Search (37 results, page 2 of 2)

0.0017573726 = product of:
  0.014058981 = sum of:
    0.014058981 = product of:
      0.028117962 = sum of:
        0.028117962 = weight(_text_:system in 4870) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028117962 = score(doc=4870,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10100432 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.27838376 = fieldWeight in 4870, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4870)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

0.0015533128 = product of:
  0.012426502 = sum of:
    0.012426502 = product of:
      0.024853004 = sum of:
        0.024853004 = weight(_text_:system in 4831) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024853004 = score(doc=4831,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.10100432 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.24605882 = fieldWeight in 4831, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4831)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

In the 1950s, the "universe of knowledge" metaphor returned in discussions around the "first theory of faceted classification'; the Colon Classification (CC) of S.R. Ranganathan, to stress the differences within an "universe of concepts" system. Here we claim that the Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) has been either ignored or incorrectly represented in studies that focused on the pivotal role of Ranganathan in a transition from "top-down universe of concepts systems" to "bottom-up universe of concepts systems." Early 20th century designs from Paul Otlet reveal a two directional interaction between "elements" and "ensembles"that can be compared to the relations between the universe of knowledge and universe of concepts systems. Moreover, an unpublished manuscript with the title "Theorie schematique de la Classification" of 1908 includes sketches that demonstrate an exploration by Paul Otlet of the multidimensional characteristics of the UDC. The interactions between these one- and multidimensional representations of the UDC support Donker Duyvis' critical comments to Ranganathan who had dismissed it as a rigid hierarchical system in comparison to his own Colon Classification. A visualization of the experiments of the Knowledge Space Lab in which main categories of Wikipedia were mapped on the UDC provides empirical evidence of its faceted structure's flexibility.

0.0015533128 = product of:
  0.012426502 = sum of:
    0.012426502 = product of:
      0.024853004 = sum of:
        0.024853004 = weight(_text_:system in 3917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024853004 = score(doc=3917,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.10100432 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.24605882 = fieldWeight in 3917, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3917)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Many successful digital interfaces employ visual metaphors to convey features or data properties to users, but the characteristics that make a visual metaphor effective are not well understood. We used a theoretical conception of metaphor from cognitive linguistics to design an interactive system for viewing the citation network of the corpora of literature in the JSTOR database, a highly connected compound graph of 2 million papers linked by 8 million citations. We created 4 variants of this system, manipulating 2 distinct properties of metaphor. We conducted a between-subjects experimental study with 80 participants to compare understanding and engagement when working with each version. We found that building on known image schemas improved response time on look-up tasks, while contextual detail predicted increases in persistence and the number of inferences drawn from the data. Schema-congruency combined with contextual detail produced the highest gains in comprehension. These findings provide concrete mechanisms by which designers presenting large data sets through metaphorical interfaces may improve their effectiveness and appeal with users.

0.0015377011 = product of:
  0.012301609 = sum of:
    0.012301609 = product of:
      0.024603218 = sum of:
        0.024603218 = weight(_text_:system in 2307) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024603218 = score(doc=2307,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10100432 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.2435858 = fieldWeight in 2307, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2307)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Map-based visualizations of document collections have become popular in recent times. However, most of these visualizations emphasize only geospatial properties of objects, leaving out other ontological properties. In this paper we propose to extend these visualizations to include nongeospatial properties of documents to support users with elementary and synoptic visual tasks. More specifically, additional suitable representations that can enhance the utility of map-based visualizations are discussed. To demonstrate the utility of the proposed solution, we have developed a prototype map-based visualization system using Google Maps (GM), which demonstrates how additional representations can be beneficial.

0.0015377011 = product of:
  0.012301609 = sum of:
    0.012301609 = product of:
      0.024603218 = sum of:
        0.024603218 = weight(_text_:system in 4646) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024603218 = score(doc=4646,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10100432 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.2435858 = fieldWeight in 4646, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4646)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

0.0013701261 = product of:
  0.010961009 = sum of:
    0.010961009 = product of:
      0.021922018 = sum of:
        0.021922018 = weight(_text_:29 in 3437) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021922018 = score(doc=3437,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11281017 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 3437, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3437)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Date

16.11.2017 13:29:12

0.0013578009 = product of:
  0.010862407 = sum of:
    0.010862407 = product of:
      0.021724815 = sum of:
        0.021724815 = weight(_text_:22 in 4573) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021724815 = score(doc=4573,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.112301625 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4573, 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=4573)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Date

