-
Heneberg, P.: Supposedly uncited articles of Nobel laureates and Fields medalists can be prevalently attributed to the errors of omission and commission (2013)
0.13
0.12501244 = product of:
0.21430705 = sum of:
0.005979372 = weight(_text_:information in 660) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.005979372 = score(doc=660,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0616574 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 660, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=660)
0.006839816 = weight(_text_:for in 660) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.006839816 = score(doc=660,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06594466 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.103720546 = fieldWeight in 660, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=660)
0.018706596 = weight(_text_:the in 660) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018706596 = score(doc=660,freq=30.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.33756918 = fieldWeight in 660, product of:
5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
30.0 = termFreq=30.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=660)
0.13261536 = weight(_text_:commission in 660) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.13261536 = score(doc=660,freq=4.0), product of:
0.24417253 = queryWeight, product of:
6.9519553 = idf(docFreq=114, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.5431215 = fieldWeight in 660, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
6.9519553 = idf(docFreq=114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=660)
0.019562665 = weight(_text_:of in 660) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019562665 = score(doc=660,freq=34.0), product of:
0.054923624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.35617945 = fieldWeight in 660, product of:
5.8309517 = tf(freq=34.0), with freq of:
34.0 = termFreq=34.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=660)
0.018706596 = weight(_text_:the in 660) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018706596 = score(doc=660,freq=30.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.33756918 = fieldWeight in 660, product of:
5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
30.0 = termFreq=30.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=660)
0.011896656 = product of:
0.023793312 = sum of:
0.023793312 = weight(_text_:22 in 660) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023793312 = score(doc=660,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12299426 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 660, 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=660)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5833333 = coord(7/12)
- Abstract
- Several independent authors reported a high share of uncited publications, which include those produced by top scientists. This share was repeatedly reported to exceed 10% of the total papers produced, without any explanation of this phenomenon and the lack of difference in uncitedness between average and successful researchers. In this report, we analyze the uncitedness among two independent groups of highly visible scientists (mathematicians represented by Fields medalists, and researchers in physiology or medicine represented by Nobel Prize laureates in the respective field). Analysis of both groups led to the identical conclusion: over 90% of the uncited database records of highly visible scientists can be explained by the inclusion of editorial materials progress reports presented at international meetings (meeting abstracts), discussion items (letters to the editor, discussion), personalia (biographic items), and by errors of omission and commission of the Web of Science (WoS) database and of the citing documents. Only a marginal amount of original articles and reviews were found to be uncited (0.9 and 0.3%, respectively), which is in strong contrast with the previously reported data, which never addressed the document types among the uncited records.
- Date
- 22. 3.2013 19:21:46
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.3, S.448-454
-
Jacso, P.: Testing the calculation of a realistic h-index in Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science for F. W. Lancaster (2008)
0.12
0.11858423 = product of:
0.20328726 = sum of:
0.022975057 = product of:
0.06892517 = sum of:
0.06892517 = weight(_text_:f in 5586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06892517 = score(doc=5586,freq=10.0), product of:
0.13999219 = queryWeight, product of:
3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.4923501 = fieldWeight in 5586, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5586)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.008456109 = weight(_text_:information in 5586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008456109 = score(doc=5586,freq=4.0), product of:
0.0616574 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 5586, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5586)
0.015294294 = weight(_text_:for in 5586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015294294 = score(doc=5586,freq=10.0), product of:
0.06594466 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.2319262 = fieldWeight in 5586, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5586)
0.021053577 = weight(_text_:the in 5586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021053577 = score(doc=5586,freq=38.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.37992156 = fieldWeight in 5586, product of:
6.164414 = tf(freq=38.0), with freq of:
38.0 = termFreq=38.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5586)
0.093773216 = weight(_text_:commission in 5586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.093773216 = score(doc=5586,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24417253 = queryWeight, product of:
6.9519553 = idf(docFreq=114, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.38404492 = fieldWeight in 5586, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.9519553 = idf(docFreq=114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5586)
0.02068142 = weight(_text_:of in 5586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02068142 = score(doc=5586,freq=38.0), product of:
0.054923624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.37654874 = fieldWeight in 5586, product of:
6.164414 = tf(freq=38.0), with freq of:
38.0 = termFreq=38.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5586)
0.021053577 = weight(_text_:the in 5586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021053577 = score(doc=5586,freq=38.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.37992156 = fieldWeight in 5586, product of:
6.164414 = tf(freq=38.0), with freq of:
38.0 = termFreq=38.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5586)
0.5833333 = coord(7/12)
- Abstract
- This paper focuses on the practical limitations in the content and software of the databases that are used to calculate the h-index for assessing the publishing productivity and impact of researchers. To celebrate F. W. Lancaster's biological age of seventy-five, and "scientific age" of forty-five, this paper discusses the related features of Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science (WoS), and demonstrates in the latter how a much more realistic and fair h-index can be computed for F. W. Lancaster than the one produced automatically. Browsing and searching the cited reference index of the 1945-2007 edition of WoS, which in my estimate has over a hundred million "orphan references" that have no counterpart master records to be attached to, and "stray references" that cite papers which do have master records but cannot be identified by the matching algorithm because of errors of omission and commission in the references of the citing works, can bring up hundreds of additional cited references given to works of an accomplished author but are ignored in the automatic process of calculating the h-index. The partially manual process doubled the h-index value for F. W. Lancaster from 13 to 26, which is a much more realistic value for an information scientist and professor of his stature.
- Content
- Beitrag in einem Themenheft 'The Influence of F. W. Lancaster on Information Science and on Libraries', das als Festschrift für F.W. Lancaster deklariert ist.
