-
Huang, M.-H.; Huang, W.-T.; Chang, C.-C.; Chen, D. Z.; Lin, C.-P.: The greater scattering phenomenon beyond Bradford's law in patent citation (2014)
0.07
0.06823617 = product of:
0.13647234 = sum of:
0.13647234 = sum of:
0.03852201 = weight(_text_:p in 1352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03852201 = score(doc=1352,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16161878 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.23835106 = fieldWeight in 1352, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1352)
0.061409608 = weight(_text_:c in 1352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.061409608 = score(doc=1352,freq=6.0), product of:
0.15505123 = queryWeight, product of:
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.3960601 = fieldWeight in 1352, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1352)
0.036540736 = weight(_text_:22 in 1352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036540736 = score(doc=1352,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15740772 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1352, 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=1352)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 8.2014 17:11:29
-
Haustein, S.; Sugimoto, C.; Larivière, V.: Social media in scholarly communication : Guest editorial (2015)
0.04
0.041588712 = product of:
0.083177425 = sum of:
0.083177425 = sum of:
0.047179632 = weight(_text_:p in 3809) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047179632 = score(doc=3809,freq=12.0), product of:
0.16161878 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.29191923 = fieldWeight in 3809, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3809)
0.017727427 = weight(_text_:c in 3809) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017727427 = score(doc=3809,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15505123 = queryWeight, product of:
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.114332706 = fieldWeight in 3809, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3809)
0.018270368 = weight(_text_:22 in 3809) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018270368 = score(doc=3809,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15740772 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 3809, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3809)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This year marks 350 years since the inaugural publications of both the Journal des Sçavans and the Philosophical Transactions, first published in 1665 and considered the birth of the peer-reviewed journal article. This form of scholarly communication has not only remained the dominant model for disseminating new knowledge (particularly for science and medicine), but has also increased substantially in volume. Derek de Solla Price - the "father of scientometrics" (Merton and Garfield, 1986, p. vii) - was the first to document the exponential increase in scientific journals and showed that "scientists have always felt themselves to be awash in a sea of the scientific literature" (Price, 1963, p. 15), as, for example, expressed at the 1948 Royal Society's Scientific Information Conference: Not for the first time in history, but more acutely than ever before, there was a fear that scientists would be overwhelmed, that they would be no longer able to control the vast amounts of potentially relevant material that were pouring forth from the world's presses, that science itself was under threat (Bawden and Robinson, 2008, p. 183).
One of the solutions to help scientists filter the most relevant publications and, thus, to stay current on developments in their fields during the transition from "little science" to "big science", was the introduction of citation indexing as a Wellsian "World Brain" (Garfield, 1964) of scientific information: It is too much to expect a research worker to spend an inordinate amount of time searching for the bibliographic descendants of antecedent papers. It would not be excessive to demand that the thorough scholar check all papers that have cited or criticized such papers, if they could be located quickly. The citation index makes this check practicable (Garfield, 1955, p. 108). In retrospective, citation indexing can be perceived as a pre-social web version of crowdsourcing, as it is based on the concept that the community of citing authors outperforms indexers in highlighting cognitive links between papers, particularly on the level of specific ideas and concepts (Garfield, 1983). Over the last 50 years, citation analysis and more generally, bibliometric methods, have developed from information retrieval tools to research evaluation metrics, where they are presumed to make scientific funding more efficient and effective (Moed, 2006). However, the dominance of bibliometric indicators in research evaluation has also led to significant goal displacement (Merton, 1957) and the oversimplification of notions of "research productivity" and "scientific quality", creating adverse effects such as salami publishing, honorary authorships, citation cartels, and misuse of indicators (Binswanger, 2015; Cronin and Sugimoto, 2014; Frey and Osterloh, 2006; Haustein and Larivière, 2015; Weingart, 2005).
