-
Bertoli-Barsotti, L.: Improving a decomposition of the h-index (2013)
0.03
0.026986716 = product of:
0.13493358 = sum of:
0.13493358 = sum of:
0.048023015 = weight(_text_:h in 976) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048023015 = score(doc=976,freq=4.0), product of:
0.10309036 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.4658342 = fieldWeight in 976, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=976)
0.08691056 = weight(_text_:l in 976) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08691056 = score(doc=976,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16492525 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.52696943 = fieldWeight in 976, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=976)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
- Object
- h-index
-
Herb, U.; Geith, U.: Kriterien der qualitativen Bewertung wissenschaftlicher Publikationen : Befunde aus dem Projekt visOA (2020)
0.03
0.026772693 = product of:
0.06693173 = sum of:
0.055612598 = weight(_text_:u in 108) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055612598 = score(doc=108,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13587062 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.40930554 = fieldWeight in 108, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=108)
0.011319133 = product of:
0.022638267 = sum of:
0.022638267 = weight(_text_:h in 108) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022638267 = score(doc=108,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10309036 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.21959636 = fieldWeight in 108, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=108)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Source
- Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 71(2020) H.2/3, S.77-85
-
Nah, I.W.; Kang, D.-S.; Lee, D.-H.; Chung, Y.-C.: ¬A bibliometric evaluation of research performance in different subject categories (2009)
0.03
0.026738355 = product of:
0.06684589 = sum of:
0.009904242 = product of:
0.019808484 = sum of:
0.019808484 = weight(_text_:h in 2772) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019808484 = score(doc=2772,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10309036 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.19214681 = fieldWeight in 2772, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2772)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.056941643 = product of:
0.11388329 = sum of:
0.11388329 = weight(_text_:lee in 2772) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11388329 = score(doc=2772,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24718519 = queryWeight, product of:
5.957094 = idf(docFreq=310, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.4607205 = fieldWeight in 2772, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.957094 = idf(docFreq=310, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2772)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
-
Hayer, L.: Lazarsfeld zitiert : eine bibliometrische Analyse (2008)
0.03
0.02576656 = product of:
0.0644164 = sum of:
0.050361652 = sum of:
0.014148918 = weight(_text_:h in 1934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014148918 = score(doc=1934,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10309036 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.13724773 = fieldWeight in 1934, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1934)
0.036212735 = weight(_text_:l in 1934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036212735 = score(doc=1934,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16492525 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.2195706 = fieldWeight in 1934, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1934)
0.014054747 = product of:
0.028109495 = sum of:
0.028109495 = weight(_text_:22 in 1934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028109495 = score(doc=1934,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14530581 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1934, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1934)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Date
- 22. 6.2008 12:54:12
- Source
- Mitteilungen der Vereinigung Österreichischer Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare. 61(2008) H.2, S.14-20
-
Ye, F.Y.; Yu, S.S.; Leydesdorff, L.: ¬The Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations at the country level and its dynamic evolution under the pressures of globalization (2013)
0.03
0.025374835 = product of:
0.06343709 = sum of:
0.04170945 = weight(_text_:u in 1110) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04170945 = score(doc=1110,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13587062 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.30697915 = fieldWeight in 1110, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1110)
0.02172764 = product of:
0.04345528 = sum of:
0.04345528 = weight(_text_:l in 1110) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04345528 = score(doc=1110,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16492525 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.26348472 = fieldWeight in 1110, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1110)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Using data from the Web of Science (WoS), we analyze the mutual information among university, industry, and government addresses (U-I-G) at the country level for a number of countries. The dynamic evolution of the Triple Helix can thus be compared among developed and developing nations in terms of cross-sectional coauthorship relations. The results show that the Triple Helix interactions among the three subsystems U-I-G become less intensive over time, but unequally for different countries. We suggest that globalization erodes local Triple Helix relations and thus can be expected to have increased differentiation in national systems since the mid-1990s. This effect of globalization is more pronounced in developed countries than in developing ones. In the dynamic analysis, we focus on a more detailed comparison between China and the United States. Specifically, the Chinese Academy of the (Social) Sciences is changing increasingly from a public research institute to an academic one, and this has a measurable effect on China's position in the globalization.
-
Stock, W.: Informetrische Vermessung der Forschung und Entwicklung eines Landes : beispielhafte Resultate und Probleme (1992)
0.03
0.025321592 = product of:
0.06330398 = sum of:
0.049155056 = weight(_text_:u in 342) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049155056 = score(doc=342,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13587062 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.3617784 = fieldWeight in 342, 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=342)
0.014148918 = product of:
0.028297836 = sum of:
0.028297836 = weight(_text_:h in 342) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028297836 = score(doc=342,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10309036 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.27449545 = fieldWeight in 342, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=342)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Source
- Information und Dokumentation in den 90er Jahren: neue Herausforderung, neue Technologien. Deutscher Dokumentartag 1991, Universität Ulm, 30.9.-2.10.1991. Hrsg.: W. Neubauer u. K.-H. Meier
-
Kim, P.J.; Lee, J.Y.; Park, J.-H.: Developing a new collection-evaluation method : mapping and the user-side h-index (2009)
0.03
0.025217602 = product of:
0.063044004 = sum of:
0.022371402 = product of:
0.044742804 = sum of:
0.044742804 = weight(_text_:h in 3171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.044742804 = score(doc=3171,freq=20.0), product of:
0.10309036 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.4340154 = fieldWeight in 3171, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3171)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.0406726 = product of:
0.0813452 = sum of:
0.0813452 = weight(_text_:lee in 3171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0813452 = score(doc=3171,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24718519 = queryWeight, product of:
5.957094 = idf(docFreq=310, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.32908607 = fieldWeight in 3171, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.957094 = idf(docFreq=310, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3171)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- This study proposes a new visualization method and index for collection evaluation. Specifically, it develops a network-based mapping technique and a user-focused Hirsch index (user-side h-index) given the lack of previous studies on collection evaluation methods that have used the h-index. A user-side h-index is developed and compared with previous indices (use factor, difference of percentages, collection-side h-index) that represent the strengths of the subject classes of a library collection. The mapping procedure includes the subject-usage profiling of 63 subject classes and collection-usage map generations through the pathfinder network algorithm. Cluster analyses are then conducted upon the pathfinder network to generate 5 large and 14 small clusters. The nodes represent the strengths of the subject-class usages reflected by the user-side h-index. The user-side h-index was found to have advantages (e.g., better demonstrating the real utility of each subject class) over the other indices. It also can more clearly distinguish the strengths between the subject classes than can collection-side h-index. These results may help to identify actual usage and strengths of subject classes in library collections through visualized maps. This may be a useful rationale for the establishment of the collection-development plan.
- Object
- h-index
-
Scholarly metrics under the microscope : from citation analysis to academic auditing (2015)
0.02
0.024724657 = product of:
0.06181164 = sum of:
0.039324045 = weight(_text_:u in 4654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.039324045 = score(doc=4654,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13587062 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.28942272 = fieldWeight in 4654, 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=4654)
0.022487596 = product of:
0.04497519 = sum of:
0.04497519 = weight(_text_:22 in 4654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04497519 = score(doc=4654,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14530581 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4654, 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=4654)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Date
- 22. 1.2017 17:12:50
- Editor
- Cronin, B. u. C.R. Sugimoto
-
Egghe, L.: ¬The Hirsch index and related impact measures (2010)
0.02
0.024173593 = product of:
0.12086796 = sum of:
0.12086796 = sum of:
0.0339574 = weight(_text_:h in 1597) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0339574 = score(doc=1597,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10309036 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.32939452 = fieldWeight in 1597, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1597)
0.08691056 = weight(_text_:l in 1597) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08691056 = score(doc=1597,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16492525 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.52696943 = fieldWeight in 1597, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1597)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
- Object
- h-index
-
Egghe, L.; Liang, L.; Rousseau, R.: ¬A relation between h-index and impact factor in the power-law model (2009)
0.02
0.022791084 = product of:
0.113955416 = sum of:
0.113955416 = sum of:
0.032015346 = weight(_text_:h in 6759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032015346 = score(doc=6759,freq=4.0), product of:
0.10309036 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.31055614 = fieldWeight in 6759, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6759)
0.08194007 = weight(_text_:l in 6759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08194007 = score(doc=6759,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16492525 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.49683157 = fieldWeight in 6759, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6759)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
- Object
- h-index
-
Egghe, L.: Dynamic h-index : the Hirsch index in function of time (2007)
0.02
0.021712217 = product of:
0.10856108 = sum of:
0.10856108 = sum of:
0.050620705 = weight(_text_:h in 147) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050620705 = score(doc=147,freq=10.0), product of:
0.10309036 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.4910324 = fieldWeight in 147, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=147)
0.05794038 = weight(_text_:l in 147) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05794038 = score(doc=147,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16492525 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.35131297 = fieldWeight in 147, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=147)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
- Abstract
- When there are a group of articles and the present time is fixed we can determine the unique number h being the number of articles that received h or more citations while the other articles received a number of citations which is not larger than h. In this article, the time dependence of the h-index is determined. This is important to describe the expected career evolution of a scientist's work or of a journal's production in a fixed year.
-
Bornmann, L.; Daniel, H.-D.: What do we know about the h index? (2007)
0.02
0.021344937 = product of:
0.10672469 = sum of:
0.10672469 = sum of:
0.056026854 = weight(_text_:h in 477) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056026854 = score(doc=477,freq=16.0), product of:
0.10309036 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.54347324 = fieldWeight in 477, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=477)
0.050697833 = weight(_text_:l in 477) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050697833 = score(doc=477,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16492525 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.30739886 = fieldWeight in 477, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=477)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
- Abstract
- Jorge Hirsch recently proposed the h index to quantify the research output of individual scientists. The new index has attracted a lot of attention in the scientific community. The claim that the h index in a single number provides a good representation of the scientific lifetime achievement of a scientist as well as the (supposed) simple calculation of the h index using common literature databases lead to the danger of improper use of the index. We describe the advantages and disadvantages of the h index and summarize the studies on the convergent validity of this index. We also introduce corrections and complements as well as single-number alternatives to the h index.
- Object
- H-Index
-
Bornmann, L.; Mutz, R.: From P100 to P100' : a new citation-rank approach (2014)
0.02
0.020583114 = product of:
0.051457785 = sum of:
0.02897019 = product of:
0.05794038 = sum of:
0.05794038 = weight(_text_:l in 1431) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05794038 = score(doc=1431,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16492525 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.35131297 = fieldWeight in 1431, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1431)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.022487596 = product of:
0.04497519 = sum of:
0.04497519 = weight(_text_:22 in 1431) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04497519 = score(doc=1431,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14530581 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = 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)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Date
- 22. 8.2014 17:05:18
-
Shi, D.; Rousseau, R.; Yang, L.; Li, J.: ¬A journal's impact factor is influenced by changes in publication delays of citing journals (2017)
0.02
0.020488268 = product of:
0.05122067 = sum of:
0.029493032 = weight(_text_:u in 3441) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029493032 = score(doc=3441,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13587062 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.21706703 = fieldWeight in 3441, 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=3441)
0.02172764 = product of:
0.04345528 = sum of:
0.04345528 = weight(_text_:l in 3441) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04345528 = score(doc=3441,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16492525 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.26348472 = fieldWeight in 3441, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3441)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- In this article we describe another problem with journal impact factors by showing that one journal's impact factor is dependent on other journals' publication delays. The proposed theoretical model predicts a monotonically decreasing function of the impact factor as a function of publication delay, on condition that the citation curve of the journal is monotone increasing during the publication window used in the calculation of the journal impact factor; otherwise, this function has a reversed U shape. Our findings based on simulations are verified by examining three journals in the information sciences: the Journal of Informetrics, Scientometrics, and the Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology.
-
Jeong, S.; Lee, S.; Kim, H.-G.: Are you an invited speaker? : a bibliometric analysis of elite groups for scholarly events in bioinformatics (2009)
0.02
0.020270959 = product of:
0.050677396 = sum of:
0.010004795 = product of:
0.02000959 = sum of:
0.02000959 = weight(_text_:h in 2847) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02000959 = score(doc=2847,freq=4.0), product of:
0.10309036 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.1940976 = fieldWeight in 2847, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2847)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.0406726 = product of:
0.0813452 = sum of:
0.0813452 = weight(_text_:lee in 2847) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0813452 = score(doc=2847,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24718519 = queryWeight, product of:
5.957094 = idf(docFreq=310, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.32908607 = fieldWeight in 2847, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.957094 = idf(docFreq=310, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2847)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Participating in scholarly events (e.g., conferences, workshops, etc.) as an elite-group member such as an organizing committee chair or member, program committee chair or member, session chair, invited speaker, or award winner is beneficial to a researcher's career development. The objective of this study is to investigate whether elite-group membership for scholarly events is representative of scholars' prominence, and which elite group is the most prestigious. We collected data about 15 global (excluding regional) bioinformatics scholarly events held in 2007. We sampled (via stratified random sampling) participants from elite groups in each event. Then, bibliometric indicators (total citations and h index) of seven elite groups and a non-elite group, consisting of authors who submitted at least one paper to an event but were not included in any elite group, were observed using the Scopus Citation Tracker. The Kruskal-Wallis test was performed to examine the differences among the eight groups. Multiple comparison tests (Dwass, Steel, Critchlow-Fligner) were conducted as follow-up procedures. The experimental results reveal that scholars in an elite group have better performance in bibliometric indicators than do others. Among the elite groups, the invited speaker group has statistically significantly the best performance while the other elite-group types are not significantly distinguishable. From this analysis, we confirm that elite-group membership in scholarly events, at least in the field of bioinformatics, can be utilized as an alternative marker for a scholar's prominence, with invited speaker being the most important prominence indicator among the elite groups.
-
Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.: ¬The Hirsch index of a shifted Lotka function and its relation with the impact factor (2012)
0.02
0.019843703 = product of:
0.09921851 = sum of:
0.09921851 = sum of:
0.048520677 = weight(_text_:h in 243) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048520677 = score(doc=243,freq=12.0), product of:
0.10309036 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.47066164 = fieldWeight in 243, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=243)
0.050697833 = weight(_text_:l in 243) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050697833 = score(doc=243,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16492525 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.30739886 = fieldWeight in 243, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=243)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
- Abstract
- Based on earlier results about the shifted Lotka function, we prove an implicit functional relation between the Hirsch index (h-index) and the total number of sources (T). It is shown that the corresponding function, h(T), is concavely increasing. Next, we construct an implicit relation between the h-index and the impact factor IF (an average number of items per source). The corresponding function h(IF) is increasing and we show that if the parameter C in the numerator of the shifted Lotka function is high, then the relation between the h-index and the impact factor is almost linear.
- Object
- h-index
-
Waltman, L.; Eck, N.J. van: ¬The inconsistency of the h-index : the case of web accessibility in Western European countries (2012)
0.02
0.01942933 = product of:
0.097146645 = sum of:
0.097146645 = sum of:
0.053691365 = weight(_text_:h in 40) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.053691365 = score(doc=40,freq=20.0), product of:
0.10309036 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.5208185 = fieldWeight in 40, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=40)
0.04345528 = weight(_text_:l in 40) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04345528 = score(doc=40,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16492525 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.26348472 = fieldWeight in 40, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=40)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
- Abstract
- The h-index is a popular bibliometric indicator for assessing individual scientists. We criticize the h-index from a theoretical point of view. We argue that for the purpose of measuring the overall scientific impact of a scientist (or some other unit of analysis), the h-index behaves in a counterintuitive way. In certain cases, the mechanism used by the h-index to aggregate publication and citation statistics into a single number leads to inconsistencies in the way in which scientists are ranked. Our conclusion is that the h-index cannot be considered an appropriate indicator of a scientist's overall scientific impact. Based on recent theoretical insights, we discuss what kind of indicators can be used as an alternative to the h-index. We pay special attention to the highly cited publications indicator. This indicator has a lot in common with the h-index, but unlike the h-index it does not produce inconsistent rankings.
- Object
- h-index
-
Leydesdorff, L.; Bornmann, L.; Wagner, C.S.: ¬The relative influences of government funding and international collaboration on citation impact (2019)
0.02
0.01903729 = product of:
0.04759322 = sum of:
0.030727526 = product of:
0.061455052 = sum of:
0.061455052 = weight(_text_:l in 4681) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.061455052 = score(doc=4681,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16492525 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.37262368 = fieldWeight in 4681, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4681)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.016865695 = product of:
0.03373139 = sum of:
0.03373139 = weight(_text_:22 in 4681) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03373139 = score(doc=4681,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14530581 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4681, 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=4681)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Date
- 8. 1.2019 18:22:45
-
Egghe, L.: ¬The influence of transformations on the h-index and the g-index (2008)
0.02
0.01899819 = product of:
0.094990954 = sum of:
0.094990954 = sum of:
0.044293117 = weight(_text_:h in 1881) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.044293117 = score(doc=1881,freq=10.0), product of:
0.10309036 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.42965335 = fieldWeight in 1881, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1881)
0.050697833 = weight(_text_:l in 1881) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050697833 = score(doc=1881,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16492525 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.30739886 = fieldWeight in 1881, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1881)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
- Abstract
- In a previous article, we introduced a general transformation on sources and one on items in an arbitrary information production process (IPP). In this article, we investigate the influence of these transformations on the h-index and on the g-index. General formulae that describe this influence are presented. These are applied to the case that the size-frequency function is Lotkaian (i.e., is a decreasing power function). We further show that the h-index of the transformed IPP belongs to the interval bounded by the two transformations of the h-index of the original IPP, and we also show that this property is not true for the g-index.
- Object
- h-index
-
Raan, A.F.J. van: Scaling rules in the science system : influence of field-specific citation characteristics on the impact of research groups (2008)
0.02
0.018543491 = product of:
0.046358727 = sum of:
0.029493032 = weight(_text_:u in 2758) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029493032 = score(doc=2758,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13587062 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.21706703 = fieldWeight in 2758, 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=2758)
0.016865695 = product of:
0.03373139 = sum of:
0.03373139 = weight(_text_:22 in 2758) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03373139 = score(doc=2758,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14530581 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041494254 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2758, 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=2758)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Date
- 22. 3.2009 19:03:12
- Footnote
- Vgl. auch: Costas, R., M. Bordons u. T.N. van Leeuwen u.a.: Scaling rules in the science system: Influence of field-specific citation characteristics on the impact of individual researchers. In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.4, S.740-753.
