-
Van der Veer Martens, B.: Do citation systems represent theories of truth? (2001)
0.05
0.04921369 = product of:
0.09842738 = sum of:
0.09842738 = product of:
0.14764106 = sum of:
0.061993234 = weight(_text_:b in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.061993234 = score(doc=3925,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15836994 = queryWeight, product of:
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.3914457 = fieldWeight in 3925, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3925)
0.08564782 = weight(_text_:22 in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08564782 = score(doc=3925,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15653133 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 15:22:28
-
H-Index auch im Web of Science (2008)
0.04
0.042617977 = product of:
0.08523595 = sum of:
0.08523595 = product of:
0.12785393 = sum of:
0.09151664 = weight(_text_:x in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09151664 = score(doc=590,freq=6.0), product of:
0.18875335 = queryWeight, product of:
4.2226825 = idf(docFreq=1761, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.48484772 = fieldWeight in 590, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
4.2226825 = idf(docFreq=1761, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=590)
0.036337294 = weight(_text_:22 in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036337294 = score(doc=590,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15653133 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 590, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=590)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Content
- "Zur Kurzmitteilung "Latest enhancements in Scopus: ... h-Index incorporated in Scopus" in den letzten Online-Mitteilungen (Online-Mitteilungen 92, S.31) ist zu korrigieren, dass der h-Index sehr wohl bereits im Web of Science enthalten ist. Allerdings findet man/frau diese Information nicht in der "cited ref search", sondern neben der Trefferliste einer Quick Search, General Search oder einer Suche über den Author Finder in der rechten Navigationsleiste unter dem Titel "Citation Report". Der "Citation Report" bietet für die in der jeweiligen Trefferliste angezeigten Arbeiten: - Die Gesamtzahl der Zitierungen aller Arbeiten in der Trefferliste - Die mittlere Zitationshäufigkeit dieser Arbeiten - Die Anzahl der Zitierungen der einzelnen Arbeiten, aufgeschlüsselt nach Publikationsjahr der zitierenden Arbeiten - Die mittlere Zitationshäufigkeit dieser Arbeiten pro Jahr - Den h-Index (ein h-Index von x sagt aus, dass x Arbeiten der Trefferliste mehr als x-mal zitiert wurden; er ist gegenüber sehr hohen Zitierungen einzelner Arbeiten unempfindlicher als die mittlere Zitationshäufigkeit)."
- Date
- 6. 4.2008 19:04:22
-
Li, J.; Shi, D.: Sleeping beauties in genius work : when were they awakened? (2016)
0.03
0.03358752 = product of:
0.06717504 = sum of:
0.06717504 = product of:
0.10076255 = sum of:
0.06442526 = weight(_text_:b in 2647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06442526 = score(doc=2647,freq=6.0), product of:
0.15836994 = queryWeight, product of:
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.40680233 = fieldWeight in 2647, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2647)
0.036337294 = weight(_text_:22 in 2647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036337294 = score(doc=2647,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15653133 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2647, 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=2647)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- "Genius work," proposed by Avramescu, refers to scientific articles whose citations grow exponentially in an extended period, for example, over 50 years. Such articles were defined as "sleeping beauties" by van Raan, who quantitatively studied the phenomenon of delayed recognition. However, the criteria adopted by van Raan at times are not applicable and may confer recognition prematurely. To revise such deficiencies, this paper proposes two new criteria, which are applicable (but not limited) to exponential citation curves. We searched for genius work among articles of Nobel Prize laureates during the period of 1901-2012 on the Web of Science, finding 25 articles of genius work out of 21,438 papers including 10 (by van Raan's criteria) sleeping beauties and 15 nonsleeping-beauties. By our new criteria, two findings were obtained through empirical analysis: (a) the awakening periods for genius work depend on the increase rate b in the exponential function, and (b) lower b leads to a longer sleeping period.
