-
Nicolaisen, J.: Citation analysis (2007)
0.02
0.017099358 = product of:
0.05129807 = sum of:
0.05129807 = product of:
0.10259614 = sum of:
0.10259614 = weight(_text_:22 in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10259614 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047327764 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 6091, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6091)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 13. 7.2008 19:53:22
-
Døsen, K.: One more reference on self-reference (1992)
0.02
0.017099358 = product of:
0.05129807 = sum of:
0.05129807 = product of:
0.10259614 = sum of:
0.10259614 = weight(_text_:22 in 4604) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10259614 = score(doc=4604,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047327764 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 4604, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4604)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 7. 2.2005 14:10:22
-
Van der Veer Martens, B.: Do citation systems represent theories of truth? (2001)
0.02
0.01511384 = product of:
0.045341518 = sum of:
0.045341518 = product of:
0.090683036 = sum of:
0.090683036 = weight(_text_:22 in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.090683036 = score(doc=3925,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047327764 = queryNorm
0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 3925, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3925)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 15:22:28
-
White, H.D.; Wellman, B.; Nazer, N.: Does Citation Reflect Social Structure? : Longitudinal Evidence From the "Globenet" Interdisciplinary Research Group (2004)
0.01
0.012936337 = product of:
0.03880901 = sum of:
0.03880901 = product of:
0.07761802 = sum of:
0.07761802 = weight(_text_:group in 2095) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07761802 = score(doc=2095,freq=6.0), product of:
0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
0.047327764 = queryNorm
0.3543122 = fieldWeight in 2095, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2095)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Many authors have posited a social component in citation, the consensus being that the citers and citees often have interpersonal as well as intellectual ties. Evidence for this belief has been rather meager, however, in part because social networks researchers have lacked bibliometric data (e.g., pairwise citation counts from online databases), and citation analysts have lacked sociometric data (e.g., pairwise measures of acquaintanceship). In 1997 Nazer extensively measured personal relationships and communication behaviors in what we call "Globenet," an international group of 16 researchers from seven disciplines that was established in 1993 to study human development. Since Globenet's membership is known, it was possible during 2002 to obtain citation records for all members in databases of the Institute for Scientific Information. This permitted examination of how members cited each other (intercited) in journal articles over the past three decades and in a 1999 book to which they all contributed. It was also possible to explore links between the intercitation data and the social and communication data. Using network-analytic techniques, we look at the growth of intercitation over time, the extent to which it follows disciplinary or interdisciplinary lines, whether it covaries with degrees of acquaintanceship, whether it reflects Globenet's organizational structure, whether it is associated with particular in-group communication patterns, and whether it is related to the cocitation of Globenet members. Results show cocitation to be a powerful predictor of intercitation in the journal articles, while being an editor or co-author is an important predictor in the book. Intellectual ties based an shared content did better as predictors than content-neutral social ties like friendship. However, interciters in Globenet communicated more than did noninterciters.
-
Lin, X.; White, H.D.; Buzydlowski, J.: Real-time author co-citation mapping for online searching (2003)
0.01
0.011203195 = product of:
0.033609584 = sum of:
0.033609584 = product of:
0.06721917 = sum of:
0.06721917 = weight(_text_:group in 1080) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06721917 = score(doc=1080,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
0.047327764 = queryNorm
0.30684334 = fieldWeight in 1080, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1080)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Author searching is traditionally based on the matching of name strings. Special characteristics of authors as personal names and subject indicators are not considered. This makes it difficult to identify a set of related authors or to group authors by subjects in retrieval systems. In this paper, we describe the design and implementation of a prototype visualization system to enhance author searching. The system, called AuthorLink, is based on author co-citation analysis and visualization mapping algorithms such as Kohonen's feature maps and Pathfinder networks. AuthorLink produces interactive author maps in real time from a database of 1.26 million records supplied by the Institute for Scientific Information. The maps show subject groupings and more fine-grained intellectual connections among authors. Through the interactive interface the user can take advantage of such information to refine queries and retrieve documents through point-and-click manipulation of the authors' names.