- Object
- Web of Science
-
Heneberg, P.: Lifting the fog of scientometric research artifacts : on the scientometric analysis of environmental tobacco smoke research (2013)
0.10
0.103274226 = product of:
0.20654845 = sum of:
0.005979372 = weight(_text_:information in 613) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.005979372 = score(doc=613,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0616574 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 613, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=613)
0.006839816 = weight(_text_:for in 613) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.006839816 = score(doc=613,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06594466 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.103720546 = fieldWeight in 613, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=613)
0.020492045 = weight(_text_:the in 613) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020492045 = score(doc=613,freq=36.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.36978847 = fieldWeight in 613, product of:
6.0 = tf(freq=36.0), with freq of:
36.0 = termFreq=36.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=613)
0.13261536 = weight(_text_:commission in 613) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.13261536 = score(doc=613,freq=4.0), product of:
0.24417253 = queryWeight, product of:
6.9519553 = idf(docFreq=114, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.5431215 = fieldWeight in 613, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
6.9519553 = idf(docFreq=114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=613)
0.020129817 = weight(_text_:of in 613) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020129817 = score(doc=613,freq=36.0), product of:
0.054923624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.36650562 = fieldWeight in 613, product of:
6.0 = tf(freq=36.0), with freq of:
36.0 = termFreq=36.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=613)
0.020492045 = weight(_text_:the in 613) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020492045 = score(doc=613,freq=36.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.36978847 = fieldWeight in 613, product of:
6.0 = tf(freq=36.0), with freq of:
36.0 = termFreq=36.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=613)
0.5 = coord(6/12)
- Abstract
- Previous analyses identified research on environmental tobacco smoke to be subject to strong fluctuations as measured by both quantitative and qualitative indicators. The evolution of search algorithms (based on the Web of Science and Web of Knowledge database platforms) was used to show the impact of errors of omission and commission in the outcomes of scientometric research. Optimization of the search algorithm led to the complete reassessment of previously published findings on the performance of environmental tobacco smoke research. Instead of strong continuous growth, the field of environmental tobacco smoke research was shown to experience stagnation or slow growth since mid-1990s when evaluated quantitatively. Qualitative analysis revealed steady but slow increase in the citation rate and decrease in uncitedness. Country analysis revealed the North-European countries as leaders in environmental tobacco smoke research (when the normalized results were evaluated both quantitatively and qualitatively), whereas the United States ranked first only when assessing the total number of papers produced. Scientometric research artifacts, including both errors of omission and commission, were shown to be capable of completely obscuring the real output of the chosen research field.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.2, S.334-344
-
Stuart, D.: Web metrics for library and information professionals (2014)
0.08
0.07786626 = product of:
0.13348503 = sum of:
0.013235906 = weight(_text_:information in 2274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013235906 = score(doc=2274,freq=20.0), product of:
0.0616574 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.21466857 = fieldWeight in 2274, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2274)
0.009435421 = weight(_text_:und in 2274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009435421 = score(doc=2274,freq=4.0), product of:
0.07784514 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.12120757 = fieldWeight in 2274, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2274)
0.041914333 = weight(_text_:dokumentation in 2274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041914333 = score(doc=2274,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16407113 = queryWeight, product of:
4.671349 = idf(docFreq=1124, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.2554644 = fieldWeight in 2274, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.671349 = idf(docFreq=1124, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2274)
0.013542145 = weight(_text_:for in 2274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013542145 = score(doc=2274,freq=16.0), product of:
0.06594466 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.20535621 = fieldWeight in 2274, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2274)
0.019714538 = weight(_text_:the in 2274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019714538 = score(doc=2274,freq=68.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.35575798 = fieldWeight in 2274, product of:
8.246211 = tf(freq=68.0), with freq of:
68.0 = termFreq=68.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2274)
0.015928157 = weight(_text_:of in 2274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015928157 = score(doc=2274,freq=46.0), product of:
0.054923624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.29000556 = fieldWeight in 2274, product of:
6.78233 = tf(freq=46.0), with freq of:
46.0 = termFreq=46.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2274)
0.019714538 = weight(_text_:the in 2274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019714538 = score(doc=2274,freq=68.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.35575798 = fieldWeight in 2274, product of:
8.246211 = tf(freq=68.0), with freq of:
68.0 = termFreq=68.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2274)
0.5833333 = coord(7/12)
- Abstract
- This is a practical guide to using web metrics to measure impact and demonstrate value. The web provides an opportunity to collect a host of different metrics, from those associated with social media accounts and websites to more traditional research outputs. This book is a clear guide for library and information professionals as to what web metrics are available and how to assess and use them to make informed decisions and demonstrate value. As individuals and organizations increasingly use the web in addition to traditional publishing avenues and formats, this book provides the tools to unlock web metrics and evaluate the impact of this content. The key topics covered include: bibliometrics, webometrics and web metrics; data collection tools; evaluating impact on the web; evaluating social media impact; investigating relationships between actors; exploring traditional publications in a new environment; web metrics and the web of data; the future of web metrics and the library and information professional. The book will provide a practical introduction to web metrics for a wide range of library and information professionals, from the bibliometrician wanting to demonstrate the wider impact of a researcher's work than can be demonstrated through traditional citations databases, to the reference librarian wanting to measure how successfully they are engaging with their users on Twitter. It will be a valuable tool for anyone who wants to not only understand the impact of content, but demonstrate this impact to others within the organization and beyond.
- BK
- 06.00 Information und Dokumentation: Allgemeines
- Classification
- 06.00 Information und Dokumentation: Allgemeines
- Content
- 1. Introduction. MetricsIndicators -- Web metrics and Ranganathan's laws of library science -- Web metrics for the library and information professional -- The aim of this book -- The structure of the rest of this book -- 2. Bibliometrics, webometrics and web metrics. Web metrics -- Information science metrics -- Web analytics -- Relational and evaluative metrics -- Evaluative web metrics -- Relational web metrics -- Validating the results -- 3. Data collection tools. The anatomy of a URL, web links and the structure of the web -- Search engines 1.0 -- Web crawlers -- Search engines 2.0 -- Post search engine 2.0: fragmentation -- 4. Evaluating impact on the web. Websites -- Blogs -- Wikis -- Internal metrics -- External metrics -- A systematic approach to content analysis -- 5. Evaluating social media impact. Aspects of social network sites -- Typology of social network sites -- Research and tools for specific sites and services -- Other social network sites -- URL shorteners: web analytic links on any site -- General social media impact -- Sentiment analysis -- 6. Investigating relationships between actors. Social network analysis methods -- Sources for relational network analysis -- 7. Exploring traditional publications in a new environment. More bibliographic items -- Full text analysis -- Greater context -- 8. Web metrics and the web of data. The web of data -- Building the semantic web -- Implications of the web of data for web metrics -- Investigating the web of data today -- SPARQL -- Sindice -- LDSpider: an RDF web crawler -- 9. The future of web metrics and the library and information professional. How far we have come -- The future of web metrics -- The future of the library and information professional and web metrics.
