-
¬Die deutsche Zeitschrift für Dokumentation, Informationswissenschaft und Informationspraxis von 1950 bis 2011 : eine vorläufige Bilanz in vier Abschnitten (2012)
0.05
0.05056513 = product of:
0.10113026 = sum of:
0.10113026 = sum of:
0.03820133 = weight(_text_:k in 402) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03820133 = score(doc=402,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16142878 = queryWeight, product of:
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.23664509 = fieldWeight in 402, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=402)
0.026168043 = weight(_text_:h in 402) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026168043 = score(doc=402,freq=4.0), product of:
0.11234917 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.2329171 = fieldWeight in 402, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=402)
0.036760893 = weight(_text_:22 in 402) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036760893 = score(doc=402,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15835609 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 402, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=402)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 7.2012 19:35:26
- Footnote
- Besteht aus 4 Teilen: Teil 1: Eden, D., A. Arndt, A. Hoffer, T. Raschke u. P. Schön: Die Nachrichten für Dokumentation in den Jahren 1950 bis 1962 (S.159-163). Teil 2: Brose, M., E. durst, D. Nitzsche, D. Veckenstedt u. R. Wein: Statistische Untersuchung der Fachzeitschrift "Nachrichten für Dokumentation" (NfD) 1963-1975 (S.164-170). Teil 3: Bösel, J., G. Ebert, P. Garz,, M. Iwanow u. B. Russ: Methoden und Ergebnisse einer statistischen Auswertung der Fachzeitschrift "Nachrichten für Dokumentation" (NfD) 1976 bis 1988 (S.171-174). Teil 4: Engelage, H., S. Jansen, R. Mertins, K. Redel u. S. Ring: Statistische Untersuchung der Fachzeitschrift "Nachrichten für Dokumentation" (NfD) / "Information. Wissenschaft & Praxis" (IWP) 1989-2011 (S.164-170).
- Source
- Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 63(2012) H.3, S.157-182
-
Järvelin, K.; Persson, O.: ¬The DCI-index : discounted cumulated impact-based research evaluation (2008)
0.03
0.032234862 = product of:
0.064469725 = sum of:
0.064469725 = product of:
0.09670458 = sum of:
0.072033115 = weight(_text_:k in 2332) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.072033115 = score(doc=2332,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16142878 = queryWeight, product of:
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.44622225 = fieldWeight in 2332, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2332)
0.024671467 = weight(_text_:h in 2332) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024671467 = score(doc=2332,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11234917 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.21959636 = fieldWeight in 2332, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2332)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The article by K. Järvelin & O. Persson published in JASIST 59(9), The DCI-Index: Discounted Cumulated Impact-Based Research Evaluation, (pp. 1433-1440) contains an unfortunate error in one of its formulas, Equation 3. The present paper gives the correction and an example of impact analysis based on the corrected formula.
- Object
- h-index
-
Stock, W.: Informetrische Vermessung der Forschung und Entwicklung eines Landes : beispielhafte Resultate und Probleme (1992)
0.03
0.03150274 = product of:
0.06300548 = sum of:
0.06300548 = product of:
0.094508216 = sum of:
0.06366888 = weight(_text_:k in 342) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06366888 = score(doc=342,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16142878 = queryWeight, product of:
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.39440846 = fieldWeight in 342, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=342)
0.030839335 = weight(_text_:h in 342) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030839335 = score(doc=342,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11234917 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.27449545 = fieldWeight in 342, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=342)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Information und Dokumentation in den 90er Jahren: neue Herausforderung, neue Technologien. Deutscher Dokumentartag 1991, Universität Ulm, 30.9.-2.10.1991. Hrsg.: W. Neubauer u. K.-H. Meier
-
Bannister, A.; Hulek, K.; Teschke, O.: ¬Das Zitationsverhalten in mathematischen Arbeiten : einige Anmerkungen (2017)
0.03
0.03150274 = product of:
