000 to 2015 from a network analytical perspective. We fo- cus on the paper output presented at the European NKOS workshops in the last 15 years. Our open dataset, the "NKOS bibliography", includes 14 workshop agendas (ECDL 2000-2010, TPDL 2011-2015) and 4 special issues on NKOS (2001, 2004, 2006 and 2015) which cover 171 papers with 218 distinct authors in total. A focus of the analysis is the visualization of co-authorship networks in this interdisciplinary eld. We used standard network analytic measures like degree and betweenness centrality to de- scribe the co-authorship distribution in our NKOS dataset. We can see in our dataset that 15% (with degree=0) of authors had no co-authorship with others and 53% of them had a maximum of 3 cooperations with other authors. 32% had at least 4 co-authors for all of their papers. The NKOS co-author network in the "NKOS bibliography" is a typical co- authorship network with one relatively large component, many smaller components and many isolated co-authorships or triples.

Type

a

0.06438665 = product of:
  0.09657997 = sum of:
    0.012155253 = weight(_text_:a in 2830) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012155253 = score(doc=2830,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05963374 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051718395 = queryNorm
        0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 2830, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2830)
    0.08442472 = product of:
      0.16884944 = sum of:
        0.16884944 = weight(_text_:de in 2830) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.16884944 = score(doc=2830,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22225924 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051718395 = queryNorm
            0.75969595 = fieldWeight in 2830, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2830)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Type

a

0.06063791 = sum of:
  0.017813329 = product of:
    0.071253315 = sum of:
      0.071253315 = weight(_text_:authors in 68) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.071253315 = score(doc=68,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.23577455 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = queryNorm
          0.30220953 = fieldWeight in 68, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=68)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.011165313 = weight(_text_:a in 68) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
    0.011165313 = score(doc=68,freq=12.0), product of:
      0.05963374 = queryWeight, product of:
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.051718395 = queryNorm
      0.18723148 = fieldWeight in 68, product of:
        3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
          12.0 = termFreq=12.0
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=68)
  0.031659268 = product of:
    0.063318536 = sum of:
      0.063318536 = weight(_text_:de in 68) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.063318536 = score(doc=68,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.22225924 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = queryNorm
          0.28488597 = fieldWeight in 68, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=68)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Domestic citation to papers from the same country and the greater citation impact of documents involving international collaboration are two phenomena that have been extensively studied and contrasted. Here, however, we show that it is not so much a national bias, but that papers have a greater impact on their immediate environments, an impact that is diluted as that environment grows. For this reason, the greatest biases are observed in countries with a limited production. Papers that involve international collaboration have a greater impact in general, on the one hand, because they have multiple "immediate environments," and on the other because of their greater quality or prestige. In short, one can say that science knows no frontiers. Certainly there is a greater impact on the authors' immediate environment, but this does not necessarily have to coincide with their national environments, which fade in importance as the collaborative environment expands.

Type

a

0.059887897 = sum of:
  0.025191851 = product of:
    0.100767404 = sum of:
      0.100767404 = weight(_text_:authors in 2751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.100767404 = score(doc=2751,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.23577455 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = queryNorm
          0.42738882 = fieldWeight in 2751, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2751)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.0136746615 = weight(_text_:a in 2751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
    0.0136746615 = score(doc=2751,freq=18.0), product of:
      0.05963374 = queryWeight, product of:
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.051718395 = queryNorm
      0.22931081 = fieldWeight in 2751, product of:
        4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
          18.0 = termFreq=18.0
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2751)
  0.021021385 = product of:
    0.04204277 = sum of:
      0.04204277 = weight(_text_:22 in 2751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04204277 = score(doc=2751,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18110901 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = 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)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Why authors choose some references in preference to others is a question that is still not wholly answered despite its being of interest to scientists. The relevance of references is twofold: They are a mechanism for tracing the evolution of science, and because they enhance the image of the cited authors, citations are a widely known and used indicator of scientific endeavor. Following an extensive review of the literature, we selected all papers that seek to answer the central question and demonstrate that the existing theories are not sufficient: Neither citation nor indicator theory provides a complete and convincing answer. Some perspectives in this arena remain, which are isolated from the core literature. The purpose of this article is to offer a fresh perspective on a 30-year-old problem by extending the context of the discussion. We suggest reviving the discussion about citation theories with a new perspective, that of the readers, by layers or phases, in the final choice of references, allowing for a new classification in which any paper, to date, could be included.