9.12.2018 16:22:25

0.0013578009 = product of:
  0.010862407 = sum of:
    0.010862407 = product of:
      0.021724815 = sum of:
        0.021724815 = weight(_text_:22 in 4641) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021724815 = score(doc=4641,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.112301625 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4641, 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=4641)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Date

21.12.2018 17:22:13

0.0013180295 = product of:
  0.010544236 = sum of:
    0.010544236 = product of:
      0.021088472 = sum of:
        0.021088472 = weight(_text_:system in 4757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021088472 = score(doc=4757,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10100432 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.20878783 = fieldWeight in 4757, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4757)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

The editor's decision where and how to place items on a screen is crucial for the design of information displays, such as websites. We developed a statistical model that can facilitate automating this process by predicting the perceived importance of screen items from their location and size. The model was developed based on a 2-step experiment in which we asked participants to rate the importance of text articles that differed in size, screen location, and title size. Articles were either presented for 0.5 seconds or for unlimited time. In a stepwise regression analysis, the model's variables accounted for 65% of the variance in the importance ratings. In a validation study, the model predicted 85% of the variance of the mean apparent importance of screen items. The model also predicted individual raters' importance perception ratings. We discuss the implications of such a model in the context of automating layout generation. An automated system for layout generation can optimize data presentation to suit users' individual information and display preferences.

0.0013180295 = product of:
  0.010544236 = sum of:
    0.010544236 = product of:
      0.021088472 = sum of:
        0.021088472 = weight(_text_:system in 2906) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021088472 = score(doc=2906,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10100432 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.20878783 = fieldWeight in 2906, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2906)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

The use of research impact metrics and analytics has become an integral component to many aspects of institutional assessment. Many platforms currently exist to provide such analytics, both proprietary and open source; however, the functionality of these systems may not always overlap to serve uniquely specific needs. In this paper, I describe a novel web-based platform, named Manifold, that I built to serve custom research impact assessment needs in the University of Minnesota Medical School. Built on a standard LAMP architecture, Manifold automatically pulls publication data for faculty from Scopus through APIs, calculates impact metrics through automated analytics, and dynamically generates report-like profiles that visualize those metrics. Work on this project has resulted in many lessons learned about challenges to sustainability and scalability in developing a system of such magnitude.

0.0012426501 = product of:
  0.009941201 = sum of:
    0.009941201 = product of:
      0.019882401 = sum of:
        0.019882401 = weight(_text_:system in 2547) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019882401 = score(doc=2547,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.10100432 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.19684705 = fieldWeight in 2547, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2547)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

The discovery service (a search engine and service called WILBERT) used at our library at the Technical University of Applied Sciences Wildau (TUAS Wildau) is comprised of more than 8 million items. If we were to record all licensed publications in this tool to a higher level of articles, including their bibliographic records and full texts, we would have a holding estimated at a hundred million documents. A lot of features, such as ranking, autocompletion, multi-faceted classification, refining opportunities reduce the number of hits. However, it is not enough to give intuitive support for a systematic overview of topics related to documents in the library. John Naisbitt once said: "We are drowning in information, but starving for knowledge." This quote is still very true today. Two years ago, we started to develop micro thesauri for MINT topics in order to develop an advanced indexing of the library stock. We use iQvoc as a vocabulary management system to create the thesaurus. It provides an easy-to-use browser interface that builds a SKOS thesaurus in the background. The purpose of this is to integrate the thesauri in WILBERT in order to offer a better subject-related search. This approach especially supports first-year students by giving them the possibility to browse through a hierarchical alignment of a subject, for instance, logistics or computer science, and thereby discover how the terms are related. It also supports the students with an insight into established abbreviations and alternative labels. Students at the TUAS Wildau were involved in the developmental process of the software regarding the interface and functionality of iQvoc. The first steps have been taken and involve the inclusion of 3000 terms in our discovery tool WILBERT.

0.0010983578 = product of:
  0.008786863 = sum of:
    0.008786863 = product of:
      0.017573725 = sum of:
        0.017573725 = weight(_text_:system in 4837) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017573725 = score(doc=4837,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10100432 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 4837, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4837)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Icon system could represent an efficient solution for collective iconic categorization of knowledge by providing graphical interpretation. Their pictorial characters assist visualizing the structure of text to become more understandable beyond vocabulary obstacle. In this paper we are proposing a Knowledge Engineering (KM) based iconic representation approach. We assume that these systematic icons improve collective knowledge management. Meanwhile, text (constructed under our knowledge management model - Hypertopic) helps to reduce the diversity of graphical understanding belonging to different users. This "position paper" also prepares to demonstrate our hypothesis by an "iconic social tagging" experiment which is to be accomplished in 2011 with UTT students. We describe the "socio semantic web" information portal involved in this project, and a part of the icons already designed for this experiment in Sustainability field. We have reviewed existing theoretical works on icons from various origins, which can be used to lay the foundation of robust "icons systems".

