-
Nicolaisen, J.: Citation analysis (2007)
0.04
0.039725985 = product of:
0.059588976 = sum of:
0.010618603 = weight(_text_:a in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010618603 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = queryNorm
0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 6091, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6091)
0.048970375 = product of:
0.09794075 = sum of:
0.09794075 = weight(_text_:22 in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09794075 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15821345 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Date
- 13. 7.2008 19:53:22
- Type
- a
-
Døsen, K.: One more reference on self-reference (1992)
0.04
0.039725985 = product of:
0.059588976 = sum of:
0.010618603 = weight(_text_:a in 4604) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010618603 = score(doc=4604,freq=2.0), product of:
0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = queryNorm
0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 4604, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4604)
0.048970375 = product of:
0.09794075 = sum of:
0.09794075 = weight(_text_:22 in 4604) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09794075 = score(doc=4604,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15821345 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Date
- 7. 2.2005 14:10:22
- Type
- a
-
Van der Veer Martens, B.: Do citation systems represent theories of truth? (2001)
0.03
0.033280488 = product of:
0.04992073 = sum of:
0.0066366266 = weight(_text_:a in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0066366266 = score(doc=3925,freq=2.0), product of:
0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = queryNorm
0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 3925, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3925)
0.043284103 = product of:
0.08656821 = sum of:
0.08656821 = weight(_text_:22 in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08656821 = score(doc=3925,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15821345 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 15:22:28
- Type
- a
-
Castro, R. de; Grossmann, J.W.: Famous trails to Paul Erdös (1999)
0.03
0.030714607 = product of:
0.04607191 = sum of:
0.009195981 = weight(_text_:a in 3991) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009195981 = score(doc=3991,freq=6.0), product of:
0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = queryNorm
0.17652355 = fieldWeight in 3991, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3991)
0.03687593 = product of:
0.07375186 = sum of:
0.07375186 = weight(_text_:de in 3991) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07375186 = score(doc=3991,freq=2.0), product of:
0.19416152 = queryWeight, product of:
4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = queryNorm
0.37984797 = fieldWeight in 3991, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3991)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- The notion of Erdös number has floated around the mathematical research community for more than 40 years, as a way to quantify the common knowledge that mathematical and scientific research has become a very collaborative process in the 20th century, not an activity engaged in solely by isolated individualists. In this paper we explore some (fairly short) collaboration paths that one can follow from Paul Erdös to researchers inside and outside of mathematics
- Type
- a
-
Garfield, E.; Stock, W.G.: Citation Consciousness : Interview with Eugene Garfiels, chairman emeritus of ISI; Philadelphia (2002)
0.02
0.02482874 = product of:
0.03724311 = sum of:
0.0066366266 = weight(_text_:a in 613) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0066366266 = score(doc=613,freq=2.0), product of:
0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = queryNorm
0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 613, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=613)
0.030606484 = product of:
0.061212968 = sum of:
0.061212968 = weight(_text_:22 in 613) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.061212968 = score(doc=613,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15821345 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Source
- Password. 2002, H.6, S.22-25
- Type
- a
-
De Bellis, N.: Bibliometrics and citation analysis : from the Science citation index to cybermetrics (2008)
0.02
0.023060096 = product of:
0.034590144 = sum of:
0.0026546507 = weight(_text_:a in 3585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0026546507 = score(doc=3585,freq=2.0), product of:
0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = queryNorm
0.050957955 = fieldWeight in 3585, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3585)
0.031935494 = product of:
0.06387099 = sum of:
0.06387099 = weight(_text_:de in 3585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06387099 = score(doc=3585,freq=6.0), product of:
0.19416152 = queryWeight, product of:
4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = queryNorm
0.328958 = fieldWeight in 3585, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3585)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Footnote
- Rez. in: JASIS 61(2010) no.1, S.205-207 (Jeppe Nicolaisen) Weitere Rez. in: Mitt VÖB 63(2010) H.1/2, S.134-135 (J. Gorraiz u. M. Wieland): "Das Buch entwickelte sich aus einem mehrjährigen Forschungsprojekt mit dem Ziel, den schwer verständlichen quantitativen Kern der Bibliometrie in einem für primär italienische Bibliothekare leichteren historischen und philosophischen Kontext zu vermitteln, wie der Autor im Vorwort erklärt. Dank einer Empfehlung von Eugene Garfield steht dieses Werk nun auch in englischer Übersetzung einer internationalen Leserschaft zur Verfügung. Die über 400 Seiten lange Monografie von de Bellis gibt in acht Kapiteln einen detaillierten und sehr präzisen Überblick über die Bibliometrie und die Zitationsanalyse, ihre Natur und Entwicklung, ihre Kontroverse und Prognose. . . . Das Buch von de Bellis ist sehr empfehlenswert für alle die beabsichtigen, sich mit dieser neuen Wissenschaft zu beschäftigen. Es endet mit folgendem Statement: "Scientometricians have to learn to live in a multidimensional world". Und genau hier liegt die Herausforderung und Schönheit dieses Metiers."