Date

22. 3.2009 19:05:07

Type

a

0.059770044 = sum of:
  0.03085359 = product of:
    0.12341436 = sum of:
      0.12341436 = weight(_text_:authors in 4000) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.12341436 = score(doc=4000,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.23577455 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = queryNorm
          0.52344227 = fieldWeight in 4000, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4000)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.007895069 = weight(_text_:a in 4000) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
    0.007895069 = score(doc=4000,freq=6.0), product of:
      0.05963374 = queryWeight, product of:
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.051718395 = queryNorm
      0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 4000, product of:
        2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
          6.0 = termFreq=6.0
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4000)
  0.021021385 = product of:
    0.04204277 = sum of:
      0.04204277 = weight(_text_:22 in 4000) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04204277 = score(doc=4000,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18110901 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4000, 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=4000)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Author research impact was examined based on citer analysis (the number of citers as opposed to the number of citations) for 90 highly cited authors grouped into three broad subject areas. Citer-based outcome measures were also compared with more traditional citation-based measures for levels of association. The authors found that there are significant differences in citer-based outcomes among the three broad subject areas examined and that there is a high degree of correlation between citer and citation-based measures for all measures compared, except for two outcomes calculated for the social sciences. Citer-based measures do produce slightly different rankings of authors based on citer counts when compared to more traditional citation counts. Examples are provided. Citation measures may not adequately address the influence, or reach, of an author because citations usually do not address the origin of the citation beyond self-citations.

Date

28. 9.2010 12:54:22

Type

a

0.059691086 = sum of:
  0.025711328 = product of:
    0.10284531 = sum of:
      0.10284531 = weight(_text_:authors in 3863) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.10284531 = score(doc=3863,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.23577455 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = queryNorm
          0.43620193 = fieldWeight in 3863, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3863)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.0075970334 = weight(_text_:a in 3863) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
    0.0075970334 = score(doc=3863,freq=8.0), product of:
      0.05963374 = queryWeight, product of:
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.051718395 = queryNorm
      0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 3863, product of:
        2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
          8.0 = termFreq=8.0
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3863)
  0.026382726 = product of:
    0.05276545 = sum of:
      0.05276545 = weight(_text_:de in 3863) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05276545 = score(doc=3863,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.22225924 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = queryNorm
          0.23740499 = fieldWeight in 3863, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3863)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Knowledge Organization (KO) theoretical foundations are still being developed in a continuous process of epistemological, theoretical and methodological consolidation. The remarkable growth of scientific records has stimulated the analysis of this production and the creation of instruments to evaluate the behavior of science became indispensable. We propose the Domain Analysis of KO in North America through the citation analysis of North American Symposium on Knowledge Organization (NASKO) proceedings (2007 - 2015). We present the citation, co-citation and bibliographic coupling analysis to visualize and recognize the researchers that influence the scholarly communication in this domain. The most prolific authors through NASKO conferences are Smiraglia, Tennis, Green, Dousa, Grant Campbell, Pimentel, Beak, La Barre, Kipp and Fox. Regarding their theoretical references, Hjørland, Olson, Smiraglia, and Ranganathan are the authors who most inspired the event's studies. The co-citation network shows the highest frequency is between Olson and Mai, followed by Hjørland and Mai and Beghtol and Mai, consolidating Mai and Hjørland as the central authors of the theoretical references in NASKO. The strongest theoretical proximity in author bibliographic coupling network occurs between Fox and Tennis, Dousa and Tennis, Tennis and Smiraglia, Dousa and Beak, and Pimentel and Tennis, highlighting Tennis as central author, that interconnects the others in relation to KO theoretical references in NASKO. The North American chapter has demonstrated a strong scientific production as well as a high level of concern with theoretical and epistemological questions, gathering researchers from different countries, universities and knowledge areas.