-
Leydesdorff, L.: Can networks of journal-journal citations be used as indicators of change in the social sciences? (2003)
0.08
0.07585735 = product of:
0.18205765 = sum of:
0.016415559 = weight(_text_:for in 4460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016415559 = score(doc=4460,freq=8.0), product of:
0.06594466 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.24892932 = fieldWeight in 4460, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4460)
0.02592062 = weight(_text_:the in 4460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02592062 = score(doc=4460,freq=40.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.4677496 = fieldWeight in 4460, product of:
6.3245554 = tf(freq=40.0), with freq of:
40.0 = termFreq=40.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4460)
0.019723112 = weight(_text_:of in 4460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019723112 = score(doc=4460,freq=24.0), product of:
0.054923624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.3591007 = fieldWeight in 4460, product of:
4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
24.0 = termFreq=24.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4460)
0.02592062 = weight(_text_:the in 4460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02592062 = score(doc=4460,freq=40.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.4677496 = fieldWeight in 4460, product of:
6.3245554 = tf(freq=40.0), with freq of:
40.0 = termFreq=40.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4460)
0.09407773 = sum of:
0.065525755 = weight(_text_:communities in 4460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.065525755 = score(doc=4460,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18632571 = queryWeight, product of:
5.3049703 = idf(docFreq=596, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.35167316 = fieldWeight in 4460, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.3049703 = idf(docFreq=596, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4460)
0.028551972 = weight(_text_:22 in 4460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028551972 = score(doc=4460,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12299426 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4460, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4460)
0.41666666 = coord(5/12)
- Abstract
- Aggregated journal-journal citations can be used for mapping the intellectual organization of the sciences in terms of specialties because the latter can be considered as interreading communities. Can the journal-journal citations also be used as early indicators of change by comparing the files for two subsequent years? Probabilistic entropy measures enable us to analyze changes in large datasets at different levels of aggregation and in considerable detail. Compares Journal Citation Reports of the Social Science Citation Index for 1999 with similar data for 1998 and analyzes the differences using these measures. Compares the various indicators with similar developments in the Science Citation Index. Specialty formation seems a more important mechanism in the development of the social sciences than in the natural and life sciences, but the developments in the social sciences are volatile. The use of aggregate statistics based on the Science Citation Index is ill-advised in the case of the social sciences because of structural differences in the underlying dynamics.
- Date
- 6.11.2005 19:02:22
- Source
- Journal of documentation. 59(2003) no.1, S.84-104
-
Katsaros, D.; Akritidis, L.; Bozanis, P.: ¬The f index : quantifying the impact of coterminal citations on scientists' ranking (2009)
0.08
0.07542616 = product of:
0.129302 = sum of:
0.021355685 = product of:
0.06406705 = sum of:
0.06406705 = weight(_text_:f in 2805) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06406705 = score(doc=2805,freq=6.0), product of:
0.13999219 = queryWeight, product of:
3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.45764732 = fieldWeight in 2805, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2805)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.007175247 = weight(_text_:information in 2805) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.007175247 = score(doc=2805,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0616574 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2805, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2805)
0.008207779 = weight(_text_:for in 2805) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008207779 = score(doc=2805,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06594466 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.12446466 = fieldWeight in 2805, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2805)
0.020897869 = weight(_text_:the in 2805) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020897869 = score(doc=2805,freq=26.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.37711173 = fieldWeight in 2805, product of:
5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
26.0 = termFreq=26.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2805)
0.018004656 = weight(_text_:of in 2805) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018004656 = score(doc=2805,freq=20.0), product of:
0.054923624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.32781258 = fieldWeight in 2805, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2805)
0.020897869 = weight(_text_:the in 2805) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020897869 = score(doc=2805,freq=26.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.37711173 = fieldWeight in 2805, product of:
5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
26.0 = termFreq=26.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2805)
0.032762878 = product of:
0.065525755 = sum of:
0.065525755 = weight(_text_:communities in 2805) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.065525755 = score(doc=2805,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18632571 = queryWeight, product of:
5.3049703 = idf(docFreq=596, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.35167316 = fieldWeight in 2805, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.3049703 = idf(docFreq=596, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2805)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5833333 = coord(7/12)
- Abstract
- Designing fair and unbiased metrics to measure the level of excellence of a scientist is a very significant task because they recently also have been taken into account when deciding faculty promotions, when allocating funds, and so on. Despite criticism that such scientometric evaluators are confronted with, they do have their merits, and efforts should be spent to arm them with robustness and resistance to manipulation. This article aims at initiating the study of the coterminal citations - their existence and implications - and presents them as a generalization of self-citations and of co-citation; it also shows how they can be used to capture any manipulation attempts against scientometric indicators, and finally presents a new index, the f index, that takes into account the coterminal citations. The utility of the new index is validated using the academic production of a number of esteemed computer scientists. The results confirm that the new index can discriminate those individuals whose work penetrates many scientific communities.
- Object
- f-Index
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.5, S.1051-1056
-
Thelwall, M.: ¬A layered approach for investigating the topological structure of communities in the Web (2003)
0.07
0.07332978 = product of:
0.14665955 = sum of:
0.008456109 = weight(_text_:information in 4450) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008456109 = score(doc=4450,freq=4.0), product of:
0.0616574 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 4450, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4450)
0.01184691 = weight(_text_:for in 4450) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01184691 = score(doc=4450,freq=6.0), product of:
0.06594466 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.17964928 = fieldWeight in 4450, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4450)
0.023163972 = weight(_text_:the in 4450) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023163972 = score(doc=4450,freq=46.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.41800463 = fieldWeight in 4450, product of:
6.78233 = tf(freq=46.0), with freq of:
46.0 = termFreq=46.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4450)
0.018978573 = weight(_text_:of in 4450) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018978573 = score(doc=4450,freq=32.0), product of:
0.054923624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.34554482 = fieldWeight in 4450, product of:
5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
32.0 = termFreq=32.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4450)
0.023163972 = weight(_text_:the in 4450) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023163972 = score(doc=4450,freq=46.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.41800463 = fieldWeight in 4450, product of:
6.78233 = tf(freq=46.0), with freq of:
46.0 = termFreq=46.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4450)
0.061050016 = product of:
0.12210003 = sum of:
0.12210003 = weight(_text_:communities in 4450) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.12210003 = score(doc=4450,freq=10.0), product of:
0.18632571 = queryWeight, product of:
5.3049703 = idf(docFreq=596, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.65530425 = fieldWeight in 4450, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
5.3049703 = idf(docFreq=596, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4450)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(6/12)
- Abstract
- A layered approach for identifying communities in the Web is presented and explored by applying the flake exact community identification algorithm to the UK academic Web. Although community or topic identification is a common task in information retrieval, a new perspective is developed by: the application of alternative document models, shifting the focus from individual pages to aggregated collections based upon Web directories, domains and entire sites; the removal of internal site links; and the adaptation of a new fast algorithm to allow fully-automated community identification using all possible single starting points. The overall topology of the graphs in the three least-aggregated layers was first investigated and found to include a large number of isolated points but, surprisingly, with most of the remainder being in one huge connected component, exact proportions varying by layer. The community identification process then found that the number of communities far exceeded the number of topological components, indicating that community identification is a potentially useful technique, even with random starting points. Both the number and size of communities identified was dependent on the parameter of the algorithm, with very different results being obtained in each case. In conclusion, the UK academic Web is embedded with layers of non-trivial communities and, if it is not unique in this, then there is the promise of improved results for information retrieval algorithms that can exploit this additional structure, and the application of the technique directly to partially automate Web metrics tasks such as that of finding all pages related to a given subject hosted by a single country's universities.
- Source
- Journal of documentation. 59(2003) no.4, S.410-429
-
Debackere, K.; Clarysse, B.: Advanced bibliometric methods to model the relationship between entry behavior and networking in emerging technological communities (1998)
0.07
0.07263832 = product of:
0.14527664 = sum of:
0.008371122 = weight(_text_:information in 330) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008371122 = score(doc=330,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0616574 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 330, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=330)
0.009575742 = weight(_text_:for in 330) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009575742 = score(doc=330,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06594466 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.14520876 = fieldWeight in 330, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=330)
0.02242712 = weight(_text_:the in 330) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02242712 = score(doc=330,freq=22.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.40470776 = fieldWeight in 330, product of:
4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
22.0 = termFreq=22.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=330)
0.016270736 = weight(_text_:of in 330) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016270736 = score(doc=330,freq=12.0), product of:
0.054923624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.29624295 = fieldWeight in 330, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=330)
0.02242712 = weight(_text_:the in 330) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02242712 = score(doc=330,freq=22.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.40470776 = fieldWeight in 330, product of:
4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
22.0 = termFreq=22.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=330)
0.0662048 = product of:
0.1324096 = sum of:
0.1324096 = weight(_text_:communities in 330) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.1324096 = score(doc=330,freq=6.0), product of:
0.18632571 = queryWeight, product of:
5.3049703 = idf(docFreq=596, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.7106351 = fieldWeight in 330, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
5.3049703 = idf(docFreq=596, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=330)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(6/12)
- Abstract
- Organizational ecology and social network theory are used to explain entries in technological communities. Using bibliometric data on 411 organizations in the field of plant biotechnology, we test several hypotheses that entry is not only influenced by the density of the field, but also by the structure of the R&D network within the community. The empirical findings point to the usefulness of bibliometric data in mapping change and evolution in technological communities, as well as to the effects of networking on entry behavior
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 49(1998) no.1, S.49-58
-
Stock, W.G.: ¬Die Wichtigkeit wissenschaftlicher Dokumente relativ zu gegebenen Thematiken (1981)
0.07
0.068388656 = product of:
0.13677731 = sum of:
0.0118385535 = weight(_text_:information in 13) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0118385535 = score(doc=13,freq=4.0), product of:
0.0616574 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 13, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=13)
0.059275817 = weight(_text_:dokumentation in 13) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.059275817 = score(doc=13,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16407113 = queryWeight, product of:
4.671349 = idf(docFreq=1124, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.36128122 = fieldWeight in 13, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.671349 = idf(docFreq=1124, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=13)
0.019151485 = weight(_text_:for in 13) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019151485 = score(doc=13,freq=8.0), product of:
0.06594466 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.29041752 = fieldWeight in 13, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=13)
0.01512036 = weight(_text_:the in 13) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01512036 = score(doc=13,freq=10.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.2728539 = fieldWeight in 13, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=13)
0.016270736 = weight(_text_:of in 13) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016270736 = score(doc=13,freq=12.0), product of:
0.054923624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.29624295 = fieldWeight in 13, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=13)
0.01512036 = weight(_text_:the in 13) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01512036 = score(doc=13,freq=10.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.2728539 = fieldWeight in 13, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=13)
0.5 = coord(6/12)
- Abstract
- Scientific documents are more or less important in relation to give subjects and this importance can be measured. An empirical investigation into philosophical information was carried out using a weighting algorithm developed by N. Henrichs which results in a distribution by weighting of documents on an average philosophical subject. With the aid of statistical methods a threshold value can be obtained that separates the important and unimportant documents on a subject. The knowledge of theis threshold value is important for various practical and theoretic questions: providing new possibilities for research strategy in information retrieval; evaluation of the 'titleworthiness' of subjects by comparison of document titles and themes for which the document at hand is important; and making available data on thematic trends for scientific results
- Source
- Nachrichten für Dokumentation. 32(1981) H.4/5, S.162-164
-
Kronegger, L.; Mali, F.; Ferligoj, A.; Doreian, P.: Classifying scientific disciplines in Slovenia : a study of the evolution of collaboration structures (2015)
0.07
0.06555797 = product of:
0.112385094 = sum of:
0.012329709 = product of:
0.036989126 = sum of:
0.036989126 = weight(_text_:f in 1639) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036989126 = score(doc=1639,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13999219 = queryWeight, product of:
3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.26422277 = fieldWeight in 1639, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1639)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.010147331 = weight(_text_:information in 1639) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010147331 = score(doc=1639,freq=4.0), product of:
0.0616574 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 1639, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1639)
0.02010487 = weight(_text_:for in 1639) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02010487 = score(doc=1639,freq=12.0), product of:
0.06594466 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.3048749 = fieldWeight in 1639, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1639)
0.019223245 = weight(_text_:the in 1639) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019223245 = score(doc=1639,freq=22.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.34689236 = fieldWeight in 1639, product of:
4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
22.0 = termFreq=22.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1639)
0.017080715 = weight(_text_:of in 1639) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017080715 = score(doc=1639,freq=18.0), product of:
0.054923624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.3109903 = fieldWeight in 1639, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1639)
0.019223245 = weight(_text_:the in 1639) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019223245 = score(doc=1639,freq=22.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.34689236 = fieldWeight in 1639, product of:
4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
22.0 = termFreq=22.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1639)
0.014275986 = product of:
0.028551972 = sum of:
0.028551972 = weight(_text_:22 in 1639) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028551972 = score(doc=1639,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12299426 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1639, 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=1639)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5833333 = coord(7/12)
- Abstract
- We explore classifying scientific disciplines including their temporal features by focusing on their collaboration structures over time. Bibliometric data for Slovenian researchers registered at the Slovenian Research Agency were used. These data were obtained from the Slovenian National Current Research Information System. We applied a recently developed hierarchical clustering procedure for symbolic data to the coauthorship structure of scientific disciplines. To track temporal changes, we divided data for the period 1986-2010 into five 5-year time periods. The clusters of disciplines for the Slovene science system revealed 5 clusters of scientific disciplines that, in large measure, correspond with the official national classification of sciences. However, there were also some significant differences pointing to the need for a dynamic classification system of sciences to better characterize them. Implications stemming from these results, especially with regard to classifying scientific disciplines, understanding the collaborative structure of science, and research and development policies, are discussed.
- Date
- 21. 1.2015 14:55:22
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.2, S.321-339
-
Didegah, F.; Thelwall, M.: Co-saved, co-tweeted, and co-cited networks (2018)
0.06
0.0642592 = product of:
0.11015863 = sum of:
0.012329709 = product of:
0.036989126 = sum of:
0.036989126 = weight(_text_:f in 4291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036989126 = score(doc=4291,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13999219 = queryWeight, product of:
3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.26422277 = fieldWeight in 4291, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4291)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.007175247 = weight(_text_:information in 4291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.007175247 = score(doc=4291,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0616574 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4291, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4291)
0.021715743 = weight(_text_:for in 4291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021715743 = score(doc=4291,freq=14.0), product of:
0.06594466 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.32930255 = fieldWeight in 4291, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4291)
0.018328644 = weight(_text_:the in 4291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018328644 = score(doc=4291,freq=20.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.3307489 = fieldWeight in 4291, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4291)
0.018004656 = weight(_text_:of in 4291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018004656 = score(doc=4291,freq=20.0), product of:
0.054923624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.32781258 = fieldWeight in 4291, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4291)
0.018328644 = weight(_text_:the in 4291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018328644 = score(doc=4291,freq=20.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.3307489 = fieldWeight in 4291, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4291)
0.014275986 = product of:
0.028551972 = sum of:
0.028551972 = weight(_text_:22 in 4291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028551972 = score(doc=4291,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12299426 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4291, 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=4291)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5833333 = coord(7/12)
- Abstract
- Counts of tweets and Mendeley user libraries have been proposed as altmetric alternatives to citation counts for the impact assessment of articles. Although both have been investigated to discover whether they correlate with article citations, it is not known whether users tend to tweet or save (in Mendeley) the same kinds of articles that they cite. In response, this article compares pairs of articles that are tweeted, saved to a Mendeley library, or cited by the same user, but possibly a different user for each source. The study analyzes 1,131,318 articles published in 2012, with minimum tweeted (10), saved to Mendeley (100), and cited (10) thresholds. The results show surprisingly minor overall overlaps between the three phenomena. The importance of journals for Twitter and the presence of many bots at different levels of activity suggest that this site has little value for impact altmetrics. The moderate differences between patterns of saving and citation suggest that Mendeley can be used for some types of impact assessments, but sensitivity is needed for underlying differences.
- Date
- 28. 7.2018 10:00:22
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 69(2018) no.8, S.959-973
-
Carpenter, M.P.; Narin, F.: ¬The adequacy of Science Citation Index (SCI) as an indicator of international scientific activity (1981)
0.06
0.062962584 = product of:
0.12592517 = sum of:
0.02876932 = product of:
0.08630796 = sum of:
0.08630796 = weight(_text_:f in 6680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08630796 = score(doc=6680,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13999219 = queryWeight, product of:
3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.6165198 = fieldWeight in 6680, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6680)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.016742244 = weight(_text_:information in 6680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016742244 = score(doc=6680,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0616574 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 6680, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6680)
0.019151485 = weight(_text_:for in 6680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019151485 = score(doc=6680,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06594466 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.29041752 = fieldWeight in 6680, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6680)
0.01912591 = weight(_text_:the in 6680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01912591 = score(doc=6680,freq=4.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.34513593 = fieldWeight in 6680, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6680)
0.023010297 = weight(_text_:of in 6680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023010297 = score(doc=6680,freq=6.0), product of:
0.054923624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.41895083 = fieldWeight in 6680, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6680)
0.01912591 = weight(_text_:the in 6680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01912591 = score(doc=6680,freq=4.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.34513593 = fieldWeight in 6680, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6680)
0.5 = coord(6/12)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 32(1981), S.430-439
-
Wan, X.; Liu, F.: Are all literature citations equally important? : automatic citation strength estimation and its applications (2014)
0.06
0.06072612 = product of:
0.104101926 = sum of:
0.012329709 = product of:
0.036989126 = sum of:
0.036989126 = weight(_text_:f in 1350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036989126 = score(doc=1350,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13999219 = queryWeight, product of:
3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.26422277 = fieldWeight in 1350, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1350)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.007175247 = weight(_text_:information in 1350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.007175247 = score(doc=1350,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0616574 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 1350, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1350)
0.014216291 = weight(_text_:for in 1350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014216291 = score(doc=1350,freq=6.0), product of:
0.06594466 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.21557912 = fieldWeight in 1350, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1350)
0.021686744 = weight(_text_:the in 1350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021686744 = score(doc=1350,freq=28.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.39134735 = fieldWeight in 1350, product of:
5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
28.0 = termFreq=28.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1350)
0.012731214 = weight(_text_:of in 1350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012731214 = score(doc=1350,freq=10.0), product of:
0.054923624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.23179851 = fieldWeight in 1350, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1350)
0.021686744 = weight(_text_:the in 1350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021686744 = score(doc=1350,freq=28.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.39134735 = fieldWeight in 1350, product of:
5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
28.0 = termFreq=28.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1350)
0.014275986 = product of:
0.028551972 = sum of:
0.028551972 = weight(_text_:22 in 1350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028551972 = score(doc=1350,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12299426 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1350, 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=1350)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5833333 = coord(7/12)
- Abstract
- Literature citation analysis plays a very important role in bibliometrics and scientometrics, such as the Science Citation Index (SCI) impact factor, h-index. Existing citation analysis methods assume that all citations in a paper are equally important, and they simply count the number of citations. Here we argue that the citations in a paper are not equally important and some citations are more important than the others. We use a strength value to assess the importance of each citation and propose to use the regression method with a few useful features for automatically estimating the strength value of each citation. Evaluation results on a manually labeled data set in the computer science field show that the estimated values can achieve good correlation with human-labeled values. We further apply the estimated citation strength values for evaluating paper influence and author influence, and the preliminary evaluation results demonstrate the usefulness of the citation strength values.
- Date
- 22. 8.2014 17:12:35
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.9, S.1929-1938
-
Ni, C.; Sugimoto, C.R.; Jiang, J.: Venue-author-coupling : a measure for identifying disciplines through author communities (2013)
0.06
0.06041743 = product of:
0.12083486 = sum of:
0.014646411 = weight(_text_:information in 607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014646411 = score(doc=607,freq=12.0), product of:
0.0616574 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.23754507 = fieldWeight in 607, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=607)
0.013679632 = weight(_text_:for in 607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013679632 = score(doc=607,freq=8.0), product of:
0.06594466 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.20744109 = fieldWeight in 607, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=607)
0.018072287 = weight(_text_:the in 607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018072287 = score(doc=607,freq=28.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.3261228 = fieldWeight in 607, product of:
5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
28.0 = termFreq=28.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=607)
0.01775283 = weight(_text_:of in 607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01775283 = score(doc=607,freq=28.0), product of:
0.054923624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.32322758 = fieldWeight in 607, product of:
5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
28.0 = termFreq=28.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=607)
0.018072287 = weight(_text_:the in 607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018072287 = score(doc=607,freq=28.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.3261228 = fieldWeight in 607, product of:
5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
28.0 = termFreq=28.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=607)
0.03861142 = product of:
0.07722284 = sum of:
0.07722284 = weight(_text_:communities in 607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07722284 = score(doc=607,freq=4.0), product of:
0.18632571 = queryWeight, product of:
5.3049703 = idf(docFreq=596, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.4144508 = fieldWeight in 607, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
5.3049703 = idf(docFreq=596, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=607)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(6/12)
- Abstract
- Conceptualizations of disciplinarity often focus on the social aspects of disciplines; that is, disciplines are defined by the set of individuals who participate in their activities and communications. However, operationalizations of disciplinarity often demarcate the boundaries of disciplines by standard classification schemes, which may be inflexible to changes in the participation profile of that discipline. To address this limitation, a metric called venue-author-coupling (VAC) is proposed and illustrated using journals from the Journal Citation Report's (JCR) library science and information science category. As JCRs are some of the most frequently used categories in bibliometric analyses, this allows for an examination of the extent to which the journals in JCR categories can be considered as proxies for disciplines. By extending the idea of bibliographic coupling, VAC identifies similarities among journals based on the similarities of their author profiles. The employment of this method using information science and library science journals provides evidence of four distinct subfields, that is, management information systems, specialized information and library science, library science-focused, and information science-focused research. The proposed VAC method provides a novel way to examine disciplinarity from the perspective of author communities.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.2, S.265-279
