-
Bookstein, A.: Informetric distributions : I. Unified overview (1990)
0.09
0.0930887 = product of:
0.1861774 = sum of:
0.1861774 = sum of:
0.099987686 = weight(_text_:i in 6902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.099987686 = score(doc=6902,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.58340967 = fieldWeight in 6902, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6902)
0.08618971 = weight(_text_:22 in 6902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08618971 = score(doc=6902,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6902, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6902)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 18:55:29
-
He, Z.-L.: International collaboration does not have greater epistemic authority (2009)
0.05
0.04877007 = product of:
0.09754014 = sum of:
0.09754014 = sum of:
0.060601693 = weight(_text_:i in 3122) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.060601693 = score(doc=3122,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.35359967 = fieldWeight in 3122, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3122)
0.036938448 = weight(_text_:22 in 3122) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036938448 = score(doc=3122,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3122, 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=3122)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The consistent finding that internationally coauthored papers are more heavily cited has led to a tacit agreement among politicians and scientists that international collaboration in scientific research should be particularly promoted. However, existing studies of research collaboration suffer from a major weakness in that the Thomson Reuters Web of Science until recently did not link author names with affiliation addresses. The general approach has been to hierarchically code papers into international paper, national paper, or local paper based on the address information. This hierarchical coding scheme severely understates the level and contribution of local or national collaboration on an internationally coauthored paper. In this research, I code collaboration variables by hand checking each paper in the sample, use two measures of a paper's impact, and try several regression models. I find that both international collaboration and local collaboration are positively and significantly associated with a paper's impact, but international collaboration does not have more epistemic authority than local collaboration. This result suggests that previous findings based on hierarchical coding might be misleading.
- Date
- 26. 9.2009 11:22:05
-
Campanario, J.M.: Large increases and decreases in journal impact factors in only one year : the effect of journal self-citations (2011)
0.05
0.04654435 = product of:
0.0930887 = sum of:
0.0930887 = sum of:
0.049993843 = weight(_text_:i in 4187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049993843 = score(doc=4187,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.29170483 = fieldWeight in 4187, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4187)
0.043094855 = weight(_text_:22 in 4187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043094855 = score(doc=4187,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4187, 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=4187)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- I studied the factors (citations, self-citations, and number of articles) that influenced large changes in only 1 year in the impact factors (IFs) of journals. A set of 360 instances of journals with large increases or decreases in their IFs from a given year to the following was selected from journals in the Journal Citation Reports from 1998 to 2007 (40 journals each year). The main factor influencing large changes was the change in the number of citations. About 54% of the increases and 42% of the decreases in the journal IFs were associated with changes in the journal self-citations.
- Date
- 22. 1.2011 12:53:00
-
Kreider, J.: ¬The correlation of local citation data with citation data from Journal Citation Reports (1999)
0.04
0.039895155 = product of:
0.07979031 = sum of:
0.07979031 = sum of:
0.042851865 = weight(_text_:i in 102) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042851865 = score(doc=102,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.25003272 = fieldWeight in 102, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=102)
0.036938448 = weight(_text_:22 in 102) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036938448 = score(doc=102,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 102, 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=102)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- University librarians continue to face the difficult task of determining which journals remain crucial for their collections during these times of static financial resources and escalating journal costs. One evaluative tool, Journal Citation Reports (JCR), recently has become available on CD-ROM, making it simpler for librarians to use its citation data as input for ranking journals. But many librarians remain unconvinced that the global citation data from the JCR bears enough correspondence to their local situation to be useful. In this project, I explore the correlation between global citation data available from JCR with local citation data generated specifically for the University of British Columbia, for 20 subject fields in the sciences and social sciences. The significant correlations obtained in this study suggest that large research-oriented university libraries could consider substituting global citation data for local citation data when evaluating their journals, with certain cautions.