Furthermore, the rise of the web, and subsequently, the social web, has challenged the quasi-monopolistic status of the journal as the main form of scholarly communication and citation indices as the primary assessment mechanisms. Scientific communication is becoming more open, transparent, and diverse: publications are increasingly open access; manuscripts, presentations, code, and data are shared online; research ideas and results are discussed and criticized openly on blogs; and new peer review experiments, with open post publication assessment by anonymous or non-anonymous referees, are underway. The diversification of scholarly production and assessment, paired with the increasing speed of the communication process, leads to an increased information overload (Bawden and Robinson, 2008), demanding new filters. The concept of altmetrics, short for alternative (to citation) metrics, was created out of an attempt to provide a filter (Priem et al., 2010) and to steer against the oversimplification of the measurement of scientific success solely on the basis of number of journal articles published and citations received, by considering a wider range of research outputs and metrics (Piwowar, 2013). Although the term altmetrics was introduced in a tweet in 2010 (Priem, 2010), the idea of capturing traces - "polymorphous mentioning" (Cronin et al., 1998, p. 1320) - of scholars and their documents on the web to measure "impact" of science in a broader manner than citations was introduced years before, largely in the context of webometrics (Almind and Ingwersen, 1997; Thelwall et al., 2005):
There will soon be a critical mass of web-based digital objects and usage statistics on which to model scholars' communication behaviors - publishing, posting, blogging, scanning, reading, downloading, glossing, linking, citing, recommending, acknowledging - and with which to track their scholarly influence and impact, broadly conceived and broadly felt (Cronin, 2005, p. 196). A decade after Cronin's prediction and five years after the coining of altmetrics, the time seems ripe to reflect upon the role of social media in scholarly communication. This Special Issue does so by providing an overview of current research on the indicators and metrics grouped under the umbrella term of altmetrics, on their relationships with traditional indicators of scientific activity, and on the uses that are made of the various social media platforms - on which these indicators are based - by scientists of various disciplines.
- Date
- 20. 1.2015 18:30:22
-
Grazia Colonia; Dimmler, E.; Dresel, R.; Messner, C.; Krobath, A.; Petz, S.; Sypien, M.; Boxen, P. van; Harders, M.; Heuer, D.; Jordans, I.; Juchem, K.; Linnertz, M.; Mittelhuber, I.; Schwammel, S.; Schlögl, C.; Stock, W.G.: Informationswissenschaftliche Zeitschriften in szientometrischer Analyse (2002)
0.03
0.034479957 = product of:
0.068959914 = sum of:
0.068959914 = product of:
0.10343987 = sum of:
0.04494234 = weight(_text_:p in 1075) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04494234 = score(doc=1075,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16161878 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.27807623 = fieldWeight in 1075, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1075)
0.058497526 = weight(_text_:c in 1075) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.058497526 = score(doc=1075,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15505123 = queryWeight, product of:
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.3772787 = fieldWeight in 1075, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1075)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Malesios, C.: Some variations on the standard theoretical models for the h-index : a comparative analysis (2015)
0.03
0.034479957 = product of:
0.068959914 = sum of:
0.068959914 = product of:
0.10343987 = sum of:
0.04494234 = weight(_text_:p in 2267) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04494234 = score(doc=2267,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16161878 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.27807623 = fieldWeight in 2267, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2267)
0.058497526 = weight(_text_:c in 2267) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.058497526 = score(doc=2267,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15505123 = queryWeight, product of:
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.3772787 = fieldWeight in 2267, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2267)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Various mathematical models have been proposed in the recent literature for estimating the h-index using measures such as number of articles (P) and citations received (C). These models have been previously empirically tested assuming a mathematical model and predetermining the models' parameter values at some fixed constant. The present study, from a statistical modeling viewpoint, investigates alternative distributions commonly used for this type of point data. The study shows that the typical assumptions for the parameters of the h-index mathematical models in such representations are not always realistic, with more suitable specifications being favorable. Prediction of the h-index is also demonstrated.