-
Garfield, E.; Stock, W.G.: Citation Consciousness : Interview with Eugene Garfiels, chairman emeritus of ISI; Philadelphia (2002)
0.01
0.010687098 = product of:
0.032061294 = sum of:
0.032061294 = product of:
0.06412259 = sum of:
0.06412259 = weight(_text_:22 in 613) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06412259 = score(doc=613,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047327764 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 613, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=613)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Source
- Password. 2002, H.6, S.22-25
-
Marion, L.S.; McCain, K.W.: Contrasting views of software engineering journals : author cocitation choices and indexer vocabulary assignments (2001)
0.01
0.009335997 = product of:
0.028007988 = sum of:
0.028007988 = product of:
0.056015976 = sum of:
0.056015976 = weight(_text_:group in 5767) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056015976 = score(doc=5767,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
0.047327764 = queryNorm
0.2557028 = fieldWeight in 5767, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5767)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- We explore the intellectual subject structure and research themes in software engineering through the identification and analysis of a core journal literature. We examine this literature via two expert perspectives: that of the author, who identified significant work by citing it (journal cocitation analysis), and that of the professional indexer, who tags published work with subject terms to facilitate retrieval from a bibliographic database (subject profile analysis). The data sources are SCISEARCH (the on-line version of Science Citation Index), and INSPEC (a database covering software engineering, computer science, and information systems). We use data visualization tools (cluster analysis, multidimensional scaling, and PFNets) to show the "intellectual maps" of software engineering. Cocitation and subject profile analyses demonstrate that software engineering is a distinct interdisciplinary field, valuing practical and applied aspects, and spanning a subject continuum from "programming-in-the-smalI" to "programming-in-the-large." This continuum mirrors the software development life cycle by taking the operating system or major application from initial programming through project management, implementation, and maintenance. Object orientation is an integral but distinct subject area in software engineering. Key differences are the importance of management and programming: (1) cocitation analysis emphasizes project management and systems development; (2) programming techniques/languages are more influential in subject profiles; (3) cocitation profiles place object-oriented journals separately and centrally while the subject profile analysis locates these journals with the programming/languages group
-
Gabel, J.: Improving information retrieval of subjects through citation-analysis (2006)
0.01
0.009335997 = product of:
0.028007988 = sum of:
0.028007988 = product of:
0.056015976 = sum of:
0.056015976 = weight(_text_:group in 61) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056015976 = score(doc=61,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
0.047327764 = queryNorm
0.2557028 = fieldWeight in 61, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=61)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Citation-chasing is proposed as a method of discovering additional terms to enhance subject-search retrieval by broadening and prioritizing the results. Subjects attached to records representing cited works are compared to subjects attached to records representing the original citing sources, and to the subjects yielded by chasing see-also references from the latter group of headings. Original citing sources were yielded via a subject-list search in a library catalog using the subject heading "Language and languages - Origin." A subject-search was employed to avoid subjectivity in choosing sources. References from the sources were searched in OCLC where applicable, and the subject headings were retrieved. The subjects were ranked first by number of citations from original sources, then by total citation-frequency. The results were tiered into 4 groups in a Bradford-like distribution. A similar rank and division was performed on the subjects representing the original citing sources, and those yielded by chasing see-also references. Both in terms of subject frequency and topic type, positive comparisons between citation chasing and see-also references show a confirmation of different methods of yielding alternative subjects. Exclusive results suggest potential mutual complementary value among these different methods.