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
Ajiferuke, I.; Lu, K.; Wolfram, D.: ¬A comparison of citer and citation-based measure outcomes for multiple disciplines (2010)
0.04
0.039895155 = product of:
0.07979031 = sum of:
0.07979031 = sum of:
0.042851865 = weight(_text_:i in 4000) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042851865 = score(doc=4000,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.25003272 = fieldWeight in 4000, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4000)
0.036938448 = weight(_text_:22 in 4000) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036938448 = score(doc=4000,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 28. 9.2010 12:54:22
-
Cerda-Cosme, R.; Méndez, E.: Analysis of shared research data in Spanish scientific papers about COVID-19 : a first approach (2023)
0.03
0.033245962 = product of:
0.066491924 = sum of:
0.066491924 = sum of:
0.035709884 = weight(_text_:i in 916) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035709884 = score(doc=916,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.20836058 = fieldWeight in 916, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=916)
0.03078204 = weight(_text_:22 in 916) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03078204 = score(doc=916,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 916, 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=916)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- During the coronavirus pandemic, changes in the way science is done and shared occurred, which motivates meta-research to help understand science communication in crises and improve its effectiveness. The objective is to study how many Spanish scientific papers on COVID-19 published during 2020 share their research data. Qualitative and descriptive study applying nine attributes: (a) availability, (b) accessibility, (c) format, (d) licensing, (e) linkage, (f) funding, (g) editorial policy, (h) content, and (i) statistics. We analyzed 1,340 papers, 1,173 (87.5%) did not have research data. A total of 12.5% share their research data of which 2.1% share their data in repositories, 5% share their data through a simple request, 0.2% do not have permission to share their data, and 5.2% share their data as supplementary material. There is a small percentage that shares their research data; however, it demonstrates the researchers' poor knowledge on how to properly share their research data and their lack of knowledge on what is research data.
- Date
- 21. 3.2023 19:22:02
-
Folly, G.; Hajtman, B.; Nagy, J.I.; Ruff, I.: Some methodological problems in ranking scientists by citation analysis (1981)
0.03
0.02856791 = product of:
0.05713582 = sum of:
0.05713582 = product of:
0.11427164 = sum of:
0.11427164 = weight(_text_:i in 3275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11427164 = score(doc=3275,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.6667539 = fieldWeight in 3275, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3275)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Wormell, I.: Infometrics exploring databases as analytical tools (1998)
0.03
0.02856791 = product of:
0.05713582 = sum of:
0.05713582 = product of:
0.11427164 = sum of:
0.11427164 = weight(_text_:i in 6453) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11427164 = score(doc=6453,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.6667539 = fieldWeight in 6453, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6453)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Ahlgren, P.; Jarneving, B.; Rousseau, R.: Requirements for a cocitation similarity measure, with special reference to Pearson's correlation coefficient (2003)
0.03
0.02659677 = product of:
0.05319354 = sum of:
0.05319354 = sum of:
0.02856791 = weight(_text_:i in 5171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02856791 = score(doc=5171,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.16668847 = fieldWeight in 5171, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5171)
0.024625631 = weight(_text_:22 in 5171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024625631 = score(doc=5171,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 5171, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5171)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Ahlgren, Jarneving, and. Rousseau review accepted procedures for author co-citation analysis first pointing out that since in the raw data matrix the row and column values are identical i,e, the co-citation count of two authors, there is no clear choice for diagonal values. They suggest the number of times an author has been co-cited with himself excluding self citation rather than the common treatment as zeros or as missing values. When the matrix is converted to a similarity matrix the normal procedure is to create a matrix of Pearson's r coefficients between data vectors. Ranking by r and by co-citation frequency and by intuition can easily yield three different orders. It would seem necessary that the adding of zeros to the matrix will not affect the value or the relative order of similarity measures but it is shown that this is not the case with Pearson's r. Using 913 bibliographic descriptions form the Web of Science of articles form JASIS and Scientometrics, authors names were extracted, edited and 12 information retrieval authors and 12 bibliometric authors each from the top 100 most cited were selected. Co-citation and r value (diagonal elements treated as missing) matrices were constructed, and then reconstructed in expanded form. Adding zeros can both change the r value and the ordering of the authors based upon that value. A chi-squared distance measure would not violate these requirements, nor would the cosine coefficient. It is also argued that co-citation data is ordinal data since there is no assurance of an absolute zero number of co-citations, and thus Pearson is not appropriate. The number of ties in co-citation data make the use of the Spearman rank order coefficient problematic.
