Search (1326 results, page 1 of 67)

  • × theme_ss:"Informetrie"
  1. Rostaing, H.; Barts, N.; Léveillé, V.: Bibliometrics: representation instrument of the multidisciplinary positioning of a scientific area : Implementation for an Advisory Scientific Committee (2007) 0.10 
    0.103263214 = product of:
  0.12907901 = sum of:
    0.0036554944 = product of:
      0.007310989 = sum of:
        0.007310989 = weight(_text_:e in 1144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007310989 = score(doc=1144,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.05754566 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040035386 = queryNorm
            0.12704675 = fieldWeight in 1144, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1144)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.03794148 = weight(_text_:u in 1144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03794148 = score(doc=1144,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13109364 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040035386 = queryNorm
        0.28942272 = fieldWeight in 1144, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1144)
    0.06578507 = weight(_text_:n in 1144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06578507 = score(doc=1144,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17261884 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040035386 = queryNorm
        0.38110018 = fieldWeight in 1144, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1144)
    0.021696968 = product of:
      0.043393936 = sum of:
        0.043393936 = weight(_text_:22 in 1144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043393936 = score(doc=1144,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1401971 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040035386 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.8 = coord(4/5)
    Date
    30.12.2007 11:22:39
    Language
    e
    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
  2. ¬Die deutsche Zeitschrift für Dokumentation, Informationswissenschaft und Informationspraxis von 1950 bis 2011 : eine vorläufige Bilanz in vier Abschnitten (2012) 0.07 
    0.06993809 = product of:
  0.116563484 = sum of:
    0.04337855 = sum of:
      0.03789531 = weight(_text_:j in 402) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03789531 = score(doc=402,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.1272123 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.040035386 = queryNorm
          0.2978903 = fieldWeight in 402, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=402)
      0.0054832413 = weight(_text_:e in 402) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0054832413 = score(doc=402,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.05754566 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
            0.040035386 = queryNorm
          0.09528506 = fieldWeight in 402, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=402)
    0.056912214 = weight(_text_:u in 402) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056912214 = score(doc=402,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.13109364 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040035386 = queryNorm
        0.43413407 = fieldWeight in 402, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=402)
    0.016272726 = product of:
      0.03254545 = sum of:
        0.03254545 = weight(_text_:22 in 402) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03254545 = score(doc=402,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1401971 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040035386 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Content
    Vgl.: http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/iwp.2012.63.issue-3/iwp-2012-0037/iwp-2012-0037.xml?format=INT.
    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).
  3. Asubiaro, T.V.; Onaolapo, S.: ¬A comparative study of the coverage of African journals in Web of Science, Scopus, and CrossRef (2023) 0.06 
    0.06466964 = product of:
  0.10778273 = sum of:
    0.002284684 = product of:
      0.004569368 = sum of:
        0.004569368 = weight(_text_:e in 992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.004569368 = score(doc=992,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.05754566 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040035386 = queryNorm
            0.07940422 = fieldWeight in 992, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=992)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.09193744 = weight(_text_:n in 992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09193744 = score(doc=992,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.17261884 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040035386 = queryNorm
        0.53260374 = fieldWeight in 992, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=992)
    0.013560605 = product of:
      0.02712121 = sum of:
        0.02712121 = weight(_text_:22 in 992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02712121 = score(doc=992,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1401971 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040035386 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 992, 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=992)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    This is the first study that evaluated the coverage of journals from Africa in Web of Science, Scopus, and CrossRef. A list of active journals published in each of the 55 African countries was compiled from Ulrich's periodicals directory and African Journals Online (AJOL) website. Journal master lists for Web of Science, Scopus, and CrossRef were searched for the African journals. A total of 2,229 unique active African journals were identified from Ulrich (N = 2,117, 95.0%) and AJOL (N = 243, 10.9%) after removing duplicates. The volume of African journals in Web of Science and Scopus databases is 7.4% (N = 166) and 7.8% (N = 174), respectively, compared to the 45.6% (N = 1,017) covered in CrossRef. While making up only 17.% of all the African journals, South African journals had the best coverage in the two most authoritative databases, accounting for 73.5% and 62.1% of all the African journals in Web of Science and Scopus, respectively. In contrast, Nigeria published 44.5% of all the African journals. The distribution of the African journals is biased in favor of Medical, Life and Health Sciences and Humanities and the Arts in the three databases. The low representation of African journals in CrossRef, a free indexing infrastructure that could be harnessed for building an African-centric research indexing database, is concerning.