0.06300548 = sum of:
0.06300548 = product of:
0.094508216 = sum of:
0.06366888 = weight(_text_:k in 4499) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06366888 = score(doc=4499,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16142878 = queryWeight, product of:
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.39440846 = fieldWeight in 4499, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4499)
0.030839335 = weight(_text_:h in 4499) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030839335 = score(doc=4499,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11234917 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.27449545 = fieldWeight in 4499, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4499)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Mitteilungen der Deutschen Mathematiker-Vereinigung. 2017, H.4, S.208-214
-
H-Index auch im Web of Science (2008)
0.03
0.028572273 = product of:
0.057144545 = sum of:
0.057144545 = product of:
0.085716814 = sum of:
0.048955925 = weight(_text_:h in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048955925 = score(doc=590,freq=14.0), product of:
0.11234917 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.435748 = fieldWeight in 590, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=590)
0.036760893 = weight(_text_:22 in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036760893 = score(doc=590,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15835609 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 590, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=590)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Content
- "Zur Kurzmitteilung "Latest enhancements in Scopus: ... h-Index incorporated in Scopus" in den letzten Online-Mitteilungen (Online-Mitteilungen 92, S.31) ist zu korrigieren, dass der h-Index sehr wohl bereits im Web of Science enthalten ist. Allerdings findet man/frau diese Information nicht in der "cited ref search", sondern neben der Trefferliste einer Quick Search, General Search oder einer Suche über den Author Finder in der rechten Navigationsleiste unter dem Titel "Citation Report". Der "Citation Report" bietet für die in der jeweiligen Trefferliste angezeigten Arbeiten: - Die Gesamtzahl der Zitierungen aller Arbeiten in der Trefferliste - Die mittlere Zitationshäufigkeit dieser Arbeiten - Die Anzahl der Zitierungen der einzelnen Arbeiten, aufgeschlüsselt nach Publikationsjahr der zitierenden Arbeiten - Die mittlere Zitationshäufigkeit dieser Arbeiten pro Jahr - Den h-Index (ein h-Index von x sagt aus, dass x Arbeiten der Trefferliste mehr als x-mal zitiert wurden; er ist gegenüber sehr hohen Zitierungen einzelner Arbeiten unempfindlicher als die mittlere Zitationshäufigkeit)."
- Date
- 6. 4.2008 19:04:22
- Object
- H-Index
- Source
- Mitteilungen der Vereinigung Österreichischer Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare. 61(2008) H.1, S.124-125
-
Chang, K.-C.; Zhou, W.; Zhang, S.; Yuan, C,-C.: Threshold effects of the patent H-index in the relationship between patent citations and market value (2015)
0.03
0.027841903 = product of:
0.055683807 = sum of:
0.055683807 = product of:
0.08352571 = sum of:
0.03820133 = weight(_text_:k in 2344) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03820133 = score(doc=2344,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16142878 = queryWeight, product of:
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.23664509 = fieldWeight in 2344, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2344)
0.04532438 = weight(_text_:h in 2344) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04532438 = score(doc=2344,freq=12.0), product of:
0.11234917 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.40342426 = fieldWeight in 2344, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2344)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This study employs a panel threshold regression model to test whether the patent h-index has a threshold effect on the relationship between patent citations and market value in the pharmaceutical industry. It aims to bridge the gap in extant research on this topic. This study demonstrates that the patent h-index has a triple threshold effect on the relationship between patent citations and market value. When the patent h-index is less than or equal to the lowest threshold, 4, there is a positive relationship between patent citations and market value. This study indicates that the first regime (where the patent h-index is less than or equal to 4) is optimal, because this is where the extent of the positive relationship between patent citations and market value is the greatest.