-
Araújo, P.C. de; Gutierres Castanha, R.C.; Hjoerland, B.: Citation indexing and indexes (2021)
0.02
0.023035955 = product of:
0.03455393 = sum of:
0.006896985 = weight(_text_:a in 444) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.006896985 = score(doc=444,freq=6.0), product of:
0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = queryNorm
0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 444, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=444)
0.027656946 = product of:
0.055313893 = sum of:
0.055313893 = weight(_text_:de in 444) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055313893 = score(doc=444,freq=2.0), product of:
0.19416152 = queryWeight, product of:
4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = queryNorm
0.28488597 = fieldWeight in 444, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=444)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- A citation index is a bibliographic database that provides citation links between documents. The first modern citation index was suggested by the researcher Eugene Garfield in 1955 and created by him in 1964, and it represents an important innovation to knowledge organization and information retrieval. This article describes citation indexes in general, considering the modern citation indexes, including Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Crossref, Dimensions and some special citation indexes and predecessors to the modern citation index like Shepard's Citations. We present comparative studies of the major ones and survey theoretical problems related to the role of citation indexes as subject access points (SAP), recognizing the implications to knowledge organization and information retrieval. Finally, studies on citation behavior are presented and the influence of citation indexes on knowledge organization, information retrieval and the scientific information ecosystem is recognized.
- Type
- a
-
Garfield, E.: Recollections of Irving H. Sher 1924-1996 : Polymath/information scientist extraordinaire (2001)
0.02
0.022477165 = product of:
0.033715747 = sum of:
0.012291206 = weight(_text_:a in 6920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012291206 = score(doc=6920,freq=14.0), product of:
0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = queryNorm
0.23593865 = fieldWeight in 6920, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6920)
0.02142454 = product of:
0.04284908 = sum of:
0.04284908 = weight(_text_:22 in 6920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04284908 = score(doc=6920,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15821345 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Over a 35-year period, Irving H. Sher played a critical role in the development and implementation of the Science Citation Index and other ISI products. Trained as a biochemist, statistician, and linguist, Sher brought a unique combination of talents to ISI as Director of Quality Control and Director of Research and Development. His talents as a teacher and mentor evoked loyalty. He was a particularly inventive but self-taught programmer. In addition to the SCI, Social Sciences Citation Index, and Arts and Humanities Citation Index,
- Date
- 16.12.2001 14:01:22
- Type
- a
-
Tay, A.: ¬The next generation discovery citation indexes : a review of the landscape in 2020 (2020)
0.02
0.022477165 = product of:
0.033715747 = sum of:
0.012291206 = weight(_text_:a in 40) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012291206 = score(doc=40,freq=14.0), product of:
0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = queryNorm
0.23593865 = fieldWeight in 40, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=40)
0.02142454 = product of:
0.04284908 = sum of:
0.04284908 = weight(_text_:22 in 40) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04284908 = score(doc=40,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15821345 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Conclusion There is a reason why Google Scholar and Web of Science/Scopus are kings of the hills in their various arenas. They have strong brand recogniton, a head start in development and a mass of eyeballs and users that leads to an almost virtious cycle of improvement. Competing against such well established competitors is not easy even when one has deep pockets (Microsoft) or a killer idea (scite). It will be interesting to see how the landscape will look like in 2030. Stay tuned for part II where I review each particular index.
- Date
- 17.11.2020 12:22:59
- Type
- a
-
Bensman, S.J.: Eugene Garfield, Francis Narin, and PageRank : the theoretical bases of the Google search engine (2013)
0.02
0.021329116 = product of:
0.031993672 = sum of:
0.0075084865 = weight(_text_:a in 1149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0075084865 = score(doc=1149,freq=4.0), product of:
0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = queryNorm
0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 1149, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1149)
0.024485188 = product of:
0.048970375 = sum of:
0.048970375 = weight(_text_:22 in 1149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048970375 = score(doc=1149,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15821345 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- This paper presents a test of the validity of using Google Scholar to evaluate the publications of researchers by comparing the premises on which its search engine, PageRank, is based, to those of Garfield's theory of citation indexing. It finds that the premises are identical and that PageRank and Garfield's theory of citation indexing validate each other.