-
Pichappan, P.; Sangaranachiyar, S.: Ageing approach to scientific eponyms (1996)
0.03
0.033361223 = product of:
0.066722445 = sum of:
0.066722445 = product of:
0.100083664 = sum of:
0.05136268 = weight(_text_:p in 80) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05136268 = score(doc=80,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16161878 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.31780142 = fieldWeight in 80, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=80)
0.048720982 = weight(_text_:22 in 80) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048720982 = score(doc=80,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15740772 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 80, 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=80)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Footnote
- Report presented at the 16th National Indian Association of Special Libraries and Information Centres Seminar Special Interest Group Meeting on Informatrics in Bombay, 19-22 Dec 94
-
Ohly, P.: Dimensions of globality : a bibliometric analysis (2016)
0.03
0.033361223 = product of:
0.066722445 = sum of:
0.066722445 = product of:
0.100083664 = sum of:
0.05136268 = weight(_text_:p in 4942) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05136268 = score(doc=4942,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16161878 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.31780142 = fieldWeight in 4942, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4942)
0.048720982 = weight(_text_:22 in 4942) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048720982 = score(doc=4942,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15740772 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4942, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4942)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 20. 1.2019 11:22:31
-
Li, T.-C.: Reference sources in periodicals : research note (1995)
0.03
0.03199804 = product of:
0.06399608 = sum of:
0.06399608 = product of:
0.095994115 = sum of:
0.047273137 = weight(_text_:c in 5092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047273137 = score(doc=5092,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15505123 = queryWeight, product of:
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.3048872 = fieldWeight in 5092, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5092)
0.048720982 = weight(_text_:22 in 5092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048720982 = score(doc=5092,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15740772 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5092, 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=5092)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Presents a list of 53 periodicals in 22 subject fields which regularly provide bibliographies of theses, research in progress and patents in their particular subject field. The fields of business, economics, history and literature have most periodical listings of dissertations and theses. Also lists 63 periodicals in 25 sub-disciplines which provide rankings or ratings. Rankings and ratings information predominates in the fields of business, sports and games, finance and banking, and library and information science
-
¬Die deutsche Zeitschrift für Dokumentation, Informationswissenschaft und Informationspraxis von 1950 bis 2011 : eine vorläufige Bilanz in vier Abschnitten (2012)
0.03
0.030339696 = product of:
0.06067939 = sum of:
0.06067939 = product of:
0.09101909 = sum of:
0.05447835 = weight(_text_:p in 402) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05447835 = score(doc=402,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16161878 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.33707932 = fieldWeight in 402, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=402)
0.036540736 = weight(_text_:22 in 402) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036540736 = score(doc=402,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15740772 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
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).
-
Fassin, Y.: ¬A new qualitative rating system for scientific publications and a fame index for academics (2018)
0.03
0.028768778 = product of:
0.057537556 = sum of:
0.057537556 = product of:
0.08630633 = sum of:
0.04494234 = weight(_text_:p in 4571) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04494234 = score(doc=4571,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16161878 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.27807623 = fieldWeight in 4571, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4571)
0.04136399 = weight(_text_:c in 4571) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04136399 = score(doc=4571,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15505123 = queryWeight, product of:
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.2667763 = fieldWeight in 4571, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4571)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- An innovative approach is proposed for a rating system for academic publications based on a categorization into ratings comparable to financial ratings such as Moody's and S&P ratings (AAA, AA, A, BA, BBB, BB, B, C). The categorization makes use of a variable percentile approach based on recently developed h-related indices. Building on this categorization, a new index is proposed for researchers, the fame-index or f2-index. This new index integrates some qualitative elements related to the influence of a researcher's articles. It better mitigates than the classic h-index.
-
Schlögl, C.: Internationale Sichtbarkeit der europäischen und insbesondere der deutschsprachigen Informationswissenschaft (2013)
0.03
0.027998284 = product of:
0.055996567 = sum of:
0.055996567 = product of:
0.08399485 = sum of:
0.04136399 = weight(_text_:c in 900) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04136399 = score(doc=900,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15505123 = queryWeight, product of:
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.2667763 = fieldWeight in 900, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=900)
0.04263086 = weight(_text_:22 in 900) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04263086 = score(doc=900,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15740772 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = 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
-
Albarrán, P.; Ruiz-Castillo, J.: References made and citations received by scientific articles (2011)
0.03
0.025020916 = product of:
0.050041832 = sum of:
0.050041832 = product of:
0.075062744 = sum of:
0.03852201 = weight(_text_:p in 4185) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03852201 = score(doc=4185,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16161878 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.23835106 = fieldWeight in 4185, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4185)
0.036540736 = weight(_text_:22 in 4185) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036540736 = score(doc=4185,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15740772 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4185, 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=4185)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This article studies massive evidence about references made and citations received after a 5-year citation window by 3.7 million articles published in 1998 to 2002 in 22 scientific fields. We find that the distributions of references made and citations received share a number of basic features across sciences. Reference distributions are rather skewed to the right while citation distributions are even more highly skewed: The mean is about 20 percentage points to the right of the median, and articles with a remarkable or an outstanding number of citations represent about 9% of the total. Moreover, the existence of a power law representing the upper tail of citation distributions cannot be rejected in 17 fields whose articles represent 74.7% of the total. Contrary to the evidence in other contexts, the value of the scale parameter is above 3.5 in 13 of the 17 cases. Finally, power laws are typically small, but capture a considerable proportion of the total citations received.