- Object
- h-index
-
Stvilia, B.; Hinnant, C.C.; Schindler, K.; Worrall, A.; Burnett, G.; Burnett, K.; Kazmer, M.M.; Marty, P.F.: Composition of scientific teams and publication productivity at a national science lab (2011)
0.03
0.02521826 = product of:
0.05043652 = sum of:
0.05043652 = product of:
0.075654775 = sum of:
0.045020696 = weight(_text_:k in 4191) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.045020696 = score(doc=4191,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16142878 = queryWeight, product of:
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.2788889 = fieldWeight in 4191, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4191)
0.030634077 = weight(_text_:22 in 4191) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030634077 = score(doc=4191,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15835609 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4191, 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=4191)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 1.2011 13:19:42
-
Ajiferuke, I.; Lu, K.; Wolfram, D.: ¬A comparison of citer and citation-based measure outcomes for multiple disciplines (2010)
0.02
0.024987407 = product of:
0.049974814 = sum of:
0.049974814 = product of:
0.07496222 = sum of:
0.03820133 = weight(_text_:k in 4000) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03820133 = score(doc=4000,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16142878 = queryWeight, product of:
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.23664509 = fieldWeight in 4000, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4000)
0.036760893 = weight(_text_:22 in 4000) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036760893 = score(doc=4000,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15835609 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4000, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4000)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 28. 9.2010 12:54:22
-
Norris, M.; Oppenheim, C.: ¬The h-index : a broad review of a new bibliometric indicator (2010)
0.02
0.024749164 = product of:
0.049498327 = sum of:
0.049498327 = product of:
0.07424749 = sum of:
0.043613408 = weight(_text_:h in 4147) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043613408 = score(doc=4147,freq=16.0), product of:
0.11234917 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.3881952 = fieldWeight in 4147, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4147)
0.030634077 = weight(_text_:22 in 4147) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030634077 = score(doc=4147,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15835609 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4147, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4147)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Purpose - This review aims to show, broadly, how the h-index has become a subject of widespread debate, how it has spawned many variants and diverse applications since first introduced in 2005 and some of the issues in its use. Design/methodology/approach - The review drew on a range of material published in 1990 or so sources published since 2005. From these sources, a number of themes were identified and discussed ranging from the h-index's advantages to which citation database might be selected for its calculation. Findings - The analysis shows how the h-index has quickly established itself as a major subject of interest in the field of bibliometrics. Study of the index ranges from its mathematical underpinning to a range of variants perceived to address the indexes' shortcomings. The review illustrates how widely the index has been applied but also how care must be taken in its application. Originality/value - The use of bibliometric indicators to measure research performance continues, with the h-index as its latest addition. The use of the h-index, its variants and many applications to which it has been put are still at the exploratory stage. The review shows the breadth and diversity of this research and the need to verify the veracity of the h-index by more studies.
- Date
- 8. 1.2011 19:22:13
- Object
- h-index
-
Thelwall, M.; Ruschenburg, T.: Grundlagen und Forschungsfelder der Webometrie (2006)
0.02
0.024561998 = product of:
0.049123995 = sum of:
0.049123995 = product of:
0.07368599 = sum of:
0.024671467 = weight(_text_:h in 77) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024671467 = score(doc=77,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11234917 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.21959636 = fieldWeight in 77, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=77)
0.049014524 = weight(_text_:22 in 77) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049014524 = score(doc=77,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15835609 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 77, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=77)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 4.12.2006 12:12:22
- Source
- Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 57(2006) H.8, S.401-406
-
Rostaing, H.; Barts, N.; Léveillé, V.: Bibliometrics: representation instrument of the multidisciplinary positioning of a scientific area : Implementation for an Advisory Scientific Committee (2007)
0.02
0.024561998 = product of:
0.049123995 = sum of:
0.049123995 = product of:
0.07368599 = sum of:
0.024671467 = weight(_text_:h in 1144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024671467 = score(doc=1144,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11234917 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.21959636 = fieldWeight in 1144, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1144)
0.049014524 = weight(_text_:22 in 1144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049014524 = score(doc=1144,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15835609 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1144, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1144)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 30.12.2007 11:22:39
-
Mayr, P.: Information Retrieval-Mehrwertdienste für Digitale Bibliotheken: : Crosskonkordanzen und Bradfordizing (2010)
0.02
0.024176143 = product of:
0.048352286 = sum of:
0.048352286 = product of:
0.07252843 = sum of:
0.05402483 = weight(_text_:k in 4910) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05402483 = score(doc=4910,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16142878 = queryWeight, product of:
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.33466667 = fieldWeight in 4910, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4910)
0.0185036 = weight(_text_:h in 4910) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0185036 = score(doc=4910,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11234917 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.16469726 = fieldWeight in 4910, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4910)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Classification
- BAHU (FH K)
- Footnote
- Rez. in: iwp 62(2011) H.6/7, S. 323-324 (D. Lewandowski)
- GHBS
- BAHU (FH K)
-
Järvelin, K.; Persson, O.: ¬The DCI index : discounted cumulated impact-based research evaluation (2008)
0.02
0.023909448 = product of:
0.047818895 = sum of:
0.047818895 = product of:
0.07172834 = sum of:
0.045020696 = weight(_text_:k in 2694) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.045020696 = score(doc=2694,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16142878 = queryWeight, product of:
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.2788889 = fieldWeight in 2694, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2694)
0.026707647 = weight(_text_:h in 2694) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026707647 = score(doc=2694,freq=6.0), product of:
0.11234917 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.23772003 = fieldWeight in 2694, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2694)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Research evaluation is increasingly popular and important among research funding bodies and science policy makers. Various indicators have been proposed to evaluate the standing of individual scientists, institutions, journals, or countries. A simple and popular one among the indicators is the h-index, the Hirsch index (Hirsch 2005), which is an indicator for lifetime achievement of a scholar. Several other indicators have been proposed to complement or balance the h-index. However, these indicators have no conception of aging. The AR-index (Jin et al. 2007) incorporates aging but divides the received citation counts by the raw age of the publication. Consequently, the decay of a publication is very steep and insensitive to disciplinary differences. In addition, we believe that a publication becomes outdated only when it is no longer cited, not because of its age. Finally, all indicators treat citations as equally material when one might reasonably think that a citation from a heavily cited publication should weigh more than a citation froma non-cited or little-cited publication.We propose a new indicator, the Discounted Cumulated Impact (DCI) index, which devalues old citations in a smooth way. It rewards an author for receiving new citations even if the publication is old. Further, it allows weighting of the citations by the citation weight of the citing publication. DCI can be used to calculate research performance on the basis of the h-core of a scholar or any other publication data.