- Date
- 22. 1.2016 14:13:32
-
Rostaing, H.; Barts, N.; Léveillé, V.: Bibliometrics: representation instrument of the multidisciplinary positioning of a scientific area : Implementation for an Advisory Scientific Committee (2007)
0.03
0.032681435 = product of:
0.06536287 = sum of:
0.06536287 = product of:
0.098044306 = sum of:
0.049594585 = weight(_text_:b in 1144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049594585 = score(doc=1144,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15836994 = queryWeight, product of:
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.31315655 = fieldWeight in 1144, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1144)
0.048449725 = weight(_text_:22 in 1144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048449725 = score(doc=1144,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15653133 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1144, 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=1144)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 30.12.2007 11:22:39
- Source
- ¬La interdisciplinariedad y la transdisciplinariedad en la organización del conocimiento científico : actas del VIII Congreso ISKO-España, León, 18, 19 y 20 de Abril de 2007 : Interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity in the organization of scientific knowledge. Ed.: B. Rodriguez Bravo u. M.L Alvite Diez
-
Scholarly metrics under the microscope : from citation analysis to academic auditing (2015)
0.03
0.032681435 = product of:
0.06536287 = sum of:
0.06536287 = product of:
0.098044306 = sum of:
0.049594585 = weight(_text_:b in 4654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049594585 = score(doc=4654,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15836994 = queryWeight, product of:
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.31315655 = fieldWeight in 4654, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4654)
0.048449725 = weight(_text_:22 in 4654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048449725 = score(doc=4654,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15653133 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4654, 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=4654)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 1.2017 17:12:50
- Editor
- Cronin, B. u. C.R. Sugimoto
-
Wan, X.; Liu, F.: Are all literature citations equally important? : automatic citation strength estimation and its applications (2014)
0.03
0.029724812 = product of:
0.059449624 = sum of:
0.059449624 = product of:
0.089174435 = sum of:
0.052837145 = weight(_text_:x in 1350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.052837145 = score(doc=1350,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18875335 = queryWeight, product of:
4.2226825 = idf(docFreq=1761, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.27992693 = fieldWeight in 1350, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.2226825 = idf(docFreq=1761, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1350)
0.036337294 = weight(_text_:22 in 1350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036337294 = score(doc=1350,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15653133 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 8.2014 17:12:35
-
Xu, C.; Ma, B.; Chen, X.; Ma, F.: Social tagging in the scholarly world (2013)
0.03
0.02928893 = product of:
0.05857786 = sum of:
0.05857786 = product of:
0.08786679 = sum of:
0.044030957 = weight(_text_:x in 1091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.044030957 = score(doc=1091,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18875335 = queryWeight, product of:
4.2226825 = idf(docFreq=1761, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.23327245 = fieldWeight in 1091, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.2226825 = idf(docFreq=1761, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1091)
0.043835834 = weight(_text_:b in 1091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043835834 = score(doc=1091,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15836994 = queryWeight, product of:
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.2767939 = fieldWeight in 1091, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1091)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The number of research studies on social tagging has increased rapidly in the past years, but few of them highlight the characteristics and research trends in social tagging. A set of 862 academic documents relating to social tagging and published from 2005 to 2011 was thus examined using bibliometric analysis as well as the social network analysis technique. The results show that social tagging, as a research area, develops rapidly and attracts an increasing number of new entrants. There are no key authors, publication sources, or research groups that dominate the research domain of social tagging. Research on social tagging appears to focus mainly on the following three aspects: (a) components and functions of social tagging (e.g., tags, tagging objects, and tagging network), (b) taggers' behaviors and interface design, and (c) tags' organization and usage in social tagging. The trend suggest that more researchers turn to the latter two integrated with human computer interface and information retrieval, although the first aspect is the fundamental one in social tagging. Also, more studies relating to social tagging pay attention to multimedia tagging objects and not only text tagging. Previous research on social tagging was limited to a few subject domains such as information science and computer science. As an interdisciplinary research area, social tagging is anticipated to attract more researchers from different disciplines. More practical applications, especially in high-tech companies, is an encouraging research trend in social tagging.