-
Kronegger, L.; Mali, F.; Ferligoj, A.; Doreian, P.: Classifying scientific disciplines in Slovenia : a study of the evolution of collaboration structures (2015)
0.03
0.025020916 = product of:
0.050041832 = sum of:
0.050041832 = product of:
0.075062744 = sum of:
0.03852201 = weight(_text_:p in 1639) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03852201 = score(doc=1639,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16161878 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.23835106 = fieldWeight in 1639, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1639)
0.036540736 = weight(_text_:22 in 1639) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036540736 = score(doc=1639,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15740772 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 21. 1.2015 14:55:22
-
Thelwall, M.; Sud, P.: Mendeley readership counts : an investigation of temporal and disciplinary differences (2016)
0.03
0.025020916 = product of:
0.050041832 = sum of:
0.050041832 = product of:
0.075062744 = sum of:
0.03852201 = weight(_text_:p in 3211) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03852201 = score(doc=3211,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16161878 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.23835106 = fieldWeight in 3211, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3211)
0.036540736 = weight(_text_:22 in 3211) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036540736 = score(doc=3211,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15740772 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3211, 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=3211)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 16.11.2016 11:07:22
-
Ahlgren, P.; Colliander, C.; Sjögårde, P.: Exploring the relation between referencing practices and citation impact : a large-scale study based on Web of Science data (2018)
0.02
0.024981445 = product of:
0.04996289 = sum of:
0.04996289 = product of:
0.07494433 = sum of:
0.045398626 = weight(_text_:p in 4250) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.045398626 = score(doc=4250,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16161878 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.28089944 = fieldWeight in 4250, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4250)
0.02954571 = weight(_text_:c in 4250) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02954571 = score(doc=4250,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15505123 = queryWeight, product of:
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.1905545 = fieldWeight in 4250, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4250)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Chen, C.: CiteSpace II : detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature (2006)
0.02
0.024078188 = product of:
0.048156377 = sum of:
0.048156377 = product of:
0.07223456 = sum of:
0.041783947 = weight(_text_:c in 5272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041783947 = score(doc=5272,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15505123 = queryWeight, product of:
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.2694848 = fieldWeight in 5272, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5272)
0.030450614 = weight(_text_:22 in 5272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030450614 = score(doc=5272,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15740772 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5272, 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=5272)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This article describes the latest development of a generic approach to detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature. The work makes substantial theoretical and methodological contributions to progressive knowledge domain visualization. A specialty is conceptualized and visualized as a time-variant duality between two fundamental concepts in information science: research fronts and intellectual bases. A research front is defined as an emergent and transient grouping of concepts and underlying research issues. The intellectual base of a research front is its citation and co-citation footprint in scientific literature - an evolving network of scientific publications cited by research-front concepts. Kleinberg's (2002) burst-detection algorithm is adapted to identify emergent research-front concepts. Freeman's (1979) betweenness centrality metric is used to highlight potential pivotal points of paradigm shift over time. Two complementary visualization views are designed and implemented: cluster views and time-zone views. The contributions of the approach are that (a) the nature of an intellectual base is algorithmically and temporally identified by emergent research-front terms, (b) the value of a co-citation cluster is explicitly interpreted in terms of research-front concepts, and (c) visually prominent and algorithmically detected pivotal points substantially reduce the complexity of a visualized network. The modeling and visualization process is implemented in CiteSpace II, a Java application, and applied to the analysis of two research fields: mass extinction (1981-2004) and terrorism (1990-2003). Prominent trends and pivotal points in visualized networks were verified in collaboration with domain experts, who are the authors of pivotal-point articles. Practical implications of the work are discussed. A number of challenges and opportunities for future studies are identified.