- Date
- 17.12.2013 11:02:22
- Type
- a
-
Van der Veer Martens, B.; Goodrum, G.: ¬The diffusion of theories : a functional approach (2006)
0.02
0.021208337 = product of:
0.031812504 = sum of:
0.010387965 = weight(_text_:a in 5269) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010387965 = score(doc=5269,freq=10.0), product of:
0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = queryNorm
0.19940455 = fieldWeight in 5269, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5269)
0.02142454 = product of:
0.04284908 = sum of:
0.04284908 = weight(_text_:22 in 5269) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04284908 = score(doc=5269,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15821345 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- This comparative case study of the diffusion and nondiffusion over time of eight theories in the social sciences uses citation analysis, citation context analysis, content analysis, surveys of editorial review boards, and personal interviews with theorists to develop a model of the theory functions that facilitate theory diffusion throughout specific intellectual communities. Unlike previous work on the diffusion of theories as innovations, this theory functions model differs in several important respects from the findings of previous studies that employed Everett Rogers's classic typology of innovation characteristics that promote diffusion. The model is also presented as a contribution to a more integrated theory of citation.
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 15:20:01
- Type
- a
-
Mingers, J.; Burrell, Q.L.: Modeling citation behavior in Management Science journals (2006)
0.02
0.020206546 = product of:
0.030309819 = sum of:
0.011945928 = weight(_text_:a in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011945928 = score(doc=994,freq=18.0), product of:
0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = queryNorm
0.22931081 = fieldWeight in 994, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=994)
0.01836389 = product of:
0.03672778 = sum of:
0.03672778 = weight(_text_:22 in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03672778 = score(doc=994,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15821345 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Citation rates are becoming increasingly important in judging the research quality of journals, institutions and departments, and individual faculty. This paper looks at the pattern of citations across different management science journals and over time. A stochastic model is proposed which views the generating mechanism of citations as a gamma mixture of Poisson processes generating overall a negative binomial distribution. This is tested empirically with a large sample of papers published in 1990 from six management science journals and found to fit well. The model is extended to include obsolescence, i.e., that the citation rate for a paper varies over its cited lifetime. This leads to the additional citations distribution which shows that future citations are a linear function of past citations with a time-dependent and decreasing slope. This is also verified empirically in a way that allows different obsolescence functions to be fitted to the data. Conclusions concerning the predictability of future citations, and future research in this area are discussed.
- Date
- 26.12.2007 19:22:05
- Type
- a
-
Larivière, V.; Gingras, Y.; Archambault, E.: ¬The decline in the concentration of citations, 1900-2007 (2009)
0.02
0.019968294 = product of:
0.02995244 = sum of:
0.0039819763 = weight(_text_:a in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0039819763 = score(doc=2763,freq=2.0), product of:
0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = queryNorm
0.07643694 = fieldWeight in 2763, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2763)
0.025970465 = product of:
0.05194093 = sum of:
0.05194093 = weight(_text_:22 in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05194093 = score(doc=2763,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15821345 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Date
- 22. 3.2009 19:22:35
- Type
- a
-
Ma, N.; Guan, J.; Zhao, Y.: Bringing PageRank to the citation analysis (2008)
0.02
0.018178573 = product of:
0.027267858 = sum of:
0.00890397 = weight(_text_:a in 2064) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.00890397 = score(doc=2064,freq=10.0), product of:
0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = queryNorm
0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 2064, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2064)
0.01836389 = product of:
0.03672778 = sum of:
0.03672778 = weight(_text_:22 in 2064) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03672778 = score(doc=2064,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15821345 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2064, 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=2064)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- The paper attempts to provide an alternative method for measuring the importance of scientific papers based on the Google's PageRank. The method is a meaningful extension of the common integer counting of citations and is then experimented for bringing PageRank to the citation analysis in a large citation network. It offers a more integrated picture of the publications' influence in a specific field. We firstly calculate the PageRanks of scientific papers. The distributional characteristics and comparison with the traditionally used number of citations are then analyzed in detail. Furthermore, the PageRank is implemented in the evaluation of research influence for several countries in the field of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology during the time period of 2000-2005. Finally, some advantages of bringing PageRank to the citation analysis are concluded.
- Date
- 31. 7.2008 14:22:05
- Type
- a
-
Campanario, J.M.: Have referees rejected some of the most-cited articles of all times? (1996)
0.02
0.016840585 = product of:
0.025260875 = sum of:
0.006896985 = weight(_text_:a in 4215) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.006896985 = score(doc=4215,freq=6.0), product of:
0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = queryNorm
0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 4215, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4215)
0.01836389 = product of:
0.03672778 = sum of:
0.03672778 = weight(_text_:22 in 4215) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03672778 = score(doc=4215,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15821345 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- 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
- Type
- a
-
Snyder, H.; Bonzi, S.: Patterns of self-citation across disciplines : 1980-1989 (1998)
0.02
0.016840585 = product of:
0.025260875 = sum of:
0.006896985 = weight(_text_:a in 3692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.006896985 = score(doc=3692,freq=6.0), product of:
0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = queryNorm
0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 3692, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3692)
0.01836389 = product of:
0.03672778 = sum of:
0.03672778 = weight(_text_:22 in 3692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03672778 = score(doc=3692,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15821345 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Reports results of a study to examine the patterns of self citation in 6 disciplines distributed among the physical and social sciences and humanities. Sample articles were examined to deermine the relative numbers and ages of self citations and citations to other in the bibliographies and to the exposure given to each type of citation in the text of the articles. significant differences were found in the number and age of citations between disciplines. Overall, 9% of all citations were self citations; 15% of physical sciences citations were self citations, as opposed to 6% in the social sciences and 3% in the humanities. Within disciplines, there was no significantly different amount of coverage between self citations and citations to others. Overall, it appears that a lack of substantive differences in self citation behaviour is consistent across disciplines
- Date
- 22. 5.1999 19:33:24
- Type
- a
-
Chan, H.C.; Kim, H.-W.; Tan, W.C.: Information systems citation patterns from International Conference on Information Systems articles (2006)
0.02
0.016840585 = product of:
0.025260875 = sum of:
0.006896985 = weight(_text_:a in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.006896985 = score(doc=201,freq=6.0), product of:
0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = queryNorm
0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 201, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=201)
0.01836389 = product of:
0.03672778 = sum of:
0.03672778 = weight(_text_:22 in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03672778 = score(doc=201,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15821345 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Research patterns could enhance understanding of the Information Systems (IS) field. Citation analysis is the methodology commonly used to determine such research patterns. In this study, the citation methodology is applied to one of the top-ranked Information Systems conferences - International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS). Information is extracted from papers in the proceedings of ICIS 2000 to 2002. A total of 145 base articles and 4,226 citations are used. Research patterns are obtained using total citations, citations per journal or conference, and overlapping citations. We then provide the citation ranking of journals and conferences. We also examine the difference between the citation ranking in this study and the ranking of IS journals and IS conferences in other studies. Based on the comparison, we confirm that IS research is a multidisciplinary research area. We also identify the most cited papers and authors in the IS research area, and the organizations most active in producing papers in the top-rated IS conference. We discuss the findings and implications of the study.
- Date
- 3. 1.2007 17:22:03
- Type
- a
-
Ding, Y.; Zhang, G.; Chambers, T.; Song, M.; Wang, X.; Zhai, C.: Content-based citation analysis : the next generation of citation analysis (2014)
0.02
0.016840585 = product of:
0.025260875 = sum of:
0.006896985 = weight(_text_:a in 1521) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.006896985 = score(doc=1521,freq=6.0), product of:
0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = queryNorm
0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 1521, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1521)
0.01836389 = product of:
0.03672778 = sum of:
0.03672778 = weight(_text_:22 in 1521) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03672778 = score(doc=1521,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15821345 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1521, 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=1521)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Traditional citation analysis has been widely applied to detect patterns of scientific collaboration, map the landscapes of scholarly disciplines, assess the impact of research outputs, and observe knowledge transfer across domains. It is, however, limited, as it assumes all citations are of similar value and weights each equally. Content-based citation analysis (CCA) addresses a citation's value by interpreting each one based on its context at both the syntactic and semantic levels. This paper provides a comprehensive overview of CAA research in terms of its theoretical foundations, methodical approaches, and example applications. In addition, we highlight how increased computational capabilities and publicly available full-text resources have opened this area of research to vast possibilities, which enable deeper citation analysis, more accurate citation prediction, and increased knowledge discovery.
- Date
- 22. 8.2014 16:52:04
- Type
- a
-
wst: Cut-and-paste-Wissenschaft (2003)
0.02
0.015996836 = product of:
0.023995254 = sum of:
0.0056313644 = weight(_text_:a in 1270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0056313644 = score(doc=1270,freq=4.0), product of:
0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = queryNorm
0.10809815 = fieldWeight in 1270, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1270)
0.01836389 = product of:
0.03672778 = sum of:
0.03672778 = weight(_text_:22 in 1270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03672778 = score(doc=1270,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15821345 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- 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."
- Footnote
- Vgl. auch den Beitrag von H.F. Goenner zu A. Einstein und S.B. Preuss
- Type
- a
-
Umstätter, W.: Szientometrische Verfahren (2004)
0.02
0.015831511 = product of:
0.023747265 = sum of:
0.0053093014 = weight(_text_:a in 2920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0053093014 = score(doc=2920,freq=8.0), product of:
0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = queryNorm
0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 2920, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2920)
0.018437965 = product of:
0.03687593 = sum of:
0.03687593 = weight(_text_:de in 2920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03687593 = score(doc=2920,freq=2.0), product of:
0.19416152 = queryWeight, product of:
4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
0.045180224 = queryNorm
0.18992399 = fieldWeight in 2920, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.297489 = idf(docFreq=1634, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2920)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Die Szientometrie beschäftigt sich mit der Messbarkeit wissenschaftlicher Leistungen anhand bibliothekarisch nachweisbarer Publikationsergebnisse. Bei genauer Betrachtung ist es ihr Ziel, die Wissenszunahme der Wissenschaft zu messen. Die wissenschaftliche Produktion in Form von Publikationen wächst seit über dreihundert Jahren konstant mit ca. 3,5% pro Jahr. Das entspricht einerVerdopplungsrate von 20 Jahren, die zuerst dem Bibliothekar Fremont Rider 1948 bei Büchern auffiel und die 1963 von Derek J. de Solla Price auch für das Wachstum von Zeitschriften und Bibliografien bestätigt wurde. Die Konstanz dieser Evolution, unabhängig aller sich ereignenden Katastrophen, ist nur zum Teil verstanden, macht aber den unaufhaltsamen Fortschritt der Wissenschaft deutlich. Alle 20 Jahre wird so viel publiziert wie in allen Jahrhunderten davor. Eine etwa gleiche Zunahme verzeichnen die Wissenschaftler, die damit etwa gleich produktiv bleiben. Von ihnen allen sind damit ca. 87% unsere heutigen Zeitgenossen. Aus diesem Wachstum heraus können wir abschätzen, dass in 100.000 laufenden Zeitschriften heute etwa 10 Mio. Publikationen jährlich erscheinen, die von 10 Mio. Wissenschaftlern verfasst werden. Dabei definieren sich nur die als Wissenschaftler, die durchschnittlich eine Publikation jährlich verfassen. Die gesamte Produktion an Buchtiteln, die bisher erschien, dürfte bei etwa 100 Mio. liegen. Davon sind etwa 20 Mio. als wissenschaftlich einzustufen. Wenn folglich 87% aller Wissenschaftler noch heute leben, so betrug die Gesamtzahl der Wissenschaftler in der Welt bisher 11,5 Mio., die in ihrem Leben durchschnittlich 1,5 Bücher pro Kopf verfassten, und etwa das 10-20fache an Zeitschriftenbeiträgen leisteten. Ein Teil dieser Bücher sind allerdings Neuauflagen und Übersetzungen. Nach Lotka, A. J. ist die Produktivität der Wissenschaftler eine schiefe Verteilung von der Form A/n**2, wobei A die Zahl der Autoren mit nur einer Publikation ist und n die Publikationen pro Autor. Während Price in seinen "Networks of Scientific Papers" Vergleichswerte von n**2,5 bis n**3 angab, zeigten Untersuchungen am Science Citation Index (SCI), die auf die gesamte naturwissenschaftliche Literatur hochgerechnet wurden, eher einen Wert von n**1,7. Auf die Tatsache, dass eine Verdopplungsrate der Wissenschaftler von 20 Jahren und eine solche der Menschheit von etwa 50 Jahren dazu führt, dass eines Tages alle Menschen Wissenschaftler werden, hat Price bereits 1963 hingewiesen. Dieser Zustand müsste bei 10 Mio. Wissenschaftlern und 6 Mrd. Menschen in etwa 300 Jahren eintreten, ein nur scheinbar absurder Gedanke, wenn man bedenkt, dass man sich vor 300 Jahren auch kaum vorstellen konnte, dass alle Menschen Lesen, Schreiben und Rechnen lernen können, und dass wir uns ungebildete Menschen immer weniger leisten können.
- Type
- a