-
Larivière, V.; Gingras, Y.; Archambault, E.: ¬The decline in the concentration of citations, 1900-2007 (2009)
0.01
0.009068305 = product of:
0.027204912 = sum of:
0.027204912 = product of:
0.054409824 = sum of:
0.054409824 = weight(_text_:22 in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054409824 = score(doc=2763,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047327764 = queryNorm
0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 2763, 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=2763)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 22. 3.2009 19:22:35
-
Bensman, S.J.: Eugene Garfield, Francis Narin, and PageRank : the theoretical bases of the Google search engine (2013)
0.01
0.008549679 = product of:
0.025649035 = sum of:
0.025649035 = product of:
0.05129807 = sum of:
0.05129807 = weight(_text_:22 in 1149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05129807 = score(doc=1149,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047327764 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1149, 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=1149)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 17.12.2013 11:02:22
-
Garfield, E.: Recollections of Irving H. Sher 1924-1996 : Polymath/information scientist extraordinaire (2001)
0.01
0.0074809687 = product of:
0.022442905 = sum of:
0.022442905 = product of:
0.04488581 = sum of:
0.04488581 = weight(_text_:22 in 6920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04488581 = score(doc=6920,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047327764 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 6920, 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=6920)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 16.12.2001 14:01:22
-
Van der Veer Martens, B.; Goodrum, G.: ¬The diffusion of theories : a functional approach (2006)
0.01
0.0074809687 = product of:
0.022442905 = sum of:
0.022442905 = product of:
0.04488581 = sum of:
0.04488581 = weight(_text_:22 in 5269) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04488581 = score(doc=5269,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047327764 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5269, 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=5269)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 15:20:01
-
Tay, A.: ¬The next generation discovery citation indexes : a review of the landscape in 2020 (2020)
0.01
0.0074809687 = product of:
0.022442905 = sum of:
0.022442905 = product of:
0.04488581 = sum of:
0.04488581 = weight(_text_:22 in 40) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04488581 = score(doc=40,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047327764 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 40, 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=40)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 17.11.2020 12:22:59
-
White, H.D.: Authors as citers over time (2001)
0.01
0.007468797 = product of:
0.02240639 = sum of:
0.02240639 = product of:
0.04481278 = sum of:
0.04481278 = weight(_text_:group in 5581) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04481278 = score(doc=5581,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
0.047327764 = queryNorm
0.20456223 = fieldWeight in 5581, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5581)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- This study explores the tendency of authors to recite themselves and others in multiple works over time, using the insights gained to build citation theory. The set of all authors whom an author cites is defined as that author's citation identity. The study explains how to retrieve citation identities from the Institute for Scientific Information's files on Dialog and how to deal with idiosyncrasies of these files. As the author's oeuvre grows, the identity takes the form of a core-and-scatter distribution that may be divided into authors cited only once (unicitations) and authors cited at least twice (recitations). The latter group, especially those recited most frequently, are interpretable as symbols of a citer's main substantive concerns. As illustrated by the top recitees of eight information scientists, identities are intelligible, individualized, and wide-ranging. They are ego-centered without being egotistical. They are often affected by social ties between citers and citees, but the universal motivator seems to be the perceived relevance of the citees' works. Citing styles in identities differ: "scientific-paper style" authors recite heavily, adding to core; "bibliographic-essay style" authors are heavy on unicitations, adding to scatter; "literature-review style" authors do both at once. Identities distill aspects of citers' intellectual lives, such as orienting figures, interdisciplinary interests, bidisciplinary careers, and conduct in controversies. They can also be related to past schemes for classifying citations in categories such as positive-negative and perfunctory- organic; indeed, one author's frequent recitation of another, whether positive or negative, may be the readiest indicator of an organic relation between them. The shape of the core-and-scatter distribution of names in identities can be explained by the principle of least effort. Citers economize on effort by frequently reciting only a relatively small core of names in their identities. They also economize by frequent use of perfunctory citations, which require relatively little context, and infrequent use of negative citations, which require contexts more laborious to set