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 16:11:05
-
D'Angelo, C.A.; Giuffrida, C.; Abramo, G.: ¬A heuristic approach to author name disambiguation in bibliometrics databases for large-scale research assessments (2011)
0.02
0.023998529 = product of:
0.047997057 = sum of:
0.047997057 = product of:
0.071995586 = sum of:
0.035454854 = weight(_text_:c in 4190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035454854 = score(doc=4190,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15505123 = queryWeight, product of:
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.22866541 = fieldWeight in 4190, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4190)
0.036540736 = weight(_text_:22 in 4190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036540736 = score(doc=4190,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15740772 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4190, 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=4190)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 1.2011 13:06:52
-
Hayer, L.: Lazarsfeld zitiert : eine bibliometrische Analyse (2008)
0.02
0.020850763 = product of:
0.041701525 = sum of:
0.041701525 = product of:
0.06255229 = sum of:
0.032101676 = weight(_text_:p in 1934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032101676 = score(doc=1934,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16161878 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.19862589 = fieldWeight in 1934, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1934)
0.030450614 = weight(_text_:22 in 1934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030450614 = score(doc=1934,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15740772 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1934, 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=1934)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Um sich einer Antwort auf die Frage anzunähern, welche Bedeutung der Nachlass eines Wissenschaftlers wie jener Paul F. Lazarsfelds (mit zahlreichen noch unveröffentlichten Schriften) für die aktuelle Forschung haben könne, kann untersucht werden, wie häufig dieser Wissenschaftler zitiert wird. Wenn ein Autor zitiert wird, wird er auch genutzt. Wird er über einen langen Zeitraum oft genutzt, ist vermutlich auch die Auseinandersetzung mit seinem Nachlass von Nutzen. Außerdem kann aufgrund der Zitierungen festgestellt werden, was aus dem Lebenswerk eines Wissenschaftlers für die aktuelle Forschung relevant erscheint. Daraus können die vordringlichen Fragestellungen in der Bearbeitung des Nachlasses abgeleitet werden. Die Aufgabe für die folgende Untersuchung lautete daher: Wie oft wird Paul F. Lazarsfeld zitiert? Dabei interessierte auch: Wer zitiert wo? Die Untersuchung wurde mit Hilfe der Meta-Datenbank "ISI Web of Knowledge" durchgeführt. In dieser wurde im "Web of Science" mit dem Werkzeug "Cited Reference Search" nach dem zitierten Autor (Cited Author) "Lazarsfeld P*" gesucht. Diese Suche ergab 1535 Referenzen (References). Werden alle Referenzen gewählt, führt dies zu 4839 Ergebnissen (Results). Dabei wurden die Datenbanken SCI-Expanded, SSCI und A&HCI verwendet. Bei dieser Suche wurden die Publikationsjahre 1941-2008 analysiert. Vor 1956 wurden allerdings nur sehr wenige Zitate gefunden: 1946 fünf, ansonsten maximal drei, 1942-1944 und 1949 überhaupt keines. Zudem ist das Jahr 2008 noch lange nicht zu Ende. (Es gab jedoch schon vor Ende März 24 Zitate!)
- Date
- 22. 6.2008 12:54:12
-
Thelwall, M.; Sud, P.; Wilkinson, D.: Link and co-inlink network diagrams with URL citations or title mentions (2012)
0.02
0.020850763 = product of:
0.041701525 = sum of:
0.041701525 = product of:
0.06255229 = sum of:
0.032101676 = weight(_text_:p in 57) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032101676 = score(doc=57,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16161878 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.19862589 = fieldWeight in 57, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=57)
0.030450614 = weight(_text_:22 in 57) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030450614 = score(doc=57,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15740772 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 57, 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=57)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 6. 4.2012 18:16:22
-
Heneberg, P.: Supposedly uncited articles of Nobel laureates and Fields medalists can be prevalently attributed to the errors of omission and commission (2013)
0.02
0.020850763 = product of:
0.041701525 = sum of:
0.041701525 = product of:
0.06255229 = sum of:
0.032101676 = weight(_text_:p in 660) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032101676 = score(doc=660,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16161878 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.19862589 = fieldWeight in 660, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=660)
0.030450614 = weight(_text_:22 in 660) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030450614 = score(doc=660,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15740772 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 3.2013 19:21:46
-
Costas, R.; Zahedi, Z.; Wouters, P.: ¬The thematic orientation of publications mentioned on social media : large-scale disciplinary comparison of social media metrics with citations (2015)
0.02
0.020850763 = product of:
0.041701525 = sum of:
0.041701525 = product of:
0.06255229 = sum of:
0.032101676 = weight(_text_:p in 2598) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032101676 = score(doc=2598,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16161878 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.19862589 = fieldWeight in 2598, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2598)
0.030450614 = weight(_text_:22 in 2598) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030450614 = score(doc=2598,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15740772 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044950135 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2598, 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=2598)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 20. 1.2015 18:30:22
