Search (21 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × theme_ss:"Citation indexing"
  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  1. Garfield, E.; Pudovkin, A.I.; Istomin, V.S.: Why do we need algorithmic historiography? (2003) 0.02
    0.02292318 = product of:
      0.09169272 = sum of:
        0.09169272 = weight(_text_:evolution in 1606) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09169272 = score(doc=1606,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.46816036 = fieldWeight in 1606, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1606)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    This article discusses the rationale for creating historiographs of scholarly topics using a new program called HistCite(TM), which produces a variety of analyses to aid the historian identify key events (papers), people (authors), and journals in a field. By creating a genealogic profile of the evolution, the program aids the scholar in evaluating the paradigm involved.
  2. Brown, C.: ¬The evolution of preprints in the scholarly communication of physicists and astronomers (2001) 0.01
    0.014326988 = product of:
      0.05730795 = sum of:
        0.05730795 = weight(_text_:evolution in 5184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05730795 = score(doc=5184,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.2926002 = fieldWeight in 5184, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5184)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
  3. Gabel, J.: Improving information retrieval of subjects through citation-analysis : a study (2006) 0.01
    0.014326988 = product of:
      0.05730795 = sum of:
        0.05730795 = weight(_text_:evolution in 225) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05730795 = score(doc=225,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.2926002 = fieldWeight in 225, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=225)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Citation-chasing is proposed as a method of discovering additional terms to enhance subjectsearch retrieval. Subjects attached to OCLC records for cited works are compared to those attached to original citing sources. Citing sources were produced via a subject-list search in a library catalog using the LCSH "Language and languages-Origin." A subject-search was employed to avoid subjectivity in choosing sources. References from the sources were searched in OCLC where applicable, and the subject headings were retrieved. The subjects were ranked by citation-frequency and tiered into 3 groups in a Bradford-like distribution. Highly cited subjects were produced that were not revealed through the original search. A difference in relative importance among the subjects was also revealed. Broad extra-linguistic topics like evolution are more prominent than specific linguistic topics like phonology. There are exceptions, which appear somewhat predictable by the amount of imbalance in citation-representation among the 2 sources. Citation leaders were also produced for authors and secondary-source titles.
  4. Zhao, D.; Strotmann, A.: Can citation analysis of Web publications better detect research fronts? (2007) 0.01
    0.014326988 = product of:
      0.05730795 = sum of:
        0.05730795 = weight(_text_:evolution in 471) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05730795 = score(doc=471,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.2926002 = fieldWeight in 471, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=471)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    We present evidence that in some research fields, research published in journals and reported on the Web may collectively represent different evolutionary stages of the field, with journals lagging a few years behind the Web on average, and that a "two-tier" scholarly communication system may therefore be evolving. We conclude that in such fields, (a) for detecting current research fronts, author co-citation analyses (ACA) using articles published on the Web as a data source can outperform traditional ACAs using articles published in journals as data, and that (b) as a result, it is important to use multiple data sources in citation analysis studies of scholarly communication for a complete picture of communication patterns. Our evidence stems from comparing the respective intellectual structures of the XML research field, a subfield of computer science, as revealed from three sets of ACA covering two time periods: (a) from the field's beginnings in 1996 to 2001, and (b) from 2001 to 2006. For the first time period, we analyze research articles both from journals as indexed by the Science Citation Index (SCI) and from the Web as indexed by CiteSeer. We follow up by an ACA of SCI data for the second time period. We find that most trends in the evolution of this field from the first to the second time period that we find when comparing ACA results from the SCI between the two time periods already were apparent in the ACA results from CiteSeer during the first time period.
  5. Lai, K.-K.; Wu, S.-J.: Using the patent co-citation approach to establish a new patent classification system (2005) 0.01
    0.014326988 = product of:
      0.05730795 = sum of:
        0.05730795 = weight(_text_:evolution in 1013) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05730795 = score(doc=1013,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.2926002 = fieldWeight in 1013, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1013)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    The paper proposes a new approach to create a patent classification system to replace the IPC or UPC system for conducting patent analysis and management. The new approach is based on co-citation analysis of bibliometrics. The traditional approach for management of patents, which is based on either the IPC or UPC, is too general to meet the needs of specific industries. In addition, some patents are placed in incorrect categories, making it difficult for enterprises to carry out R&D planning, technology positioning, patent strategy-making and technology forecasting. Therefore, it is essential to develop a patent classification system that is adaptive to the characteristics of a specific industry. The analysis of this approach is divided into three phases. Phase I selects appropriate databases to conduct patent searches according to the subject and objective of this study and then select basic patents. Phase II uses the co-cited frequency of the basic patent pairs to assess their similarity. Phase III uses factor analysis to establish a classification system and assess the efficiency of the proposed approach. The main contribution of this approach is to develop a patent classification system based on patent similarities to assist patent manager in understanding the basic patents for a specific industry, the relationships among categories of technologies and the evolution of a technology category.
  6. Umstätter, W.: Szientometrische Verfahren (2004) 0.01
    0.01146159 = product of:
      0.04584636 = sum of:
        0.04584636 = weight(_text_:evolution in 2920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04584636 = score(doc=2920,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.23408018 = fieldWeight in 2920, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2920)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    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.
  7. Schwartz, F.; Fang, Y.C.: Citation data analysis on hydrogeology (2007) 0.01
    0.01146159 = product of:
      0.04584636 = sum of:
        0.04584636 = weight(_text_:evolution in 433) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04584636 = score(doc=433,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.23408018 = fieldWeight in 433, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=433)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    This article explores the status of research in hydrogeology using data mining techniques. First we try to explain what citation analysis is and review some of the previous work on citation analysis. The main idea in this article is to address some common issues about citation numbers and the use of these data. To validate the use of citation numbers, we compare the citation patterns for Water Resources Research papers in the 1980s with those in the 1990s. The citation growths for highly cited authors from the 1980s are used to examine whether it is possible to predict the citation patterns for highly-cited authors in the 1990s. If the citation data prove to be steady and stable, these numbers then can be used to explore the evolution of science in hydrogeology. The famous quotation, "If you are not the lead dog, the scenery never changes," attributed to Lee Iacocca, points to the importance of an entrepreneurial spirit in all forms of endeavor. In the case of hydrogeological research, impact analysis makes it clear how important it is to be a pioneer. Statistical correlation coefficients are used to retrieve papers among a collection of 2,847 papers before and after 1991 sharing the same topics with 273 papers in 1991 in Water Resources Research. The numbers of papers before and after 1991 are then plotted against various levels of citations for papers in 1991 to compare the distributions of paper population before and after that year. The similarity metrics based on word counts can ensure that the "before" papers are like ancestors and "after" papers are descendants in the same type of research. This exercise gives us an idea of how many papers are populated before and after 1991 (1991 is chosen based on balanced numbers of papers before and after that year). In addition, the impact of papers is measured in terms of citation presented as "percentile," a relative measure based on rankings in one year, in order to minimize the effect of time.
