Search (277 results, page 1 of 14)

  • × theme_ss:"Citation indexing"
  1. Nicolaisen, J.: Citation analysis (2007) 0.06 
    0.057219595 = product of:
  0.095365986 = sum of:
    0.0072214957 = weight(_text_:a in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0072214957 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.035428695 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 6091, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6091)
    0.054840736 = weight(_text_:j in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.054840736 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09763223 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = 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)
    0.033303753 = product of:
      0.066607505 = sum of:
        0.066607505 = weight(_text_:22 in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.066607505 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10759774 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03072615 = 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)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Date
    13. 7.2008 19:53:22
    Type
    a
  2. Fröhlich, G.: ¬Das Messen des leicht Meßbaren : Output-Indikatoren, Impact-Maße: Artefakte der Szeintometrie? (1999) 0.05 
    0.045112688 = product of:
  0.07518781 = sum of:
    0.0045134346 = weight(_text_:a in 4379) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0045134346 = score(doc=4379,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.035428695 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 4379, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4379)
    0.036398914 = weight(_text_:u in 4379) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.036398914 = score(doc=4379,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10061107 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.3617784 = fieldWeight in 4379, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4379)
    0.03427546 = weight(_text_:j in 4379) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03427546 = score(doc=4379,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09763223 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.35106707 = fieldWeight in 4379, 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=4379)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Footnote
    Zuerst publiziert in: Kommunikation statt Markt: Zu einer alternativen Theorie der Informationsgesellschaft. Hrsg.: J. Becker u. W. Göhring. Sankt Augustin: GMD. (GMD Report; 61) S.27-38.
    Type
    a
  3. Gabel, J.: Improving information retrieval of subjects through citation-analysis : a study (2006) 0.03 
    0.025264405 = product of:
  0.04210734 = sum of:
    0.0067701526 = weight(_text_:a in 225) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0067701526 = score(doc=225,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.035428695 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.19109234 = fieldWeight in 225, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=225)
    0.018199457 = weight(_text_:u in 225) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018199457 = score(doc=225,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10061107 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.1808892 = fieldWeight in 225, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=225)
    0.01713773 = weight(_text_:j in 225) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01713773 = score(doc=225,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09763223 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.17553353 = fieldWeight in 225, 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=225)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    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.
    Source
    Knowledge organization for a global learning society: Proceedings of the 9th International ISKO Conference, 4-7 July 2006, Vienna, Austria. Hrsg.: G. Budin, C. Swertz u. K. Mitgutsch
    Type
    a
  4. Gorraiz, J.: ¬Die unerträgliche Bedeutung der Zitate (1992) 0.02 
    0.024824893 = product of:
  0.062062234 = sum of:
    0.0072214957 = weight(_text_:a in 2824) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0072214957 = score(doc=2824,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.035428695 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 2824, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2824)
    0.054840736 = weight(_text_:j in 2824) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.054840736 = score(doc=2824,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09763223 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.5617073 = fieldWeight in 2824, 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=2824)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Type
    a
  5. Mingers, J.; Burrell, Q.L.: Modeling citation behavior in Management Science journals (2006) 0.02 
    0.02470702 = product of:
  0.041178364 = sum of:
    0.008124183 = weight(_text_:a in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008124183 = score(doc=994,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.035428695 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.22931081 = fieldWeight in 994, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=994)
    0.020565277 = weight(_text_:j in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020565277 = score(doc=994,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09763223 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.21064025 = fieldWeight in 994, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=994)
    0.012488906 = product of:
      0.024977813 = sum of:
        0.024977813 = weight(_text_:22 in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024977813 = score(doc=994,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10759774 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03072615 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    Citation rates are becoming increasingly important in judging the research quality of journals, institutions and departments, and individual faculty. This paper looks at the pattern of citations across different management science journals and over time. A stochastic model is proposed which views the generating mechanism of citations as a gamma mixture of Poisson processes generating overall a negative binomial distribution. This is tested empirically with a large sample of papers published in 1990 from six management science journals and found to fit well. The model is extended to include obsolescence, i.e., that the citation rate for a paper varies over its cited lifetime. This leads to the additional citations distribution which shows that future citations are a linear function of past citations with a time-dependent and decreasing slope. This is also verified empirically in a way that allows different obsolescence functions to be fitted to the data. Conclusions concerning the predictability of future citations, and future research in this area are discussed.
    Date
    26.12.2007 19:22:05
    Type
    a
  6. Ma, N.; Guan, J.; Zhao, Y.: Bringing PageRank to the citation analysis (2008) 0.02 
    0.023465756 = product of:
  0.03910959 = sum of:
    0.0060554086 = weight(_text_:a in 2064) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0060554086 = score(doc=2064,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.035428695 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 2064, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2064)
    0.020565277 = weight(_text_:j in 2064) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020565277 = score(doc=2064,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09763223 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.21064025 = fieldWeight in 2064, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2064)
    0.012488906 = product of:
      0.024977813 = sum of:
        0.024977813 = weight(_text_:22 in 2064) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024977813 = score(doc=2064,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10759774 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03072615 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    The paper attempts to provide an alternative method for measuring the importance of scientific papers based on the Google's PageRank. The method is a meaningful extension of the common integer counting of citations and is then experimented for bringing PageRank to the citation analysis in a large citation network. It offers a more integrated picture of the publications' influence in a specific field. We firstly calculate the PageRanks of scientific papers. The distributional characteristics and comparison with the traditionally used number of citations are then analyzed in detail. Furthermore, the PageRank is implemented in the evaluation of research influence for several countries in the field of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology during the time period of 2000-2005. Finally, some advantages of bringing PageRank to the citation analysis are concluded.
    Date
    31. 7.2008 14:22:05
    Type
    a
  7. Umstätter, W.: Szientometrische Verfahren (2004) 0.02 
    0.022535667 = product of:
  0.037559442 = sum of:
    0.0036107479 = weight(_text_:a in 2920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0036107479 = score(doc=2920,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.035428695 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 2920, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2920)
    0.014559564 = weight(_text_:u in 2920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014559564 = score(doc=2920,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10061107 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = 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)
    0.019389128 = weight(_text_:j in 2920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019389128 = score(doc=2920,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09763223 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = 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)
  0.6 = 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
    Type
    a
  8. Nicolaisen, J.: ¬The J-shaped distribution of citedness (2002) 0.02 
    0.02222694 = product of:
  0.05556735 = sum of:
    0.0080738785 = weight(_text_:a in 3765) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0080738785 = score(doc=3765,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.035428695 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.22789092 = fieldWeight in 3765, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3765)
    0.047493473 = weight(_text_:j in 3765) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.047493473 = score(doc=3765,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09763223 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.48645282 = fieldWeight in 3765, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3765)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    A new approach for investigating the correlation between research quality and citation counts is presented and applied to a case study of the relationship between peer evaluations reflected in scholarly book reviews and the citation frequencies of reviewed books. Results of the study designate a J-shaped distribution between the considered variables, presumably caused by a skewed allocation of negative citations. The paper concludes with suggestions for further research.
    Type
    a
  9. Nacke, O.: Zitatenanalyse im engeren Sinne (1980) 0.02 
    0.019637926 = product of:
  0.049094815 = sum of:
    0.005416122 = weight(_text_:a in 399) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005416122 = score(doc=399,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.035428695 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 399, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=399)
    0.043678693 = weight(_text_:u in 399) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.043678693 = score(doc=399,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10061107 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.43413407 = fieldWeight in 399, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=399)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Source
    Deutscher Dokumentartag 1979, Willingen/Hochsauerland, 1.-5.10.1979. Das IuD-Programm heute - Online-Benutzergruppe - Bibliometrie, Scientometrie - Terminologiearbeit - Datenschutz - Tariffragen, Berufsbilder - Informationsmarkt - Gesprächskreise. Bearb.: M. von der Laake u. H. Strohl-Goebel
    Type
    a
  10. Nacke, O.: Fehlerquellen bei der Zitatenanalyse (1980) 0.02 
    0.019637926 = product of:
  0.049094815 = sum of:
    0.005416122 = weight(_text_:a in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005416122 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.035428695 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 400, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=400)
    0.043678693 = weight(_text_:u in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.043678693 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10061107 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.43413407 = fieldWeight in 400, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=400)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Source
    Deutscher Dokumentartag 1979, Willingen/Hochsauerland, 1.-5.10.1979. Das IuD-Programm heute - Online-Benutzergruppe - Bibliometrie, Scientometrie - Terminologiearbeit - Datenschutz - Tariffragen, Berufsbilder - Informationsmarkt - Gesprächskreise. Bearb.: M. von der Laake u. H. Strohl-Goebel
    Type
    a
  11. De Bellis, N.: Bibliometrics and citation analysis : from the Science citation index to cybermetrics (2008) 0.02 
    0.018045073 = product of:
  0.030075122 = sum of:
    0.0018053739 = weight(_text_:a in 3585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0018053739 = score(doc=3585,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.035428695 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.050957955 = fieldWeight in 3585, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3585)
    0.014559564 = weight(_text_:u in 3585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014559564 = score(doc=3585,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10061107 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = 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)
    0.013710184 = weight(_text_:j in 3585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013710184 = score(doc=3585,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09763223 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = 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)
  0.6 = 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."
  12. Døsen, K.: One more reference on self-reference (1992) 0.02 
    0.0162101 = product of:
  0.04052525 = sum of:
    0.0072214957 = weight(_text_:a in 4604) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0072214957 = score(doc=4604,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.035428695 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 4604, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4604)
    0.033303753 = product of:
      0.066607505 = sum of:
        0.066607505 = weight(_text_:22 in 4604) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.066607505 = score(doc=4604,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10759774 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03072615 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 4604, 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=4604)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Date
    7. 2.2005 14:10:22
    Type
    a
  13. Pudovkin, A.I.; Garfield, E.: Algorithmic procedure for finding semantically related journals (2002) 0.01 
    0.01458143 = product of:
  0.036453575 = sum of:
    0.0067701526 = weight(_text_:a in 5220) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0067701526 = score(doc=5220,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.035428695 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.19109234 = fieldWeight in 5220, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5220)
    0.02968342 = weight(_text_:j in 5220) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02968342 = score(doc=5220,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09763223 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.304033 = fieldWeight in 5220, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5220)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Journal Citation Reports provides a classification of journals most heavily cited by a given journal and which most heavily cite that journal, but size variation is not taken into account. Pudovkin and Garfield suggest a procedure for meeting this difficulty. The relatedness of journal i to journal j is determined by the number of citations from journal i to journal j in a given year normalized by the product of the papers published in the j journal in that year times the number of references cited in the i journal in that year. A multiplier of ten to the sixth is suggested to bring the values into an easily perceptible range. While citations received depend upon the overall cumulative number of papers published by a journal, the current year is utilized since that data is available in JCR. Citations to current year papers would be quite low in most fields and thus not included. To produce the final index, the maximum of the A citing B value, and the B citing A value is chosen and used to indicate the closeness of the journals. The procedure is illustrated for the journal Genetics.
    Type
    a
  14. Thelwall, M.; Kousha, K.; Stuart, E.; Makita, M.; Abdoli, M.; Wilson, P.; Levitt, J.: In which fields are citations indicators of research quality? (2023) 0.01 
    0.013660424 = product of:
  0.022767372 = sum of:
    0.0024381608 = product of:
      0.021943446 = sum of:
        0.021943446 = weight(_text_:p in 1033) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021943446 = score(doc=1033,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11047626 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03072615 = queryNorm
            0.19862589 = fieldWeight in 1033, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1033)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    0.0031914804 = weight(_text_:a in 1033) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0031914804 = score(doc=1033,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.035428695 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.090081796 = fieldWeight in 1033, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1033)
    0.01713773 = weight(_text_:j in 1033) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01713773 = score(doc=1033,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09763223 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.17553353 = fieldWeight in 1033, 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=1033)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    Citation counts are widely used as indicators of research quality to support or replace human peer review and for lists of top cited papers, researchers, and institutions. Nevertheless, the relationship between citations and research quality is poorly evidenced. We report the first large-scale science-wide academic evaluation of the relationship between research quality and citations (field normalized citation counts), correlating them for 87,739 journal articles in 34 field-based UK Units of Assessment (UoA). The two correlate positively in all academic fields, from very weak (0.1) to strong (0.5), reflecting broadly linear relationships in all fields. We give the first evidence that the correlations are positive even across the arts and humanities. The patterns are similar for the field classification schemes of Scopus and Dimensions.ai, although varying for some individual subjects and therefore more uncertain for these. We also show for the first time that no field has a citation threshold beyond which all articles are excellent quality, so lists of top cited articles are not pure collections of excellence, and neither is any top citation percentile indicator. Thus, while appropriately field normalized citations associate positively with research quality in all fields, they never perfectly reflect it, even at high values.
    Type
    a
  15. Van der Veer Martens, B.: Do citation systems represent theories of truth? (2001) 0.01 
    0.013580027 = product of:
  0.033950068 = sum of:
    0.0045134346 = weight(_text_:a in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0045134346 = score(doc=3925,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.035428695 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 3925, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3925)
    0.029436635 = product of:
      0.05887327 = sum of:
        0.05887327 = weight(_text_:22 in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05887327 = score(doc=3925,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.10759774 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03072615 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Date
    22. 7.2006 15:22:28
    Type
    a
  16. Howard, D.L.: What the eye sees while predicitng a document's pertinence from its citation (1991) 0.01 
    0.013469747 = product of:
  0.033674367 = sum of:
    0.006253999 = weight(_text_:a in 3675) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006253999 = score(doc=3675,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.035428695 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.17652355 = fieldWeight in 3675, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3675)
    0.027420368 = weight(_text_:j in 3675) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027420368 = score(doc=3675,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09763223 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.28085366 = fieldWeight in 3675, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3675)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Predicting relevance of documents from citations is a common problem for information users. The study addresses the relevance prediction process and most specifically, what is viewed by the subject while using the citations. 2 kinds of protocols were collected while 11 subjects viewed 7 citations each. Eye fixations and eye movements between parts of citations were examined. Verbal reports from subjects during this process were used to explore the process of assessment
    Source
    ASIS '91: systems understanding people. proc. of the 54th Annual Meeting of the ASIS, vol.28, Washington, DC, 27.-31.10.1991. Ed.: J.-M. Griffiths
    Type
    a
  17. Korwitz, U.: Welchen 'Rang' hat ein Wissenschaftler? (1995) 0.01 
    0.013091951 = product of:
  0.032729875 = sum of:
    0.0036107479 = weight(_text_:a in 2318) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0036107479 = score(doc=2318,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.035428695 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 2318, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2318)
    0.029119128 = weight(_text_:u in 2318) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029119128 = score(doc=2318,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10061107 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.28942272 = fieldWeight in 2318, 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=2318)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Type
    a
  18. Garfield, E.: Agony and ecstasy of the Internet : experiences of an information scientist qua publisher (1996) 0.01 
    0.013017553 = product of:
  0.032543883 = sum of:
    0.0070646433 = weight(_text_:a in 3044) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0070646433 = score(doc=3044,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.035428695 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.19940455 = fieldWeight in 3044, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3044)
    0.025479238 = weight(_text_:u in 3044) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025479238 = score(doc=3044,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10061107 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.25324488 = fieldWeight in 3044, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3044)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Reports recent experiences with the publishing, via the Internet and WWW of ISI's biweekly newspaper, The Scientist; which was originally mounted on the NSFnet. Compares the use of the Internet for SDI by comparing Web searches via AltaVista with similar searches on CD-ROM. Predicts that future current awareness services and SDI services will be linked to electronic periodicals in electronic libraries. Concludes with a note on cited reference searching, a variation on the theme of hypertext searching, with particular reference to SCI and Web crawlers
    Source
    Towards a worldwide library: a ten year forecast. Proceedings of the 19th International Essen Symposium, 23-26 Sept 1996. Ed.: A.H. Helal u. J.W. Weiss
    Type
    a
  19. Huang, S.; Qian, J.; Huang, Y.; Lu, W.; Bu, Y.; Yang, J.; Cheng, Q.: Disclosing the relationship between citation structure and future impact of a publication (2022) 0.01 
    0.01208285 = product of:
  0.030207124 = sum of:
    0.005970713 = weight(_text_:a in 621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005970713 = score(doc=621,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.035428695 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.1685276 = fieldWeight in 621, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=621)
    0.02423641 = weight(_text_:j in 621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02423641 = score(doc=621,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09763223 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.2482419 = fieldWeight in 621, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=621)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Each section header of an article has its distinct communicative function. Citations from distinct sections may be different regarding citing motivation. In this paper, we grouped section headers with similar functions as a structural function and defined the distribution of citations from structural functions for a paper as its citation structure. We aim to explore the relationship between citation structure and the future impact of a publication and disclose the relative importance among citations from different structural functions. Specifically, we proposed two citation counting methods and a citation life cycle identification method, by which the regression data were built. Subsequently, we employed a ridge regression model to predict the future impact of the paper and analyzed the relative weights of regressors. Based on documents collected from the Association for Computational Linguistics Anthology website, our empirical experiments disclosed that functional structure features improve the prediction accuracy of citation count prediction and that there exist differences among citations from different structural functions. Specifically, at the early stage of citation lifetime, citations from Introduction and Method are particularly important for perceiving future impact of papers, and citations from Result and Conclusion are also vital. However, early accumulation of citations from the Background seems less important.
    Type
    a
  20. Feitelson, D.G.; Yovel, U.: Predictive ranking of computer scientists using CiteSeer data (2004) 0.01 
    0.011978924 = product of:
  0.02994731 = sum of:
    0.0044680727 = weight(_text_:a in 1259) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0044680727 = score(doc=1259,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.035428695 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 1259, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1259)
    0.025479238 = weight(_text_:u in 1259) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025479238 = score(doc=1259,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10061107 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03072615 = queryNorm
        0.25324488 = fieldWeight in 1259, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1259)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The increasing availability of digital libraries with cross-citation data on the Internet enables new studies in bibliometrics. The paper focuses on the list of 10.000 top-cited authors in computer science available as part of CiteSeer. Using data from several consecutive lists a model of how authors accrue citations with time is constructed. By comparing the rate at which individual authors accrue citations with the average rate, predictions are made of how their ranking in the list will change in the future.
    Type
    a

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 237
  • d 38
  • chi 2
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 272
  • el 8
  • m 4
  • s 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications