Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Wan, X."
  • × theme_ss:"Informetrie"
  1. Wan, X.; Liu, F.: Are all literature citations equally important? : automatic citation strength estimation and its applications (2014) 0.03 
    0.027999477 = product of:
  0.055998955 = sum of:
    0.055998955 = sum of:
      0.018749513 = weight(_text_:h in 1350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.018749513 = score(doc=1350,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.113842286 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045821942 = queryNorm
          0.16469726 = fieldWeight in 1350, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1350)
      0.037249442 = weight(_text_:22 in 1350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.037249442 = score(doc=1350,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16046064 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045821942 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1350, 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=1350)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Literature citation analysis plays a very important role in bibliometrics and scientometrics, such as the Science Citation Index (SCI) impact factor, h-index. Existing citation analysis methods assume that all citations in a paper are equally important, and they simply count the number of citations. Here we argue that the citations in a paper are not equally important and some citations are more important than the others. We use a strength value to assess the importance of each citation and propose to use the regression method with a few useful features for automatically estimating the strength value of each citation. Evaluation results on a manually labeled data set in the computer science field show that the estimated values can achieve good correlation with human-labeled values. We further apply the estimated citation strength values for evaluating paper influence and author influence, and the preliminary evaluation results demonstrate the usefulness of the citation strength values.
    Date
    22. 8.2014 17:12:35
  2. Wan, X.; Liu, F.: WL-index : leveraging citation mention number to quantify an individual's scientific impact (2014) 0.01 
    0.0055241287 = product of:
  0.011048257 = sum of:
    0.011048257 = product of:
      0.022096515 = sum of:
        0.022096515 = weight(_text_:h in 1549) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022096515 = score(doc=1549,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.113842286 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045821942 = queryNorm
            0.1940976 = fieldWeight in 1549, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1549)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    A number of bibliometric indices have been developed to evaluate an individual's scientific impact, and the most popular are the h-index and its variants. However, existing bibliometric indices are computed based on the number of citations received by each article, but they do not consider the frequency with which individual citations are mentioned in an article. We use "citation mention" to denote a unique occurrence of a cited reference mentioned in the citing article, and thus some citations may have more than one mention in an article. According to our analysis of the ACL Anthology Network corpus in the natural language processing field, more than 40% of cited references have been mentioned twice or in corresponding citing articles. We argue that citation mention is a preferable for representing the citation relationships between articles, that is, a reference article mentioned m times in the citing article will be considered to have received m citations, rather than one citation. Based on this assumption, we revise the h-index and propose a new bibliometric index, the WL-index, to evaluation an individual's scientific impact. According to our empirical analysis, the proposed WL-index more accurately discriminates between program committee chairs of reputable conferences and ordinary authors.