0.0010983578 = product of:
  0.008786863 = sum of:
    0.008786863 = product of:
      0.017573725 = sum of:
        0.017573725 = weight(_text_:system in 1214) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017573725 = score(doc=1214,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10100432 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 1214, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1214)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Complex cognitive activities, such as analytical reasoning, problem solving, and sense making, are often performed through the mediation of interactive computational tools. Examples include visual analytics, decision support, and educational tools. Through interaction with visual representations of information at the visual interface of these tools, a joint, coordinated cognitive system is formed. This partnership results in a number of relational properties-those depending on both humans and tools-that researchers and designers must be aware of if such tools are to effectively support the performance of complex cognitive activities. This article presents 10 properties of interactive visual representations that are essential and relational and whose values can be adjusted through interaction. By adjusting the values of these properties, better coordination between humans and tools can be effected, leading to higher quality performance of complex cognitive activities. This article examines how the values of these properties affect cognitive processing and visual reasoning and demonstrates the necessity of making their values adjustable-all of which is situated within a broader theoretical framework concerned with human-information interaction in complex cognitive activities. This framework can facilitate systematic research, design, and evaluation in numerous fields including information visualization, health informatics, visual analytics, and educational technology.

0.0010983578 = product of:
  0.008786863 = sum of:
    0.008786863 = product of:
      0.017573725 = sum of:
        0.017573725 = weight(_text_:system in 3467) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017573725 = score(doc=3467,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10100432 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 3467, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3467)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Die Bayerische Staatsbibliothek (BSB) zählt mit ihrem Bestand von knapp 11 Mio. Bänden zu den bedeutendsten Universalbibliotheken der Welt. Bereits 1,2 Mio. Werke sind digitalisiert, was die BSB zur größten digitalen Kulturinstitution in Deutschland macht. Dieser digitale Bestand umfasst vorwiegend urheberrechtsfreie Werke vom 8. bis ins 20. Jahrhundert, von der mittelalterlichen Bibelhandschrift bis zur Boulevardzeitung der 1920er-Jahre. Diese Vielfalt des zu digitalisierenden schriftlichen Kulturerbes und das hohe Tempo der Massendigitalisierung in den letzten Jahren haben ihren Preis - die inhaltliche Erschließung der Werke hinkt hinterher, insbesondere bei Werken, die nicht mittels Optical Character Recognition-Verfahren (OCR) automatisiert maschinenlesbar transformiert und zugänglich gemacht werden können. Dies gilt insbesondere für mittelalterliche Handschriften, Alte Druck- und Spezialbestände. Deshalb blieb auch der reichhaltige, in diesen Werken verborgene Bildbestand für den Nutzer weitestgehend verborgen und konnte lediglich durch das Durchblättern am Bildschirm entdeckt werden. Dies war Motivation für die Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, gemeinsam mit dem Fraunhofer Heinrich-Hertz-Institut in Berlin ein System zur ähnlichkeitsbasierten Bildsuche aufzubauen, welches sämtliche Bildinhalte aller 1,2 Mio. Digitalisate automatisch identifiziert. Hierbei werden mittels morphologischer Verfahren Bilder aus den Buchseiten extrahiert, die danach aufgrund von Farb- und Kantenmerkmalen klassifiziert werden. Bilder "ohne Informationswert" werden mit Hilfe von Methoden aus dem Bereich des maschinellen Lernens herausgefiltert. Damit konnten aus den digitalisierten Werken der BSB bislang mehr als 43 Mio. einzelne Bilder identifiziert werden, die mittels einer hochperformanten Suchmaschine über eine frei verfügbare Web-Applikation dem Anwender direkt zur Verfügung stehen. Dank der Vielfalt und Reichhaltigkeit der indexierten Bestände spricht dieses Angebot nicht nur Historiker und Buchwissenschaftler an, sondern Interessierte aus den unterschiedlichsten Fachrichtungen. Die Ähnlichkeitssuche stellt dabei unbekannte, ungewöhnliche und oftmals überraschende Bezüge zwischen unterschiedlichsten Werken her.

0.0010983578 = product of:
  0.008786863 = sum of:
    0.008786863 = product of:
      0.017573725 = sum of:
        0.017573725 = weight(_text_:system in 3756) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017573725 = score(doc=3756,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10100432 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 3756, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3756)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Visitors to museums and other cultural heritage sites encounter a wealth of exhibits in a variety of subject areas, but can explore only a small number of them. Moreover, there typically exists rich complementary information that can be delivered to the visitor about exhibits of interest, but only a fraction of this information can be consumed during the limited time of the visit. Recommender systems may help visitors to cope with this information overload. Ideally, the recommender system of choice should model user preferences, as well as background knowledge about the museum's environment, considering aspects of physical and thematic relevancy. We propose a personalized graph-based recommender framework, representing rating history and background multi-facet information jointly as a relational graph. A random walk measure is applied to rank available complementary multimedia presentations by their relevancy to a visitor's profile, integrating the various dimensions. We report the results of experiments conducted using authentic data collected at the Hecht museum. An evaluation of multiple graph variants, compared with several popular and state-of-the-art recommendation methods, indicates on advantages of the graph-based approach.

0.0010983578 = product of:
  0.008786863 = sum of:
    0.008786863 = product of:
      0.017573725 = sum of:
        0.017573725 = weight(_text_:system in 5702) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017573725 = score(doc=5702,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10100432 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 5702, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5702)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Die Wissenschaft befindet sich in einer Auffindbarkeitskrise. Obwohl durch die Open Access-Bewegung Forschungsergebnisse besser zugänglich geworden sind, wird ein signifikanter Teil der Outputs nicht nachgenutzt. Einen großen Anteil an der Krise haben die Tools, die für die Literatursuche verwendet werden. Angesichts von drei Millionen Veröffentlichungen pro Jahr sind klassische Ansätze, wie etwa listenbasierte Suchmaschinen, nicht mehr ausreichend. Open Knowledge Maps hat es sich zum Ziel gesetzt, die Auffindbarkeit wissenschaftlichen Wissens zu verbessern. Dafür betreibt die gemeinnützige Organisation aus Österreich die weltweit größte visuelle Suchmaschine für Forschung. Das Grundprinzip besteht darin, Wissenslandkarten für die Literatursuche zu nutzen. Diese geben einen Überblick über ein Forschungsfeld und ermöglichen so einen schnelleren Einstieg in die Literatur. Open Knowledge Maps basiert auf den Prinzipien von Open Science: Inhalte, Daten und Software werden unter einer freien Lizenz veröffentlicht. Dadurch entsteht eine offene, wiederverwendbare Infrastruktur; Lock-In-Effekte, wie sie bei proprietären Systemen auftreten, werden vermieden. Open Knowledge Maps arbeitet seit Beginn eng mit Bibliotheken und BibliothekarInnen als ExpertInnen für Wissensorganisation und -verwaltung zusammen. Im Rahmen eines konsortialen Fördermodells werden Bibliotheken nun eingeladen, das System stärker mitzugestalten - unter anderem bei wichtigen Zukunftsthemen wie der besseren Auffindbarkeit von Datensätzen.

8.1468053E-4 = product of:
  0.0065174443 = sum of:
    0.0065174443 = product of:
      0.013034889 = sum of:
        0.013034889 = weight(_text_:22 in 3035) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013034889 = score(doc=3035,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.112301625 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 3035, 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=3035)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Content

As the team describe in a paper posted (http://arxiv.org/abs/1605.04951) on arXiv, they found that figures did indeed matter-but not all in the same way. An average paper in PubMed Central has about one diagram for every three pages and gets 1.67 citations. Papers with more diagrams per page and, to a lesser extent, plots per page tended to be more influential (on average, a paper accrued two more citations for every extra diagram per page, and one more for every extra plot per page). By contrast, including photographs and equations seemed to decrease the chances of a paper being cited by others. That agrees with a study from 2012, whose authors counted (by hand) the number of mathematical expressions in over 600 biology papers and found that each additional equation per page reduced the number of citations a paper received by 22%. This does not mean that researchers should rush to include more diagrams in their next paper. Dr Howe has not shown what is behind the effect, which may merely be one of correlation, rather than causation. It could, for example, be that papers with lots of diagrams tend to be those that illustrate new concepts, and thus start a whole new field of inquiry. Such papers will certainly be cited a lot. On the other hand, the presence of equations really might reduce citations. Biologists (as are most of those who write and read the papers in PubMed Central) are notoriously mathsaverse. If that is the case, looking in a physics archive would probably produce a different result.