- Content
- Erratum in: Järvelin, K., O. Persson: The DCI-index: discounted cumulated impact-based research evaluation. Erratum re. In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.14, S.2350-2352.
-
McKeown, K.; Daume III, H.; Chaturvedi, S.; Paparrizos, J.; Thadani, K.; Barrio, P.; Biran, O.; Bothe, S.; Collins, M.; Fleischmann, K.R.; Gravano, L.; Jha, R.; King, B.; McInerney, K.; Moon, T.; Neelakantan, A.; O'Seaghdha, D.; Radev, D.; Templeton, C.; Teufel, S.: Predicting the impact of scientific concepts using full-text features (2016)
0.02
0.023519512 = product of:
0.047039025 = sum of:
0.047039025 = product of:
0.07055853 = sum of:
0.055138867 = weight(_text_:k in 3153) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055138867 = score(doc=3153,freq=6.0), product of:
0.16142878 = queryWeight, product of:
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.34156775 = fieldWeight in 3153, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3153)
0.015419668 = weight(_text_:h in 3153) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015419668 = score(doc=3153,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11234917 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.13724773 = fieldWeight in 3153, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3153)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Meho, L.I.; Rogers, Y.: Citation counting, citation ranking, and h-index of human-computer interaction researchers : a comparison of Scopus and Web of Science (2008)
0.02
0.022801464 = product of:
0.04560293 = sum of:
0.04560293 = product of:
0.06840439 = sum of:
0.037770316 = weight(_text_:h in 2352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.037770316 = score(doc=2352,freq=12.0), product of:
0.11234917 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.3361869 = fieldWeight in 2352, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2352)
0.030634077 = weight(_text_:22 in 2352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030634077 = score(doc=2352,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15835609 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2352, 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=2352)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This study examines the differences between Scopus and Web of Science in the citation counting, citation ranking, and h-index of 22 top human-computer interaction (HCI) researchers from EQUATOR - a large British Interdisciplinary Research Collaboration project. Results indicate that Scopus provides significantly more coverage of HCI literature than Web of Science, primarily due to coverage of relevant ACM and IEEE peer-reviewed conference proceedings. No significant differences exist between the two databases if citations in journals only are compared. Although broader coverage of the literature does not significantly alter the relative citation ranking of individual researchers, Scopus helps distinguish between the researchers in a more nuanced fashion than Web of Science in both citation counting and h-index. Scopus also generates significantly different maps of citation networks of individual scholars than those generated by Web of Science. The study also presents a comparison of h-index scores based on Google Scholar with those based on the union of Scopus and Web of Science. The study concludes that Scopus can be used as a sole data source for citation-based research and evaluation in HCI, especially when citations in conference proceedings are sought, and that researchers should manually calculate h scores instead of relying on system calculations.