Type

a

0.059275325 = product of:
  0.088912986 = sum of:
    0.015041361 = weight(_text_:a in 284) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015041361 = score(doc=284,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.05963374 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051718395 = queryNorm
        0.25222903 = fieldWeight in 284, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=284)
    0.07387163 = product of:
      0.14774325 = sum of:
        0.14774325 = weight(_text_:de in 284) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14774325 = score(doc=284,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22225924 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051718395 = queryNorm
            0.66473395 = fieldWeight in 284, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=284)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Source

Science, technology and society: a cross-disciplinary perspective. Ed: I. Spiegel-Rosing u. D. de Solla Price

Type

a

0.058979012 = sum of:
  0.025711328 = product of:
    0.10284531 = sum of:
      0.10284531 = weight(_text_:authors in 2590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.10284531 = score(doc=2590,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.23577455 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = queryNorm
          0.43620193 = fieldWeight in 2590, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2590)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.008493742 = weight(_text_:a in 2590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
    0.008493742 = score(doc=2590,freq=10.0), product of:
      0.05963374 = queryWeight, product of:
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.051718395 = queryNorm
      0.14243183 = fieldWeight in 2590, product of:
        3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
          10.0 = termFreq=10.0
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2590)
  0.02477394 = product of:
    0.04954788 = sum of:
      0.04954788 = weight(_text_:22 in 2590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04954788 = score(doc=2590,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.18110901 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = queryNorm
          0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2590, 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=2590)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to analyse the global scientific outputs of ontology research, an important emerging discipline that has huge potential to improve information understanding, organization, and management. Design/methodology/approach - This study collected literature published during 1900-2012 from the Web of Science database. The bibliometric analysis was performed from authorial, institutional, national, spatiotemporal, and topical aspects. Basic statistical analysis, visualization of geographic distribution, co-word analysis, and a new index were applied to the selected data. Findings - Characteristics of publication outputs suggested that ontology research has entered into the soaring stage, along with increased participation and collaboration. The authors identified the leading authors, institutions, nations, and articles in ontology research. Authors were more from North America, Europe, and East Asia. The USA took the lead, while China grew fastest. Four major categories of frequently used keywords were identified: applications in Semantic Web, applications in bioinformatics, philosophy theories, and common supporting technology. Semantic Web research played a core role, and gene ontology study was well-developed. The study focus of ontology has shifted from philosophy to information science. Originality/value - This is the first study to quantify global research patterns and trends in ontology, which might provide a potential guide for the future research. The new index provides an alternative way to evaluate the multidisciplinary influence of researchers.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22
17. 9.2018 18:22:23

Type

a

0.0580823 = sum of:
  0.025711328 = product of:
    0.10284531 = sum of:
      0.10284531 = weight(_text_:authors in 2808) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.10284531 = score(doc=2808,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.23577455 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = queryNorm
          0.43620193 = fieldWeight in 2808, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2808)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.0075970334 = weight(_text_:a in 2808) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
    0.0075970334 = score(doc=2808,freq=8.0), product of:
      0.05963374 = queryWeight, product of:
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.051718395 = queryNorm
      0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 2808, product of:
        2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
          8.0 = termFreq=8.0
        1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
        0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2808)
  0.02477394 = product of:
    0.04954788 = sum of:
      0.04954788 = weight(_text_:22 in 2808) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04954788 = score(doc=2808,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.18110901 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051718395 = queryNorm
          0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2808, 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=2808)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Internet based electronic resources are growing dramatically but there have been no empirical studies evaluating the impact of e-sources, as a whole, on formal scholarly communication. reports results of an investigation into how much e-sources have been used in formal scholarly communication, using a case study in the area of Library and Information Science (LIS) during the period 1994 to 1996. 4 citation based indicators were used in the study of the impact measurement. Concludes that, compared with the impact of print sources, the impact of e-sources on formal scholarly communication in LIS is small, as measured by e-sources cited, and does not increase significantly by year even though there is observable growth of these impact across the years. It is found that periodical format is related to the rate of citing e-sources, articles are more likely to cite e-sources than are print priodical articles. However, once authors cite electronic resource, there is no significant difference in the number of references per article by periodical format or by year. Suggests that, at this stage, citing e-sources may depend on authors rather than the periodical format in which authors choose to publish

Date

30. 1.1999 17:22:22

Type

a