-
Cabanac, G.: Shaping the landscape of research in information systems from the perspective of editorial boards : a scientometric study of 77 leading journals (2012)
0.06
0.060119886 = product of:
0.12023977 = sum of:
0.014350494 = weight(_text_:information in 242) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014350494 = score(doc=242,freq=8.0), product of:
0.0616574 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 242, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=242)
0.011607553 = weight(_text_:for in 242) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011607553 = score(doc=242,freq=4.0), product of:
0.06594466 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.17601961 = fieldWeight in 242, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=242)
0.020897869 = weight(_text_:the in 242) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020897869 = score(doc=242,freq=26.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.37711173 = fieldWeight in 242, product of:
5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
26.0 = termFreq=26.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=242)
0.019723112 = weight(_text_:of in 242) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019723112 = score(doc=242,freq=24.0), product of:
0.054923624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.3591007 = fieldWeight in 242, product of:
4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
24.0 = termFreq=24.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=242)
0.020897869 = weight(_text_:the in 242) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020897869 = score(doc=242,freq=26.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.37711173 = fieldWeight in 242, product of:
5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
26.0 = termFreq=26.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=242)
0.032762878 = product of:
0.065525755 = sum of:
0.065525755 = weight(_text_:communities in 242) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.065525755 = score(doc=242,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18632571 = queryWeight, product of:
5.3049703 = idf(docFreq=596, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.35167316 = fieldWeight in 242, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.3049703 = idf(docFreq=596, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=242)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(6/12)
- Abstract
- Characteristics of the Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology and 76 other journals listed in the InformationSystems category of the Journal Citation Reports-Science edition 2009 were analyzed. Besides reporting usual bibliographic indicators, we investigated the human cornerstone of any peer-reviewed journal: its editorial board. Demographic data about the 2,846 gatekeepers serving in information systems (IS) editorial boards were collected. We discuss various scientometric indicators supported by descriptive statistics. Our findings reflect the great variety of IS journals in terms of research output, author communities, editorial boards, and gatekeeper demographics (e.g., diversity in gender and location), seniority, authority, and degree of involvement in editorial boards. We believe that these results may help the general public and scholars (e.g., readers, authors, journal gatekeepers, policy makers) to revise and increase their knowledge of scholarly communication in the IS field. The EB_IS_2009 dataset supporting this scientometric study is released as online supplementary material to this article to foster further research on editorial boards.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.5, S.977-996
-
Marx, W.; Bornmann, L.: On the problems of dealing with bibliometric data (2014)
0.06
0.057788964 = product of:
0.11557793 = sum of:
0.014350494 = weight(_text_:information in 1239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014350494 = score(doc=1239,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0616574 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 1239, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1239)
0.016415559 = weight(_text_:for in 1239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016415559 = score(doc=1239,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06594466 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.24892932 = fieldWeight in 1239, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1239)
0.020078024 = weight(_text_:the in 1239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020078024 = score(doc=1239,freq=6.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.36231726 = fieldWeight in 1239, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1239)
0.016103853 = weight(_text_:of in 1239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016103853 = score(doc=1239,freq=4.0), product of:
0.054923624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.2932045 = fieldWeight in 1239, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1239)
0.020078024 = weight(_text_:the in 1239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020078024 = score(doc=1239,freq=6.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.36231726 = fieldWeight in 1239, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1239)
0.028551972 = product of:
0.057103943 = sum of:
0.057103943 = weight(_text_:22 in 1239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.057103943 = score(doc=1239,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12299426 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 1239, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1239)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(6/12)
- Date
- 18. 3.2014 19:13:22
- Series
- Letter to the editor
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.4, S.866-867
-
Raan, A.F.J. van: Statistical properties of bibliometric indicators : research group indicator distributions and correlations (2006)
0.06
0.05770315 = product of:
0.1154063 = sum of:
0.007175247 = weight(_text_:information in 5275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.007175247 = score(doc=5275,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0616574 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 5275, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5275)
0.008207779 = weight(_text_:for in 5275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008207779 = score(doc=5275,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06594466 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.12446466 = fieldWeight in 5275, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5275)
0.027185775 = weight(_text_:the in 5275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027185775 = score(doc=5275,freq=44.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.4905799 = fieldWeight in 5275, product of:
6.6332498 = tf(freq=44.0), with freq of:
44.0 = termFreq=44.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5275)
0.025462428 = weight(_text_:of in 5275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025462428 = score(doc=5275,freq=40.0), product of:
0.054923624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.46359703 = fieldWeight in 5275, product of:
6.3245554 = tf(freq=40.0), with freq of:
40.0 = termFreq=40.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5275)
0.027185775 = weight(_text_:the in 5275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027185775 = score(doc=5275,freq=44.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.4905799 = fieldWeight in 5275, product of:
6.6332498 = tf(freq=44.0), with freq of:
44.0 = termFreq=44.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5275)
0.020189295 = product of:
0.04037859 = sum of:
0.04037859 = weight(_text_:22 in 5275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04037859 = score(doc=5275,freq=4.0), product of:
0.12299426 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 5275, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5275)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(6/12)
- Abstract
- In this article we present an empirical approach to the study of the statistical properties of bibliometric indicators on a very relevant but not simply available aggregation level: the research group. We focus on the distribution functions of a coherent set of indicators that are used frequently in the analysis of research performance. In this sense, the coherent set of indicators acts as a measuring instrument. Better insight into the statistical properties of a measuring instrument is necessary to enable assessment of the instrument itself. The most basic distribution in bibliometric analysis is the distribution of citations over publications, and this distribution is very skewed. Nevertheless, we clearly observe the working of the central limit theorem and find that at the level of research groups the distribution functions of the main indicators, particularly the journal- normalized and the field-normalized indicators, approach normal distributions. The results of our study underline the importance of the idea of group oeuvre, that is, the role of sets of related publications as a unit of analysis.
