Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

Burrell, Q.L.: Some comments on "A proposal for a dynamic h-Type Index" by Rousseau and Ye (2009) 0.01

0.008230937 = product of:
  0.016461873 = sum of:
    0.016461873 = product of:
      0.04938562 = sum of:
        0.04938562 = weight(_text_:h in 2722) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04938562 = score(doc=2722,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.11244635 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045260075 = queryNorm
            0.4391927 = fieldWeight in 2722, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2722)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract: Caution is urged over the adoption of dynamic h-type indexes as advocated by Rousseau and Ye (2008). It is shown that the dynamics are critically dependent upon model assumptions and that practical interpretation might therefore be problematic. However, interesting questions regarding the interrelations between various h-type indexes are raised.
Object: h-index

Burrell, Q.L.: Predicting future citation behavior (2003) 0.01

0.0071541346 = product of:
  0.014308269 = sum of:
    0.014308269 = product of:
      0.042924806 = sum of:
        0.042924806 = weight(_text_:22 in 3837) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042924806 = score(doc=3837,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15849307 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045260075 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3837, 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=3837)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date: 29. 3.2003 19:22:48

Burrell, Q.L.: Formulae for the h-index : a lack of robustness in Lotkaian informetrics? (2013) 0.01
```
0.0061732023 = product of:
  0.012346405 = sum of:
    0.012346405 = product of:
      0.037039213 = sum of:
        0.037039213 = weight(_text_:h in 977) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037039213 = score(doc=977,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.11244635 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045260075 = queryNorm
            0.32939452 = fieldWeight in 977, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=977)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
```
Abstract

In one of the first attempts at providing a mathematical framework for the Hirsch index, Egghe and Rousseau (2006) assumed the standard Lotka model for an author's citation distribution to derive a delightfully simple closed formula for his/her h-index. More recently, the same authors (Egghe & Rousseau, 2012b) have presented a new (implicit) formula based on the so-called shifted Lotka function to allow for the objection that the original model makes no allowance for papers receiving zero citations. Here it is shown, through a small empirical study, that the formulae actually give very similar results whether or not the uncited papers are included. However, and more important, it is found that they both seriously underestimate the true h-index, and we suggest that the reason for this is that this is a context-the citation distribution of an author-in which straightforward Lotkaian informetrics is inappropriate. Indeed, the analysis suggests that even if we restrict attention to the upper tail of the citation distribution, a simple Lotka/Pareto-like model can give misleading results.

Object

h-index

Mingers, J.; Burrell, Q.L.: Modeling citation behavior in Management Science journals (2006) 0.01

0.0061321156 = product of:
  0.012264231 = sum of:
    0.012264231 = product of:
      0.03679269 = sum of:
        0.03679269 = weight(_text_:22 in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03679269 = score(doc=994,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15849307 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045260075 = 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)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date: 26.12.2007 19:22:05

Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

Years