    Date
    22. 6.2023 14:09:06
    Language
    e
  4. Umstätter, W.: Szientometrische Verfahren (2004) 0.06 
    0.06309148 = product of:
  0.10515246 = sum of:
    0.01263177 = product of:
      0.02526354 = sum of:
        0.02526354 = weight(_text_:j in 2920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02526354 = score(doc=2920,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1272123 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040035386 = queryNorm
            0.19859353 = fieldWeight in 2920, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2920)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.01897074 = weight(_text_:u in 2920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01897074 = score(doc=2920,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13109364 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040035386 = queryNorm
        0.14471136 = fieldWeight in 2920, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2920)
    0.07354995 = weight(_text_:n in 2920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07354995 = score(doc=2920,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.17261884 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040035386 = queryNorm
        0.42608297 = fieldWeight in 2920, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2920)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    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.
    Source
    Grundlagen der praktischen Information und Dokumentation. 5., völlig neu gefaßte Ausgabe. 2 Bde. Hrsg. von R. Kuhlen, Th. Seeger u. D. Strauch. Begründet von Klaus Laisiepen, Ernst Lutterbeck, Karl-Heinrich Meyer-Uhlenried. Bd.1: Handbuch zur Einführung in die Informationswissenschaft und -praxis
  5. Informations- und Wissensverarbeitung in den Sozialwissenschaften : Beiträge zur Umsetzung neuer Informationstechnologien (1994) 0.06 
    0.061708316 = product of:
  0.10284719 = sum of:
    0.011165013 = product of:
      0.022330025 = sum of:
        0.022330025 = weight(_text_:j in 5067) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022330025 = score(doc=5067,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1272123 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040035386 = queryNorm
            0.17553353 = fieldWeight in 5067, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5067)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.03353584 = weight(_text_:u in 5067) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03353584 = score(doc=5067,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13109364 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040035386 = queryNorm
        0.25581595 = fieldWeight in 5067, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5067)
    0.05814634 = weight(_text_:n in 5067) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05814634 = score(doc=5067,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.17261884 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040035386 = queryNorm
        0.33684817 = fieldWeight in 5067, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5067)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Content
    Enthält u.a. die Beiträge: INGWERSEN, P.: Information science as a cognitive science; MEDER, N.: Objekt-orientierte Wissensdarstellung und -navigation; SPIESS, M.: Repräsentation unsicheren Wissens; HENRICHS, N.: Begriffswandel in Datenbanken: kontextuelle Inhaltsanalyse für Disambiguierung und ideengeschichtliche Analyse; VOGT, C. u. R. WILLE: Formale Begriffsanalyse: Darstellung und Analyse von bibliographischen Daten; RITTBERGER, M.: Online-Retrieval und Hypertext: auf dem Weg zu verknüpften Datenbanken und offenen Hypertextsystemen; SCHOPEN, M.: GRIPS-Menu: Unterstützung von Endnutzerrecherchen in Literaturdatenbanken des DIMDI; KLOSE, G. u. T. PIRLEIN: Wissensmodellierung in LILOG; DANIEL, H.-D.: Peer-review als Qualitätsfilter im wissenschaftlichen Publikationswesen
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Knowledge organization 21(1994) no.3, S.167-168 (J. Krause)
  6. Karlsson, A.; Hammarfelt, B.; Steinhauer, H.J.; Falkman, G.; Olson, N.; Nelhans, G.; Nolin, J.: Modeling uncertainty in bibliometrics and information retrieval : an information fusion approach (2015) 0.05 
    0.05441205 = product of:
  0.13603012 = sum of:
    0.053798787 = sum of:
      0.04466005 = weight(_text_:j in 1696) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04466005 = score(doc=1696,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1272123 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.040035386 = queryNorm
          0.35106707 = fieldWeight in 1696, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1696)