-
Zhu, Q.; Kong, X.; Hong, S.; Li, J.; He, Z.: Global ontology research progress : a bibliometric analysis (2015)
0.03
0.028951623 = product of:
0.057903245 = sum of:
0.057903245 = product of:
0.08685487 = sum of:
0.044030957 = weight(_text_:x in 2590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.044030957 = score(doc=2590,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18875335 = queryWeight, product of:
4.2226825 = idf(docFreq=1761, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.23327245 = fieldWeight in 2590, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.2226825 = idf(docFreq=1761, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2590)
0.04282391 = weight(_text_:22 in 2590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04282391 = score(doc=2590,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15653133 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2590, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2590)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 20. 1.2015 18:30:22
17. 9.2018 18:22:23
-
Du, J.; Tang, X.; Wu, Y.: ¬The effects of research level and article type on the differences between citation metrics and F1000 recommendations (2016)
0.03
0.02500919 = product of:
0.05001838 = sum of:
0.05001838 = product of:
0.07502757 = sum of:
0.044030957 = weight(_text_:x in 3228) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.044030957 = score(doc=3228,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18875335 = queryWeight, product of:
4.2226825 = idf(docFreq=1761, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.23327245 = fieldWeight in 3228, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.2226825 = idf(docFreq=1761, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3228)
0.030996617 = weight(_text_:b in 3228) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030996617 = score(doc=3228,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15836994 = queryWeight, product of:
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.19572285 = fieldWeight in 3228, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3228)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- F1000 recommendations were assessed as a potential data source for research evaluation, but the reasons for differences between F1000 Article Factor (FFa scores) and citations remain unexplored. By linking recommendations for 28,254 publications in F1000 with citations in Scopus, we investigated the effect of research level (basic, clinical, mixed) and article type on the internal consistency of assessments based on citations and FFa scores. The research level has little impact on the differences between the 2 evaluation tools, while article type has a big effect. These 2 measures differ significantly for 2 groups: (a) nonprimary research or evidence-based research are more highly cited but not highly recommended, while (b) translational research or transformative research are more highly recommended but have fewer citations. This can be expected, since citation activity is usually practiced by academic authors while the potential for scientific revolutions and the suitability for clinical practice of an article should be investigated from a practitioners' perspective. We conclude with a recommendation that the application of bibliometric approaches in research evaluation should consider the proportion of 3 types of publications: evidence-based research, transformative research, and translational research. The latter 2 types are more suitable for assessment through peer review.
-
Jiao, H.; Qiu, Y.; Ma, X.; Yang, B.: Dissmination effect of data papers on scientific datasets (2024)
0.03
0.02500919 = product of:
0.05001838 = sum of:
0.05001838 = product of:
0.07502757 = sum of:
0.044030957 = weight(_text_:x in 1204) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.044030957 = score(doc=1204,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18875335 = queryWeight, product of:
4.2226825 = idf(docFreq=1761, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.23327245 = fieldWeight in 1204, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.2226825 = idf(docFreq=1761, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1204)
0.030996617 = weight(_text_:b in 1204) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030996617 = score(doc=1204,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15836994 = queryWeight, product of:
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.19572285 = fieldWeight in 1204, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1204)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
¬Die deutsche Zeitschrift für Dokumentation, Informationswissenschaft und Informationspraxis von 1950 bis 2011 : eine vorläufige Bilanz in vier Abschnitten (2012)
0.02
0.02451108 = product of:
0.04902216 = sum of:
0.04902216 = product of:
0.07353324 = sum of:
0.03719594 = weight(_text_:b in 402) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03719594 = score(doc=402,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15836994 = queryWeight, product of:
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.23486741 = fieldWeight in 402, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=402)
0.036337294 = weight(_text_:22 in 402) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036337294 = score(doc=402,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15653133 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = 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).
-
Milard, B.; Pitarch, Y.: Egocentric cocitation networks and scientific papers destinies (2023)
0.02
0.02451108 = product of:
0.04902216 = sum of:
0.04902216 = product of:
0.07353324 = sum of:
0.03719594 = weight(_text_:b in 918) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03719594 = score(doc=918,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15836994 = queryWeight, product of:
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.23486741 = fieldWeight in 918, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=918)
0.036337294 = weight(_text_:22 in 918) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036337294 = score(doc=918,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15653133 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 918, 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=918)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 21. 3.2023 19:22:14
-
Chen, C.: CiteSpace II : detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature (2006)
0.02
0.020425899 = product of:
0.040851798 = sum of:
0.040851798 = product of:
0.061277695 = sum of:
0.030996617 = weight(_text_:b in 5272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030996617 = score(doc=5272,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15836994 = queryWeight, product of:
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.19572285 = fieldWeight in 5272, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5272)
0.030281078 = weight(_text_:22 in 5272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030281078 = score(doc=5272,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15653133 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = 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
-
Mukherjee, B.: Do open-access journals in library and information science have any scholarly impact? : a bibliometric study of selected open-access journals using Google Scholar (2009)
0.02
0.020425899 = product of:
0.040851798 = sum of:
0.040851798 = product of:
0.061277695 = sum of:
0.030996617 = weight(_text_:b in 2745) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030996617 = score(doc=2745,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15836994 = queryWeight, product of:
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.19572285 = fieldWeight in 2745, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2745)
0.030281078 = weight(_text_:22 in 2745) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030281078 = score(doc=2745,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15653133 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2745, 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=2745)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 3.2009 17:54:59
-
Leydesdorff, L.; Bornmann, L.: How fractional counting of citations affects the impact factor : normalization in terms of differences in citation potentials among fields of science (2011)
0.02
0.020425899 = product of:
0.040851798 = sum of:
0.040851798 = product of:
0.061277695 = sum of:
0.030996617 = weight(_text_:b in 4186) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030996617 = score(doc=4186,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15836994 = queryWeight, product of:
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.19572285 = fieldWeight in 4186, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4186)
0.030281078 = weight(_text_:22 in 4186) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030281078 = score(doc=4186,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15653133 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4186, 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=4186)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The Impact Factors (IFs) of the Institute for Scientific Information suffer from a number of drawbacks, among them the statistics-Why should one use the mean and not the median?-and the incomparability among fields of science because of systematic differences in citation behavior among fields. Can these drawbacks be counteracted by fractionally counting citation weights instead of using whole numbers in the numerators? (a) Fractional citation counts are normalized in terms of the citing sources and thus would take into account differences in citation behavior among fields of science. (b) Differences in the resulting distributions can be tested statistically for their significance at different levels of aggregation. (c) Fractional counting can be generalized to any document set including journals or groups of journals, and thus the significance of differences among both small and large sets can be tested. A list of fractionally counted IFs for 2008 is available online at http:www.leydesdorff.net/weighted_if/weighted_if.xls The between-group variance among the 13 fields of science identified in the U.S. Science and Engineering Indicators is no longer statistically significant after this normalization. Although citation behavior differs largely between disciplines, the reflection of these differences in fractionally counted citation distributions can not be used as a reliable instrument for the classification.