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 16:20:22
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.3, S.408-430
-
Minguillo, D.: Toward a new way of mapping scientific fields : authors' competence for publishing in scholarly journals (2010)
0.06
0.05610092 = product of:
0.11220184 = sum of:
0.008456109 = weight(_text_:information in 3441) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008456109 = score(doc=3441,freq=4.0), product of:
0.0616574 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 3441, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3441)
0.013679632 = weight(_text_:for in 3441) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013679632 = score(doc=3441,freq=8.0), product of:
0.06594466 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.20744109 = fieldWeight in 3441, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3441)
0.021600515 = weight(_text_:the in 3441) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021600515 = score(doc=3441,freq=40.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.3897913 = fieldWeight in 3441, product of:
6.3245554 = tf(freq=40.0), with freq of:
40.0 = termFreq=40.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3441)
0.019562665 = weight(_text_:of in 3441) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019562665 = score(doc=3441,freq=34.0), product of:
0.054923624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.35617945 = fieldWeight in 3441, product of:
5.8309517 = tf(freq=34.0), with freq of:
34.0 = termFreq=34.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3441)
0.021600515 = weight(_text_:the in 3441) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021600515 = score(doc=3441,freq=40.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.3897913 = fieldWeight in 3441, product of:
6.3245554 = tf(freq=40.0), with freq of:
40.0 = termFreq=40.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3441)
0.027302396 = product of:
0.05460479 = sum of:
0.05460479 = weight(_text_:communities in 3441) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05460479 = score(doc=3441,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18632571 = queryWeight, product of:
5.3049703 = idf(docFreq=596, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.29306096 = fieldWeight in 3441, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.3049703 = idf(docFreq=596, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3441)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(6/12)
- Abstract
- The objective of this article is to introduce a socially oriented approach to the analysis and representation of the social and intellectual structure of scientific fields. A sociological perspective is introduced as the theoretical basis to analyze scientific fields, and the social network framework is adopted to develop a multidisciplinary approach to analyze the organization of science. This approach is then applied to study the Spanish Library and Information Science community from 1999 to 2007. The underlying notion is that science is organized work, in which the pursuit of impact shapes the specific scientific organization. This generates mutual dependence and control among researchers, which may restrict access when formally communicating with other scientific communities. On the other hand, scholarly journals facilitate the coordination of new knowledge and serve as platforms for interaction among scientists. Consequently, the interaction of well-defined groups of homogenous researchers, concentrated around particular sets of journals, leads to the formation of cohesive (sub)groups tied together by the degree of similarity of the researchers' competence. An empirical test suggests that this consideration can accurately reveal a segment of the structure of the scientific field. This study therefore introduces a new approach for mapping the structure of scientific fields that differs from most existing methods, which are based on (co)citation.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.4, S.772-786
-
Klavans, R.; Boyack, K.W.: Using global mapping to create more accurate document-level maps of research fields (2011)
0.06
0.056036573 = product of:
0.112073146 = sum of:
0.013370283 = weight(_text_:information in 4956) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013370283 = score(doc=4956,freq=10.0), product of:
0.0616574 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.21684799 = fieldWeight in 4956, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4956)
0.006839816 = weight(_text_:for in 4956) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.006839816 = score(doc=4956,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06594466 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.103720546 = fieldWeight in 4956, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4956)
0.018072287 = weight(_text_:the in 4956) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018072287 = score(doc=4956,freq=28.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.3261228 = fieldWeight in 4956, product of:
5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
28.0 = termFreq=28.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4956)
0.017107055 = weight(_text_:of in 4956) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017107055 = score(doc=4956,freq=26.0), product of:
0.054923624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.31146988 = fieldWeight in 4956, product of:
5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
26.0 = termFreq=26.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4956)
0.018072287 = weight(_text_:the in 4956) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018072287 = score(doc=4956,freq=28.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.3261228 = fieldWeight in 4956, product of:
5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
28.0 = termFreq=28.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4956)
0.03861142 = product of:
0.07722284 = sum of:
0.07722284 = weight(_text_:communities in 4956) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07722284 = score(doc=4956,freq=4.0), product of:
0.18632571 = queryWeight, product of:
5.3049703 = idf(docFreq=596, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.4144508 = fieldWeight in 4956, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
5.3049703 = idf(docFreq=596, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4956)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(6/12)
- Abstract
- We describe two general approaches to creating document-level maps of science. To create a local map, one defines and directly maps a sample of data, such as all literature published in a set of information science journals. To create a global map of a research field, one maps "all of science" and then locates a literature sample within that full context. We provide a deductive argument that global mapping should create more accurate partitions of a research field than does local mapping, followed by practical reasons why this may not be so. The field of information science is then mapped at the document level using both local and global methods to provide a case illustration of the differences between the methods. Textual coherence is used to assess the accuracies of both maps. We find that document clusters in the global map have significantly higher coherence than do those in the local map, and that the global map provides unique insights into the field of information science that cannot be discerned from the local map. Specifically, we show that information science and computer science have a large interface and that computer science is the more progressive discipline at that interface. We also show that research communities in temporally linked threads have a much higher coherence than do isolated communities, and that this feature can be used to predict which threads will persist into a subsequent year. Methods that could increase the accuracy of both local and global maps in the future also are discussed.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.1, S.1-18
-
Bartolucci, F.: On a possible decomposition of the h-index. (2012)
0.06
0.055842686 = product of:
0.11168537 = sum of:
0.024659418 = product of:
0.07397825 = sum of:
0.07397825 = weight(_text_:f in 454) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07397825 = score(doc=454,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13999219 = queryWeight, product of:
3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.52844554 = fieldWeight in 454, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=454)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.014350494 = weight(_text_:information in 454) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014350494 = score(doc=454,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0616574 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 454, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=454)
0.016415559 = weight(_text_:for in 454) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016415559 = score(doc=454,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06594466 = queryWeight, product of:
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.24892932 = fieldWeight in 454, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=454)
0.020078024 = weight(_text_:the in 454) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020078024 = score(doc=454,freq=6.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.36231726 = fieldWeight in 454, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=454)
0.016103853 = weight(_text_:of in 454) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016103853 = score(doc=454,freq=4.0), product of:
0.054923624 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.2932045 = fieldWeight in 454, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=454)
0.020078024 = weight(_text_:the in 454) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020078024 = score(doc=454,freq=6.0), product of:
0.05541559 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.035122856 = queryNorm
0.36231726 = fieldWeight in 454, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.5777643 = idf(docFreq=24812, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=454)
0.5 = coord(6/12)
- Series
- Letter to the editor
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.10, S.2126-2127