  8. Nicolaisen, J.: Citation analysis (2007) 0.01
    0.0066799684 = product of:
      0.026719874 = sum of:
        0.026719874 = product of:
          0.08015962 = sum of:
            0.08015962 = weight(_text_:22 in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08015962 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03697776 = 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)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    13. 7.2008 19:53:22
  9. Van der Veer Martens, B.: Do citation systems represent theories of truth? (2001) 0.01
    0.005904314 = product of:
      0.023617256 = sum of:
        0.023617256 = product of:
          0.070851766 = sum of:
            0.070851766 = weight(_text_:22 in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.070851766 = score(doc=3925,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03697776 = 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)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    22. 7.2006 15:22:28
  10. Garfield, E.; Stock, W.G.: Citation Consciousness : Interview with Eugene Garfiels, chairman emeritus of ISI; Philadelphia (2002) 0.00
    0.0041749803 = product of:
      0.016699921 = sum of:
        0.016699921 = product of:
          0.050099764 = sum of:
            0.050099764 = weight(_text_:22 in 613) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.050099764 = score(doc=613,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03697776 = 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)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Password. 2002, H.6, S.22-25
  11. Larivière, V.; Gingras, Y.; Archambault, E.: ¬The decline in the concentration of citations, 1900-2007 (2009) 0.00
    0.0035425886 = product of:
      0.014170354 = sum of:
        0.014170354 = product of:
          0.04251106 = sum of:
            0.04251106 = weight(_text_:22 in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04251106 = score(doc=2763,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03697776 = 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)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    22. 3.2009 19:22:35
  12. Garfield, E.: Recollections of Irving H. Sher 1924-1996 : Polymath/information scientist extraordinaire (2001) 0.00
    0.0029224863 = product of:
      0.011689945 = sum of:
        0.011689945 = product of:
          0.035069834 = sum of:
            0.035069834 = weight(_text_:22 in 6920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.035069834 = score(doc=6920,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03697776 = 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)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    16.12.2001 14:01:22
  13. Van der Veer Martens, B.; Goodrum, G.: ¬The diffusion of theories : a functional approach (2006) 0.00
    0.0029224863 = product of:
      0.011689945 = sum of:
        0.011689945 = product of:
          0.035069834 = sum of:
            0.035069834 = weight(_text_:22 in 5269) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.035069834 = score(doc=5269,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03697776 = 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)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    22. 7.2006 15:20:01
  14. wst: Cut-and-paste-Wissenschaft (2003) 0.00
    0.002504988 = product of:
      0.010019952 = sum of:
        0.010019952 = product of:
          0.030059857 = sum of:
            0.030059857 = weight(_text_:22 in 1270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.030059857 = score(doc=1270,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03697776 = 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)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    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."
  15. Chan, H.C.; Kim, H.-W.; Tan, W.C.: Information systems citation patterns from International Conference on Information Systems articles (2006) 0.00
    0.002504988 = product of:
      0.010019952 = sum of:
        0.010019952 = product of:
          0.030059857 = sum of:
            0.030059857 = weight(_text_:22 in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.030059857 = score(doc=201,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03697776 = 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)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    3. 1.2007 17:22:03
  16. H-Index auch im Web of Science (2008) 0.00
    0.002504988 = product of:
      0.010019952 = sum of:
        0.010019952 = product of:
          0.030059857 = sum of:
            0.030059857 = weight(_text_:22 in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.030059857 = score(doc=590,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03697776 = 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)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    6. 4.2008 19:04:22
  17. Mingers, J.; Burrell, Q.L.: Modeling citation behavior in Management Science journals (2006) 0.00
    0.002504988 = product of:
      0.010019952 = sum of:
        0.010019952 = product of:
          0.030059857 = sum of:
            0.030059857 = weight(_text_:22 in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.030059857 = score(doc=994,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03697776 = 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)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    26.12.2007 19:22:05
  18. Ma, N.; Guan, J.; Zhao, Y.: Bringing PageRank to the citation analysis (2008) 0.00
    0.002504988 = product of:
      0.010019952 = sum of:
        0.010019952 = product of:
          0.030059857 = sum of:
            0.030059857 = weight(_text_:22 in 2064) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.030059857 = score(doc=2064,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03697776 = 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)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    31. 7.2008 14:22:05
  19. Hayer, L.: Lazarsfeld zitiert : eine bibliometrische Analyse (2008) 0.00
    0.0020874902 = product of:
      0.008349961 = sum of:
        0.008349961 = product of:
          0.025049882 = sum of:
            0.025049882 = weight(_text_:22 in 1934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.025049882 = score(doc=1934,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03697776 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1934, 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=1934)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    22. 6.2008 12:54:12
  20. Wildner, B.: Web of Science - Scopus : Auf der Suche nach Zitierungen (2006) 0.00
    0.0016699921 = product of:
      0.0066799684 = sum of:
        0.0066799684 = product of:
          0.020039905 = sum of:
            0.020039905 = weight(_text_:22 in 5034) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.020039905 = score(doc=5034,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03697776 = queryNorm
                0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 5034, 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=5034)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    4. 6.2006 17:22:15