-
Bornmann, L.; Mutz, R.: From P100 to P100' : a new citation-rank approach (2014)
0.02
0.02052752 = product of:
0.04105504 = sum of:
0.013732546 = weight(_text_:information in 1431) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013732546 = score(doc=1431,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 1431, 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=1431)
0.027322493 = product of:
0.054644987 = sum of:
0.054644987 = weight(_text_:22 in 1431) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054644987 = score(doc=1431,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1431, 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=1431)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Date
- 22. 8.2014 17:05:18
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.9, S.1939-1943
-
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
-
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.; 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.; Mutz, R.; Daniel, H.-D.: Are there better indices for evaluation purposes than the h index? : a comparison of nine different variants of the h index using data from biomedicine (2008)
0.00
0.0021457102 = product of:
0.008582841 = sum of:
0.008582841 = weight(_text_:information in 1608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008582841 = score(doc=1608,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 1608, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1608)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.5, S.830-837
-
Bornmann, L.; Mutz, R.; Daniel, H.D.: Do we need the h index and its variants in addition to standard bibliometric measures? (2009)
0.00
0.0021457102 = product of:
0.008582841 = sum of:
0.008582841 = weight(_text_:information in 2861) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008582841 = score(doc=2861,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 2861, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2861)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.6, S.1286-1289
-
Bornmann, L.; Mutz, R.; Daniel, H.-D.: Multilevel-statistical reformulation of citation-based university rankings : the Leiden ranking 2011/2012 (2013)
0.00
0.0021457102 = product of:
0.008582841 = sum of:
0.008582841 = weight(_text_:information in 1007) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008582841 = score(doc=1007,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 1007, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1007)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.8, S.1649-1658
-
Mutz, R.; Bornmann, L.; Daniel, H.-D.: Testing for the fairness and predictive validity of research funding decisions : a multilevel multiple imputation for missing data approach using ex-ante and ex-post peer evaluation data from the Austrian science fund (2015)
0.00
0.0021457102 = product of:
0.008582841 = sum of:
0.008582841 = weight(_text_:information in 2270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008582841 = score(doc=2270,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.050415643 = queryNorm
0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 2270, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2270)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.11, S.2321-2339