-
Campanario, J.M.: Have referees rejected some of the most-cited articles of all times? (1996)
0.01
0.0064122584 = product of:
0.019236775 = sum of:
0.019236775 = product of:
0.03847355 = sum of:
0.03847355 = weight(_text_:22 in 4215) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03847355 = score(doc=4215,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047327764 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4215, 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=4215)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- In this article a quantitative study is reported on the resistance that scientists may encounter when they do innovative work or when they attempt to publish articles that later become highly cited. A set of 205 commentaries by authors of some of the most-cited papers of all times have been examined in order to identify those articles whose authors encountered difficulty in getting his or her work published. There are 22 commentaries (10,7%) in which authors mention some difficulty or resistance in doing or publishing the research reported in the article. Three of the articles which had problems in being published are the most cited from their respective journals. According the authors' commentaries, although sometimes referees' negative evaluations can help improve the articles, in other instances referees and editors wrongly rejected the highly cited articles
-
Snyder, H.; Bonzi, S.: Patterns of self-citation across disciplines : 1980-1989 (1998)
0.01
0.0064122584 = product of:
0.019236775 = sum of:
0.019236775 = product of:
0.03847355 = sum of:
0.03847355 = weight(_text_:22 in 3692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03847355 = score(doc=3692,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047327764 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3692, 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=3692)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 22. 5.1999 19:33:24
-
wst: Cut-and-paste-Wissenschaft (2003)
0.01
0.0064122584 = product of:
0.019236775 = sum of:
0.019236775 = product of:
0.03847355 = sum of:
0.03847355 = weight(_text_:22 in 1270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03847355 = score(doc=1270,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047327764 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1270, 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=1270)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Content
- "Mikhail Simkin und Vwani Roychowdhury von der University of Califomia, Los Angeles, haben eine in der wissenschaftlichen Gemeinschaft verbreitete Unsitte erstmals quantitativ erfasst. Die Wissenschaftler analysierten die Verbreitung von Druckfehlern in den Literaturlisten wissenschaftlicher Arbeiten (www.arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0212043). 78 Prozent aller zitierten Aufsätze - so schätzen die Forscher - haben die zitierenden Wissenschaftler demnach nicht gelesen, sondern nur per 'cut and paste' von einer Vorlage in ihre eigene Literaturliste übernommen. Das könne man beispielsweise abschätzen aus der Analyse fehlerhafter Seitenangaben in der Literaturliste eines 1973 veröffentlichten Aufsatzes über die Struktur zweidimensionaler Kristalle: Dieser Aufsatz ist rund 4300 mal zitiert worden. In 196 Fällen enthalten die Zitate jedoch Fehler in der Jahreszahl, dem Band der Zeitschrift oder der Seitenzahl, die als Indikatoren für cut and paste genommen werden können, denn man kann, obwohl es Milliarden Möglichkeiten gibt, nur 45 verschiedene Arten von Druckfehlern unterscheiden. In erster Näherung ergibt sich eine Obergrenze für die Zahl der `echten Leser' daher aus der Zahl der unterscheidbaren Druckfehler (45) geteilt durch die Gesamtzahl der Publikationen mit Druckfehler (196), das macht etwa 22 Prozent."
-
Chan, H.C.; Kim, H.-W.; Tan, W.C.: Information systems citation patterns from International Conference on Information Systems articles (2006)
0.01
0.0064122584 = product of:
0.019236775 = sum of:
0.019236775 = product of:
0.03847355 = sum of:
0.03847355 = weight(_text_:22 in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03847355 = score(doc=201,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047327764 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 201, 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=201)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 3. 1.2007 17:22:03
-
H-Index auch im Web of Science (2008)
0.01
0.0064122584 = product of:
0.019236775 = sum of:
0.019236775 = product of:
0.03847355 = sum of:
0.03847355 = weight(_text_:22 in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03847355 = score(doc=590,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047327764 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 6. 4.2008 19:04:22
-
Mingers, J.; Burrell, Q.L.: Modeling citation behavior in Management Science journals (2006)
0.01
0.0064122584 = product of:
0.019236775 = sum of:
0.019236775 = product of:
0.03847355 = sum of:
0.03847355 = weight(_text_:22 in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03847355 = score(doc=994,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047327764 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 994, 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=994)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 26.12.2007 19:22:05