- Object
- h-index
-
Juchem, K.: ¬Der Bibliotheksdienst in szientometrischer Analyse (2002)
0.02
0.02205192 = product of:
0.04410384 = sum of:
0.04410384 = product of:
0.066155754 = sum of:
0.04456822 = weight(_text_:k in 1213) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04456822 = score(doc=1213,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16142878 = queryWeight, product of:
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.27608594 = fieldWeight in 1213, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1213)
0.021587534 = weight(_text_:h in 1213) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021587534 = score(doc=1213,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11234917 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.19214681 = fieldWeight in 1213, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1213)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Bibliotheksdienst. 36(2002) H.12, S.1732-1740
-
Schlögl, C.: Internationale Sichtbarkeit der europäischen und insbesondere der deutschsprachigen Informationswissenschaft (2013)
0.02
0.021491747 = product of:
0.042983495 = sum of:
0.042983495 = product of:
0.06447524 = sum of:
0.021587534 = weight(_text_:h in 900) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021587534 = score(doc=900,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11234917 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.19214681 = fieldWeight in 900, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=900)
0.042887706 = weight(_text_:22 in 900) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042887706 = score(doc=900,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15835609 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 900, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=900)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 3.2013 14:04:09
- Source
- Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 64(2013) H.1, S.1-8
-
Kousha, K.; Thelwall, M.: How is science cited on the Web? : a classification of google unique Web citations (2007)
0.02
0.020822838 = product of:
0.041645676 = sum of:
0.041645676 = product of:
0.062468514 = sum of:
0.03183444 = weight(_text_:k in 586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03183444 = score(doc=586,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16142878 = queryWeight, product of:
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.19720423 = fieldWeight in 586, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=586)
0.030634077 = weight(_text_:22 in 586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030634077 = score(doc=586,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15835609 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 586, 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=586)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Although the analysis of citations in the scholarly literature is now an established and relatively well understood part of information science, not enough is known about citations that can be found on the Web. In particular, are there new Web types, and if so, are these trivial or potentially useful for studying or evaluating research communication? We sought evidence based upon a sample of 1,577 Web citations of the URLs or titles of research articles in 64 open-access journals from biology, physics, chemistry, and computing. Only 25% represented intellectual impact, from references of Web documents (23%) and other informal scholarly sources (2%). Many of the Web/URL citations were created for general or subject-specific navigation (45%) or for self-publicity (22%). Additional analyses revealed significant disciplinary differences in the types of Google unique Web/URL citations as well as some characteristics of scientific open-access publishing on the Web. We conclude that the Web provides access to a new and different type of citation information, one that may therefore enable us to measure different aspects of research, and the research process in particular; but to obtain good information, the different types should be separated.
-
Shibata, N.; Kajikawa, Y.; Takeda, Y.; Matsushima, K.: Comparative study on methods of detecting research fronts using different types of citation (2009)
0.02
0.020822838 = product of:
0.041645676 = sum of:
0.041645676 = product of:
0.062468514 = sum of:
0.03183444 = weight(_text_:k in 2743) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03183444 = score(doc=2743,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16142878 = queryWeight, product of:
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.19720423 = fieldWeight in 2743, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2743)
0.030634077 = weight(_text_:22 in 2743) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030634077 = score(doc=2743,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15835609 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2743, 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=2743)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 3.2009 17:52:50
-
Liu, D.-R.; Shih, M.-J.: Hybrid-patent classification based on patent-network analysis (2011)
0.02
0.020822838 = product of:
0.041645676 = sum of:
0.041645676 = product of:
0.062468514 = sum of:
0.03183444 = weight(_text_:k in 4189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03183444 = score(doc=4189,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16142878 = queryWeight, product of:
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.19720423 = fieldWeight in 4189, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4189)
0.030634077 = weight(_text_:22 in 4189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030634077 = score(doc=4189,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15835609 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045220956 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4189, 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=4189)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Effective patent management is essential for organizations to maintain their competitive advantage. The classification of patents is a critical part of patent management and industrial analysis. This study proposes a hybrid-patent-classification approach that combines a novel patent-network-based classification method with three conventional classification methods to analyze query patents and predict their classes. The novel patent network contains various types of nodes that represent different features extracted from patent documents. The nodes are connected based on the relationship metrics derived from the patent metadata. The proposed classification method predicts a query patent's class by analyzing all reachable nodes in the patent network and calculating their relevance to the query patent. It then classifies the query patent with a modified k-nearest neighbor classifier. To further improve the approach, we combine it with content-based, citation-based, and metadata-based classification methods to develop a hybrid-classification approach. We evaluate the performance of the hybrid approach on a test dataset of patent documents obtained from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, and compare its performance with that of the three conventional methods. The results demonstrate that the proposed patent-network-based approach yields more accurate class predictions than the patent network-based approach.
- Date
- 22. 1.2011 13:04:21