- Date
- 9. 7.2006 10:22:35
-
Mulkay, M.J.: Sociology of the scientific research community (1977)
0.02
0.024996921 = product of:
0.049993843 = sum of:
0.049993843 = product of:
0.099987686 = sum of:
0.099987686 = weight(_text_:i in 284) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.099987686 = score(doc=284,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.58340967 = fieldWeight in 284, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=284)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Science, technology and society: a cross-disciplinary perspective. Ed: I. Spiegel-Rosing u. D. de Solla Price
-
Epifanio, I.: Mapping the asymmetrical citation relationships between journals by h-plots (2014)
0.02
0.024996921 = product of:
0.049993843 = sum of:
0.049993843 = product of:
0.099987686 = sum of:
0.099987686 = weight(_text_:i in 1294) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.099987686 = score(doc=1294,freq=8.0), product of:
0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.58340967 = fieldWeight in 1294, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1294)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- I propose the use of h-plots for visualizing the asymmetric relationships between the citing and cited profiles of journals in a common map. With this exploratory tool, we can understand better the journal's dual roles of citing and being cited in a reference network. The h-plot is introduced and its use is validated with a set of 25 journals belonging to the statistics area. The relatedness factor is considered for describing the relations of citations from a journal "i" to a journal "j," and the citations from the journal "j" to the journal "i." More information has been extracted from the h-plot, compared with other statistical techniques for modelling and representing asymmetric data, such as multidimensional unfolding.
-
Tanaka, M.: Domain analysis of computational science : fifty years of a scientific computing group
0.02
0.024740538 = product of:
0.049481075 = sum of:
0.049481075 = product of:
0.09896215 = sum of:
0.09896215 = weight(_text_:i in 3538) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09896215 = score(doc=3538,freq=6.0), product of:
0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.57742584 = fieldWeight in 3538, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3538)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- I employed bibliometric and historical methods to study the domain of the Scientific Computing group at Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) for an extended period of fifty years, from 1958 to 2007. I noted and confirmed the growing emergence of interdisciplinarity within the group. I also identified a strong, consistent mathematics and physics orientation within it.
-
Nicholls, P.T.: Empirical validation of Lotka's law (1986)
0.02
0.024625631 = product of:
0.049251262 = sum of:
0.049251262 = product of:
0.098502524 = sum of:
0.098502524 = weight(_text_:22 in 5509) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.098502524 = score(doc=5509,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 5509, 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=5509)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Information processing and management. 22(1986), S.417-419
-
Nicolaisen, J.: Citation analysis (2007)
0.02
0.024625631 = product of:
0.049251262 = sum of:
0.049251262 = product of:
0.098502524 = sum of:
0.098502524 = weight(_text_:22 in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.098502524 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 13. 7.2008 19:53:22
-
Fiala, J.: Information flood : fiction and reality (1987)
0.02
0.024625631 = product of:
0.049251262 = sum of:
0.049251262 = product of:
0.098502524 = sum of:
0.098502524 = weight(_text_:22 in 1080) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.098502524 = score(doc=1080,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 1080, 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=1080)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Thermochimica acta. 110(1987), S.11-22
-
Su, Y.; Han, L.-F.: ¬A new literature growth model : variable exponential growth law of literature (1998)
0.02
0.02176619 = product of:
0.04353238 = sum of:
0.04353238 = product of:
0.08706476 = sum of:
0.08706476 = weight(_text_:22 in 3690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08706476 = score(doc=3690,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 3690, 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=3690)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 5.1999 19:22:35
-
Van der Veer Martens, B.: Do citation systems represent theories of truth? (2001)
0.02
0.02176619 = product of:
0.04353238 = sum of:
0.04353238 = product of:
0.08706476 = sum of:
0.08706476 = weight(_text_:22 in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08706476 = score(doc=3925,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 15:22:28
-
Diodato, V.: Dictionary of bibliometrics (1994)
0.02
0.021547427 = product of:
0.043094855 = sum of:
0.043094855 = product of:
0.08618971 = sum of:
0.08618971 = weight(_text_:22 in 5666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08618971 = score(doc=5666,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 5666, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5666)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Footnote
- Rez. in: Journal of library and information science 22(1996) no.2, S.116-117 (L.C. Smith)
-
Bookstein, A.: Informetric distributions : II. Resilience to ambiguity (1990)
0.02
0.021547427 = product of:
0.043094855 = sum of:
0.043094855 = product of:
0.08618971 = sum of:
0.08618971 = weight(_text_:22 in 4689) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08618971 = score(doc=4689,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15912095 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4689, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4689)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 18:55:55
-
Schwendtke, A.: Wissenschaftssystematik und Scientometrologie (1979)
0.02
0.021425933 = product of:
0.042851865 = sum of:
0.042851865 = product of:
0.08570373 = sum of:
0.08570373 = weight(_text_:i in 76) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08570373 = score(doc=76,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.045439374 = queryNorm
0.50006545 = fieldWeight in 76, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=76)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Klassifikation und Erkenntnis I. Proc. der Plenarvorträge und der Sektion 1 "Klassifikation und Wissensgewinnung" der 3. Fachtagung der Gesellschaft für Klassifikation, Königstein/Ts., 5.-6.4.1979