- Date
- 22. 1.2011 12:51:07
-
Stvilia, B.; Hinnant, C.C.; Schindler, K.; Worrall, A.; Burnett, G.; Burnett, K.; Kazmer, M.M.; Marty, P.F.: Composition of scientific teams and publication productivity at a national science lab (2011)
0.02
0.020425899 = product of:
0.040851798 = sum of:
0.040851798 = product of:
0.061277695 = sum of:
0.030996617 = weight(_text_:b in 4191) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030996617 = score(doc=4191,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15836994 = queryWeight, product of:
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.19572285 = fieldWeight in 4191, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4191)
0.030281078 = weight(_text_:22 in 4191) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030281078 = score(doc=4191,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15653133 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4191, 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=4191)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 1.2011 13:19:42
-
Cerda-Cosme, R.; Méndez, E.: Analysis of shared research data in Spanish scientific papers about COVID-19 : a first approach (2023)
0.02
0.020425899 = product of:
0.040851798 = sum of:
0.040851798 = product of:
0.061277695 = sum of:
0.030996617 = weight(_text_:b in 916) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030996617 = score(doc=916,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15836994 = queryWeight, product of:
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.19572285 = fieldWeight in 916, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=916)
0.030281078 = weight(_text_:22 in 916) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030281078 = score(doc=916,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15653133 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
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
-
Ye, F.Y.: ¬A theoretical approach to the unification of informetric models by wave-heat equations (2011)
0.02
0.016605115 = product of:
0.03321023 = sum of:
0.03321023 = product of:
0.09963068 = sum of:
0.09963068 = weight(_text_:x in 4464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09963068 = score(doc=4464,freq=4.0), product of:
0.18875335 = queryWeight, product of:
4.2226825 = idf(docFreq=1761, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.5278353 = fieldWeight in 4464, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.2226825 = idf(docFreq=1761, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4464)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- A simple distribution function f(x, t)=p(x+q)**-ße**alpha*t obeys wave and heat equations, that constructs a theoretical approach to the unification of informetric models, with which we can unify all informetric laws. While its space-type distributions deduce naturally Lotka-type laws in size approaches and Zipf-type laws in rank approaches, its time-type distributions introduce the mechanism of Price-type and Brookes-type laws.
-
Liu, X.; Chen, X.: Authors' noninstitutional emails and their correlation with retraction (2021)
0.02
0.016605115 = product of:
0.03321023 = sum of:
0.03321023 = product of:
0.09963068 = sum of:
0.09963068 = weight(_text_:x in 152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09963068 = score(doc=152,freq=4.0), product of:
0.18875335 = queryWeight, product of:
4.2226825 = idf(docFreq=1761, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.5278353 = fieldWeight in 152, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.2226825 = idf(docFreq=1761, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=152)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Folly, G.; Hajtman, B.; Nagy, J.I.; Ruff, I.: Some methodological problems in ranking scientists by citation analysis (1981)
0.02
0.016531529 = product of:
0.033063058 = sum of:
0.033063058 = product of:
0.09918917 = sum of:
0.09918917 = weight(_text_:b in 3275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09918917 = score(doc=3275,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15836994 = queryWeight, product of:
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.04469987 = queryNorm
0.6263131 = fieldWeight in 3275, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3275)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