      0.009138736 = weight(_text_:e in 1696) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.009138736 = score(doc=1696,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.05754566 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
            0.040035386 = queryNorm
          0.15880844 = fieldWeight in 1696, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1696)
    0.082231335 = weight(_text_:n in 1696) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.082231335 = score(doc=1696,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17261884 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040035386 = queryNorm
        0.47637522 = fieldWeight in 1696, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1696)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Language
    e
  7. Antonakis, J.; Lalive, R.: Quantifying scholarly impact : IQp versus the Hirsch h (2008) 0.05 
    0.0542725 = product of:
  0.13568124 = sum of:
    0.026899394 = sum of:
      0.022330025 = weight(_text_:j in 1722) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.022330025 = score(doc=1722,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1272123 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.040035386 = queryNorm
          0.17553353 = fieldWeight in 1722, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1722)
      0.004569368 = weight(_text_:e in 1722) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.004569368 = score(doc=1722,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.05754566 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
            0.040035386 = queryNorm
          0.07940422 = fieldWeight in 1722, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1722)
    0.108781844 = weight(_text_:n in 1722) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.108781844 = score(doc=1722,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.17261884 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040035386 = queryNorm
        0.63018525 = fieldWeight in 1722, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1722)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Hirsch's (2005) h index of scholarly output has generated substantial interest and wide acceptance because of its apparent ability to quantify scholarly impact simply and accurately. We show that the excitement surrounding h is premature for three reasons: h stagnates with increasing scientific age; it is highly dependent on publication quantity; and it is highly dependent on field-specific citation rates. Thus, it is not useful for comparing scholars across disciplines. We propose the scholarly index of quality and productivity (IQp) as an alternative to h. The new index takes into account a scholar's total impact and also corrects for field-specific citation rates, scholarly productivity, and scientific age. The IQp accurately predicts group membership on a common metric, as tested on a sample of 80 scholars from three populations: (a) Nobel winners in physics (n = 10), chemistry (n = 10), medicine (n = 10), and economics (n = 10), and towering psychologists (n = 10); and scholars who have made more modest contributions to science including randomly selected (b) fellows (n = 15) and (c) members (n = 15) of the Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. The IQp also correlates better with expert ratings of greatness than does the h index.
    Language
    e
  8. Egghe, L.: Theory of the topical coverage of multiple databases (2013) 0.05 
    0.052764386 = product of:
  0.13191096 = sum of:
    0.0031985575 = product of:
      0.006397115 = sum of:
        0.006397115 = weight(_text_:e in 526) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006397115 = score(doc=526,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.05754566 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040035386 = queryNorm
            0.1111659 = fieldWeight in 526, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=526)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.1287124 = weight(_text_:n in 526) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1287124 = score(doc=526,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.17261884 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040035386 = queryNorm
        0.74564517 = fieldWeight in 526, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=526)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    We present a model that describes which fraction of the literature on a certain topic we will find when we use n (n = 1, 2, .) databases. It is a generalization of the theory of discovering usability problems. We prove that, in all practical cases, this fraction is a concave function of n, the number of used databases, thereby explaining some graphs that exist in the literature. We also study limiting features of this fraction for n very high and we characterize the case that we find all literature on a certain topic for n high enough.
    Language
    e
  9. Crespo, J.A.; Herranz, N.; Li, Y.; Ruiz-Castillo, J.: ¬The effect on citation inequality of differences in citation practices at the web of science subject category level (2014) 0.05 
    0.052315596 = product of:
  0.087192655 = sum of:
    0.026899394 = sum of:
      0.022330025 = weight(_text_:j in 1291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.022330025 = score(doc=1291,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1272123 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.040035386 = queryNorm
          0.17553353 = fieldWeight in 1291, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1291)
      0.004569368 = weight(_text_:e in 1291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.004569368 = score(doc=1291,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.05754566 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
            0.040035386 = queryNorm
          0.07940422 = fieldWeight in 1291, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1291)
    0.041115668 = weight(_text_:n in 1291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041115668 = score(doc=1291,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17261884 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040035386 = queryNorm
        0.23818761 = fieldWeight in 1291, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1291)
    0.019177591 = product of:
      0.038355183 = sum of:
        0.038355183 = weight(_text_:22 in 1291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038355183 = score(doc=1291,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1401971 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040035386 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 1291, 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=1291)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    This article studies the impact of differences in citation practices at the subfield, or Web of Science subject category level, using the model introduced in Crespo, Li, and Ruiz-Castillo (2013a), according to which the number of citations received by an article depends on its underlying scientific influence and the field to which it belongs. We use the same Thomson Reuters data set of about 4.4 million articles used in Crespo et al. (2013a) to analyze 22 broad fields. The main results are the following: First, when the classification system goes from 22 fields to 219 subfields the effect on citation inequality of differences in citation practices increases from ?14% at the field level to 18% at the subfield level. Second, we estimate a set of exchange rates (ERs) over a wide [660, 978] citation quantile interval to express the citation counts of articles into the equivalent counts in the all-sciences case. In the fractional case, for example, we find that in 187 of 219 subfields the ERs are reliable in the sense that the coefficient of variation is smaller than or equal to 0.10. Third, in the fractional case the normalization of the raw data using the ERs (or subfield mean citations) as normalization factors reduces the importance of the differences in citation practices from 18% to 3.8% (3.4%) of overall citation inequality. Fourth, the results in the fractional case are essentially replicated when we adopt a multiplicative approach.
    Language
    e
  10. Nicolaisen, J.: Citation analysis (2007) 0.05 
    0.051788803 = product of:
  0.129472 = sum of:
    0.08607806 = sum of:
      0.07145608 = weight(_text_:j in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07145608 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1272123 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.040035386 = queryNorm
          0.5617073 = fieldWeight in 6091, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6091)
      0.014621978 = weight(_text_:e in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.014621978 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.05754566 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
            0.040035386 = queryNorm
          0.2540935 = fieldWeight in 6091, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
            0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6091)
    0.043393936 = product of:
      0.08678787 = sum of:
        0.08678787 = weight(_text_:22 in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08678787 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1401971 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040035386 = 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)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Date
    13. 7.2008 19:53:22
    Language
    e
  11. Fiala, J.: Information flood : fiction and reality (1987) 0.05 
    0.051788803 = product of:
  0.129472 = sum of:
    0.08607806 = sum of:
      0.07145608 = weight(_text_:j in 1080) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07145608 = score(doc=1080,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1272123 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.040035386 = queryNorm
          0.5617073 = fieldWeight in 1080, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1080)
      0.014621978 = weight(_text_:e in 1080) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.014621978 = score(doc=1080,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.05754566 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
            0.040035386 = queryNorm
          0.2540935 = fieldWeight in 1080, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
            0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1080)
    0.043393936 = product of:
      0.08678787 = sum of:
        0.08678787 = weight(_text_:22 in 1080) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08678787 = score(doc=1080,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1401971 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040035386 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 1080, 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=1080)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Language
    e
    Source
    Thermochimica acta. 110(1987), S.11-22
  12. Egghe, L.: Relations between the continuous and the discrete Lotka power function (2005) 0.05 
    0.048668373 = product of:
  0.12167093 = sum of:
    0.051895328 = sum of:
      0.046412088 = weight(_text_:j in 3464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.046412088 = score(doc=3464,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.1272123 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.040035386 = queryNorm
          0.3648396 = fieldWeight in 3464, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3464)
      0.0054832413 = weight(_text_:e in 3464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0054832413 = score(doc=3464,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.05754566 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
            0.040035386 = queryNorm
          0.09528506 = fieldWeight in 3464, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3464)
    0.0697756 = weight(_text_:n in 3464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0697756 = score(doc=3464,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.17261884 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040035386 = queryNorm
        0.40421778 = fieldWeight in 3464, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3464)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The discrete Lotka power function describes the number of sources (e.g., authors) with n = 1, 2, 3, ... items (e.g., publications). As in econometrics, informetrics theory requires functions of a continuous variable j, replacing the discrete variable n. Now j represents item densities instead of number of items. The continuous Lotka power function describes the density of sources with item density j. The discrete Lotka function one obtains from data, obtained empirically; the continuous Lotka function is the one needed when one wants to apply Lotkaian informetrics, i.e., to determine properties that can be derived from the (continuous) model. It is, hence, important to know the relations between the two models. We show that the exponents of the discrete Lotka function (if not too high, i.e., within limits encountered in practice) and of the continuous Lotka function are approximately the same. This is important to know in applying theoretical results (from the continuous model), derived from practical data.
    Language
    e
  13. Arboit, A.E.; Cabrini Gracio, M.C.; Oliveira, E.F.T. de; Bufrem, L.S.: ¬The relationship between authors and main thematic categories in the field of knowledge organization : a bibliometric approach (2012) 0.05 
    0.04832192 = product of:
  0.08053653 = sum of:
    0.0027416206 = product of:
      0.0054832413 = sum of:
        0.0054832413 = weight(_text_:e in 824) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0054832413 = score(doc=824,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.05754566 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040035386 = queryNorm
            0.09528506 = fieldWeight in 824, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=824)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.028456107 = weight(_text_:u in 824) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028456107 = score(doc=824,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13109364 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040035386 = queryNorm
        0.21706703 = fieldWeight in 824, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=824)
    0.049338803 = weight(_text_:n in 824) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.049338803 = score(doc=824,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17261884 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040035386 = queryNorm
        0.28582513 = fieldWeight in 824, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=824)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    This is a study about the relationships between authors and the main thematic categories in the papers published in the last five International ISKO Conferences, held between 2002 and 2010. The aim is to map the domain as ISKO conferences are considered the most representative forum in the field. The published papers are considered to indicate the relationships between authors and themes. The Classification Scheme for Knowledge Organization Literature (CSKOL) was used to categorize the papers. The theoretical and methodological foundations of the study can be found in the concept of domain analysis proposed by Hjørland. The analysis of the papers (n=146) led to the identification of the most productive authors, the networks representing the relationships between the authors as also the categories that constitute the primary areas of research.
    Language
    e
    Source
    Categories, contexts and relations in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the Twelfth International ISKO Conference 6-9 August 2012, Mysore, India. Eds.: Neelameghan, A. u. K.S. Raghavan
  14. Egghe, L.: Empirical and combinatorial study of country occurrences in multi-authored papers (2006) 0.05 
    0.045687642 = product of:
  0.1142191 = sum of:
    0.057247553 = sum of:
      0.05359206 = weight(_text_:j in 81) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05359206 = score(doc=81,freq=18.0), product of:
          0.1272123 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.040035386 = queryNorm
          0.42128047 = fieldWeight in 81, product of:
            4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
              18.0 = termFreq=18.0
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=81)
      0.0036554944 = weight(_text_:e in 81) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0036554944 = score(doc=81,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.05754566 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
            0.040035386 = queryNorm
          0.063523374 = fieldWeight in 81, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=81)
    0.056971543 = weight(_text_:n in 81) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056971543 = score(doc=81,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.17261884 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040035386 = queryNorm
        0.33004245 = fieldWeight in 81, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=81)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Papers written by several authors can be classified according to the countries of the author affiliations. The empirical part of this paper consists of two datasets. One dataset consists of 1,035 papers retrieved via the search "pedagog*" in the years 2004 and 2005 (up to October) in Academic Search Elite which is a case where phi(m) = the number of papers with m =1, 2,3 ... authors is decreasing, hence most of the papers have a low number of authors. Here we find that #, m = the number of times a country occurs j times in a m-authored paper, j =1, ..., m-1 is decreasing and that # m, m is much higher than all the other #j, m values. The other dataset consists of 3,271 papers retrieved via the search "enzyme" in the year 2005 (up to October) in the same database which is a case of a non-decreasing phi(m): most papers have 3 or 4 authors and we even find many papers with a much higher number of authors. In this case we show again that # m, m is much higher than the other #j, m values but that #j, m is not decreasing anymore in j =1, ..., m-1, although #1, m is (apart from # m, m) the largest number amongst the #j,m. The combinatorial part gives a proof of the fact that #j,m decreases for j = 1, m-1, supposing that all cases are equally possible. This shows that the first dataset is more conform with this model than the second dataset. Explanations for these findings are given. From the data we also find the (we think: new) distribution of number of papers with n =1, 2,3,... countries (i.e. where there are n different countries involved amongst the m (a n) authors of a paper): a fast decreasing function e.g. as a power law with a very large Lotka exponent.
    Language
    e
  15. De Bellis, N.: Bibliometrics and citation analysis : from the Science citation index to cybermetrics (2008) 0.04 
    0.04402968 = product of:
  0.073382795 = sum of:
    0.021519516 = sum of:
      0.01786402 = weight(_text_:j in 3585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.01786402 = score(doc=3585,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1272123 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.040035386 = queryNorm
          0.14042683 = fieldWeight in 3585, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3585)
      0.0036554944 = weight(_text_:e in 3585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0036554944 = score(doc=3585,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.05754566 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
            0.040035386 = queryNorm
          0.063523374 = fieldWeight in 3585, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3585)
    0.01897074 = weight(_text_:u in 3585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01897074 = score(doc=3585,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13109364 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040035386 = queryNorm
        0.14471136 = fieldWeight in 3585, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3585)
    0.032892536 = weight(_text_:n in 3585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032892536 = score(doc=3585,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17261884 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040035386 = queryNorm
        0.19055009 = fieldWeight in 3585, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3585)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    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."
    Language
    e
  16. Zornic, N.; Markovic, A.; Jeremic, V.: How the top 500 ARWU can provide a misleading rank (2014) 0.04 
    0.04166434 = product of:
  0.104160845 = sum of:
    0.0054832413 = product of:
      0.010966483 = sum of:
        0.010966483 = weight(_text_:e in 1279) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010966483 = score(doc=1279,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.05754566 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040035386 = queryNorm
            0.19057012 = fieldWeight in 1279, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1279)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.098677605 = weight(_text_:n in 1279) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.098677605 = score(doc=1279,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17261884 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040035386 = queryNorm
        0.57165027 = fieldWeight in 1279, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1279)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Language
    e
  17. Torres-Salinas, D.; Robinson-García, N.: ¬The time for bibliometric applications (2016) 0.04 
    0.04166434 = product of:
  0.104160845 = sum of:
    0.0054832413 = product of:
      0.010966483 = sum of:
        0.010966483 = weight(_text_:e in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010966483 = score(doc=2763,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.05754566 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040035386 = queryNorm
            0.19057012 = fieldWeight in 2763, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2763)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.098677605 = weight(_text_:n in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.098677605 = score(doc=2763,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17261884 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040035386 = queryNorm
        0.57165027 = fieldWeight in 2763, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2763)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Language
    e
  18. Egghe, L.; Ravichandra Rao, I.K.: ¬The influence of the broadness of a query of a topic on its h-index : models and examples of the h-index of n-grams (2008) 0.04 
    0.041198842 = product of:
  0.1029971 = sum of:
    0.002284684 = product of:
      0.004569368 = sum of:
        0.004569368 = weight(_text_:e in 2009) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.004569368 = score(doc=2009,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.05754566 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040035386 = queryNorm
            0.07940422 = fieldWeight in 2009, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2009)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.10071242 = weight(_text_:n in 2009) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10071242 = score(doc=2009,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.17261884 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040035386 = queryNorm
        0.58343816 = fieldWeight in 2009, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2009)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The article studies the influence of the query formulation of a topic on its h-index. In order to generate pure random sets of documents, we used N-grams (N variable) to measure this influence: strings of zeros, truncated at the end. The used databases are WoS and Scopus. The formula h=T**1/alpha, proved in Egghe and Rousseau (2006) where T is the number of retrieved documents and is Lotka's exponent, is confirmed being a concavely increasing function of T. We also give a formula for the relation between h and N the length of the N-gram: h=D10**(-N/alpha) where D is a constant, a convexly decreasing function, which is found in our experiments. Nonlinear regression on h=T**1/alpha gives an estimation of , which can then be used to estimate the h-index of the entire database (Web of Science [WoS] and Scopus): h=S**1/alpha, , where S is the total number of documents in the database.
    Language
    e
  19. Egghe, L.; Ravichandra Rao, I.K.: Duality revisited : construction of fractional frequency distributions based on two dual Lotka laws (2002) 0.04 
    0.04102194 = product of:
  0.10255484 = sum of:
    0.0038772377 = product of:
      0.0077544753 = sum of:
        0.0077544753 = weight(_text_:e in 1006) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0077544753 = score(doc=1006,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.05754566 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040035386 = queryNorm
            0.13475344 = fieldWeight in 1006, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1006)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.098677605 = weight(_text_:n in 1006) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.098677605 = score(doc=1006,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.17261884 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040035386 = queryNorm
        0.57165027 = fieldWeight in 1006, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1006)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Fractional frequency distributions of, for example, authors with a certain (fractional) number of papers are very irregular and, therefore, not easy to model or to explain. This article gives a first attempt to this by assuming two simple Lotka laws (with exponent 2): one for the number of authors with n papers (total count here) and one for the number of papers with n authors, n E N. Based an an earlier made convolution model of Egghe, interpreted and reworked now for discrete scores, we are able to produce theoretical fractional frequency distributions with only one parameter, which are in very close agreement with the practical ones as found in a large dataset produced earlier by Rao. The article also shows that (irregular) fractional frequency distributions are a consequence of Lotka's law, and are not examples of breakdowns of this famous historical law.
    Language
    e
  20. Thelwall, M.; Maflahi, N.: Guideline references and academic citations as evidence of the clinical value of health research (2016) 0.04 
    0.04101189 = product of:
  0.06835315 = sum of:
    0.0027416206 = product of:
      0.0054832413 = sum of:
        0.0054832413 = weight(_text_:e in 2856) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0054832413 = score(doc=2856,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.05754566 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040035386 = queryNorm
            0.09528506 = fieldWeight in 2856, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2856)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.049338803 = weight(_text_:n in 2856) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.049338803 = score(doc=2856,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17261884 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040035386 = queryNorm
        0.28582513 = fieldWeight in 2856, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2856)
    0.016272726 = product of:
      0.03254545 = sum of:
        0.03254545 = weight(_text_:22 in 2856) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03254545 = score(doc=2856,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1401971 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040035386 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2856, 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=2856)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Date
    19. 3.2016 12:22:00
    Language
    e

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 1272
  • d 47
  • sp 2
  • ? 1
  • f 1
  • m 1
  • ro 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 1278
  • el 21
  • m 21
  • s 19
  • r 3
  • b 2
  • x 2
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications