-
Leydesdorff, L.; Bornmann, L.: Mapping (USPTO) patent data using overlays to Google Maps (2012)
0.00
0.0044597755 = product of:
0.017839102 = sum of:
0.017839102 = weight(_text_:information in 288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017839102 = score(doc=288,freq=6.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 288, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=288)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- A technique is developed using patent information available online (at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office) for the generation of Google Maps. The overlays indicate both the quantity and the quality of patents at the city level. This information is relevant for research questions in technology analysis, innovation studies, and evolutionary economics, as well as economic geography. The resulting maps can also be relevant for technological innovation policies and research and development management, because the U.S. market can be considered the leading market for patenting and patent competition. In addition to the maps, the routines provide quantitative data about the patents for statistical analysis. The cities on the map are colored according to the results of significance tests. The overlays are explored for the Netherlands as a "national system of innovations" and further elaborated in two cases of emerging technologies: ribonucleic acid interference (RNAi) and nanotechnology.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.7, S.1442-1458
-
Bornmann, L.: Complex tasks and simple solutions : the use of heuristics in the evaluation of research (2015)
0.00
0.0042914203 = product of:
0.017165681 = sum of:
0.017165681 = weight(_text_:information in 8911) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017165681 = score(doc=8911,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 8911, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=8911)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.8, S.1738-1739
-
Bauer, J.; Leydesdorff, L.; Bornmann, L.: Highly cited papers in Library and Information Science (LIS) : authors, institutions, and network structures (2016)
0.00
0.0042914203 = product of:
0.017165681 = sum of:
0.017165681 = weight(_text_:information in 3231) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017165681 = score(doc=3231,freq=8.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 3231, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3231)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- As a follow-up to the highly cited authors list published by Thomson Reuters in June 2014, we analyzed the top 1% most frequently cited papers published between 2002 and 2012 included in the Web of Science (WoS) subject category "Information Science & Library Science." In all, 798 authors contributed to 305 top 1% publications; these authors were employed at 275 institutions. The authors at Harvard University contributed the largest number of papers, when the addresses are whole-number counted. However, Leiden University leads the ranking if fractional counting is used. Twenty-three of the 798 authors were also listed as most highly cited authors by Thomson Reuters in June 2014 (http://highlycited.com/). Twelve of these 23 authors were involved in publishing 4 or more of the 305 papers under study. Analysis of coauthorship relations among the 798 highly cited scientists shows that coauthorships are based on common interests in a specific topic. Three topics were important between 2002 and 2012: (a) collection and exploitation of information in clinical practices; (b) use of the Internet in public communication and commerce; and (c) scientometrics.
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.12, S.3095-3100
-
Egghe, L.; Bornmann, L.: Fallout and miss in journal peer review (2013)
0.00
0.00424829 = product of:
0.01699316 = sum of:
0.01699316 = weight(_text_:information in 1759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01699316 = score(doc=1759,freq=4.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 1759, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1759)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Purpose - The authors exploit the analogy between journal peer review and information retrieval in order to quantify some imperfections of journal peer review. Design/methodology/approach - The authors define fallout rate and missing rate in order to describe quantitatively the weak papers that were accepted and the strong papers that were missed, respectively. To assess the quality of manuscripts the authors use bibliometric measures. Findings - Fallout rate and missing rate are put in relation with the hitting rate and success rate. Conclusions are drawn on what fraction of weak papers will be accepted in order to have a certain fraction of strong accepted papers. Originality/value - The paper illustrates that these curves are new in peer review research when interpreted in the information retrieval terminology.
-
Bornmann, L.: What is societal impact of research and how can it be assessed? : a literature survey (2013)
0.00
0.0036413912 = product of:
0.014565565 = sum of:
0.014565565 = weight(_text_:information in 606) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014565565 = score(doc=606,freq=4.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 606, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=606)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Series
- Advances in information science
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.2, S.217-233
-
Bornmann, L.; Haunschild, R.: Overlay maps based on Mendeley data : the use of altmetrics for readership networks (2016)
0.00
0.0036413912 = product of:
0.014565565 = sum of:
0.014565565 = weight(_text_:information in 3230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014565565 = score(doc=3230,freq=4.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 3230, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3230)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Visualization of scientific results using networks has become popular in scientometric research. We provide base maps for Mendeley reader count data using the publication year 2012 from the Web of Science data. Example networks are shown and explained. The reader can use our base maps to visualize other results with the VOSViewer. The proposed overlay maps are able to show the impact of publications in terms of readership data. The advantage of using our base maps is that it is not necessary for the user to produce a network based on all data (e.g., from 1 year), but can collect the Mendeley data for a single institution (or journals, topics) and can match them with our already produced information. Generation of such large-scale networks is still a demanding task despite the available computer power and digital data availability. Therefore, it is very useful to have base maps and create the network with the overlay technique.
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.12, S.3064-3072
-
Bornmann, L.; Bauer, J.: Which of the world's institutions employ the most highly cited researchers : an analysis of the data from highlycited.com (2015)
0.00
0.0034331365 = product of:
0.013732546 = sum of:
0.013732546 = weight(_text_:information in 1556) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013732546 = score(doc=1556,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 1556, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1556)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.10, S.2146-2148
-
Bornmann, L.; Bauer, J.: Which of the world's institutions employ the most highly cited researchers : an analysis of the data from highlycited.com (2015)
0.00
0.0034331365 = product of:
0.013732546 = sum of:
0.013732546 = weight(_text_:information in 2223) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013732546 = score(doc=2223,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 2223, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2223)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.10, S.2146-2148
-
Bornmann, L.; Mutz, R.: Growth rates of modern science : a bibliometric analysis based on the number of publications and cited references (2015)
0.00
0.0030344925 = product of:
0.01213797 = sum of:
0.01213797 = weight(_text_:information in 2261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01213797 = score(doc=2261,freq=4.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 2261, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2261)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Many studies (in information science) have looked at the growth of science. In this study, we reexamine the question of the growth of science. To do this we (a) use current data up to publication year 2012 and (b) analyze the data across all disciplines and also separately for the natural sciences and for the medical and health sciences. Furthermore, the data were analyzed with an advanced statistical technique-segmented regression analysis-which can identify specific segments with similar growth rates in the history of science. The study is based on two different sets of bibliometric data: (a) the number of publications held as source items in the Web of Science (WoS, Thomson Reuters) per publication year and (b) the number of cited references in the publications of the source items per cited reference year. We looked at the rate at which science has grown since the mid-1600s. In our analysis of cited references we identified three essential growth phases in the development of science, which each led to growth rates tripling in comparison with the previous phase: from less than 1% up to the middle of the 18th century, to 2 to 3% up to the period between the two world wars, and 8 to 9% to 2010.
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.11, S.2215-2222
-
Bornmann, L.; Daniel, H.-D.: What do we know about the h index? (2007)
0.00
0.0030039945 = product of:
0.012015978 = sum of:
0.012015978 = weight(_text_:information in 477) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012015978 = score(doc=477,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 477, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=477)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.9, S.1381-1385
-
Bornmann, L.; Marx, W.: Distributions instead of single numbers : percentiles and beam plots for the assessment of single researchers (2014)
0.00
0.0030039945 = product of:
0.012015978 = sum of:
0.012015978 = weight(_text_:information in 1190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012015978 = score(doc=1190,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 1190, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1190)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.1, S.206-208
-
Marx, W.; Bornmann, L.; Barth, A.; Leydesdorff, L.: Detecting the historical roots of research fields by reference publication year spectroscopy (RPYS) (2014)
0.00
0.0030039945 = product of:
0.012015978 = sum of:
0.012015978 = weight(_text_:information in 1238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012015978 = score(doc=1238,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 1238, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1238)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.4, S.751-764
-
Bornmann, L.; Marx, W.: ¬The wisdom of citing scientists (2014)
0.00
0.0030039945 = product of:
0.012015978 = sum of:
0.012015978 = weight(_text_:information in 1293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012015978 = score(doc=1293,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 1293, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1293)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.6, S.1288-1292
-
Bornmann, L.: How well does a university perform in comparison with its peers? : The use of odds, and odds ratios, for the comparison of institutional citation impact using the Leiden Rankings (2015)
0.00
0.0030039945 = product of:
0.012015978 = sum of:
0.012015978 = weight(_text_:information in 2340) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012015978 = score(doc=2340,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 2340, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2340)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.12, S.2711-2713
-
Bornmann, L.; Haunschild, R.: Relative Citation Ratio (RCR) : an empirical attempt to study a new field-normalized bibliometric indicator (2017)
0.00
0.0030039945 = product of:
0.012015978 = sum of:
0.012015978 = weight(_text_:information in 3541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012015978 = score(doc=3541,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 3541, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3541)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 68(2017) no.4, S.1064-1067
-
Leydesdorff, L.; Bornmann, L.; Mutz, R.; Opthof, T.: Turning the tables on citation analysis one more time : principles for comparing sets of documents (2011)
0.00
0.0025748524 = product of:
0.01029941 = sum of:
0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 4485) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01029941 = score(doc=4485,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4485, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4485)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.7, S.1370-1381
-
Bornmann, L.; Leydesdorff, L.: Which cities produce more excellent papers than can be expected? : a new mapping approach, using Google Maps, based on statistical significance testing (2011)
0.00
0.0025748524 = product of:
0.01029941 = sum of:
0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 4767) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01029941 = score(doc=4767,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4767, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4767)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.10, S.1954-1962
-
Leydesdorff, L.; Radicchi, F.; Bornmann, L.; Castellano, C.; Nooy, W. de: Field-normalized impact factors (IFs) : a comparison of rescaling and fractionally counted IFs (2013)
0.00
0.0025748524 = product of:
0.01029941 = sum of:
0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 1108) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01029941 = score(doc=1108,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 1108, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1108)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.11, S.2299-2309
-
Bornmann, L.; Moya Anegón, F. de; Mutz, R.: Do universities or research institutions with a specific subject profile have an advantage or a disadvantage in institutional rankings? (2013)
0.00
0.0025748524 = product of:
0.01029941 = sum of:
0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 1109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01029941 = score(doc=1109,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 1109, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1109)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.11, S.2310-2316
-
Bornmann, L.: Interrater reliability and convergent validity of F1000Prime peer review (2015)
0.00
0.0025748524 = product of:
0.01029941 = sum of:
0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 2328) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01029941 = score(doc=2328,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2328, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2328)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.12, S.2415-2426
