Search (402 results, page 1 of 21)

0.039301746 = product of:
  0.07860349 = sum of:
    0.07265442 = weight(_text_:digitale in 875) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07265442 = score(doc=875,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.18027179 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.158747 = idf(docFreq=690, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.40302712 = fieldWeight in 875, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.158747 = idf(docFreq=690, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=875)
    0.0059490725 = weight(_text_:information in 875) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0059490725 = score(doc=875,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 875, 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=875)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Die Bereitstellung und Nutzung digitaler Bibliotheken entwickelt sich allmählich zum Standard der Literatur und Informationsversorgung in Wissenschaft und Forschung. Ganzen Disziplinen genügt oftmals die verfügbare digitale Information, Printmedien werden besonders im STM-Segment zu einem Nischenprodukt. Digitale Texte können beliebig eingebaut, kopiert und nachgenutzt werden, die Verlinkung zwischen Metadaten und Volltexten bringt weitere Nutzungsvorteile. Dabei sind die Angebote von Digital Libraries Bestandteil eines ganzheitlichen digitalen Ansatzes, wonach die elektronische Informations- und Literaturversorgung integraler Bestandteil von E-Science (Enhanced Science) oder Cyberinfrastructure darstellt. Hierbei verschmelzen dann Produktion, Diskussion, Distribution und Rezeption der wissenschaftlichen Inhalte auf einer einzigen digitalen Plattform. Damit sind dann nicht nur die Literatur- und Informationsversorgung (Digital Libraries), sondern auch die Wissenschaft selbst digital geworden. Diese dramatische Veränderung in der Wissenschaftskommunikation hat direkte Auswirkungen auf die Messung der Wissenschaftskommunikation, also auf die Evaluation von wissenschaftlichem Output. Bisherige Systeme der Wissenschaftsvermessung basieren hauptsächlich auf bibliometrischen Analysen, d.h. der Quantifizierung des Outputs und dessen Rezeption (Zitierhäufigkeit). Basis dafür sind insbesondere im STM-Bereich die international anerkannten Datenbanken des ISI (Thomson Scientific) insbesondere der Science Citation Index, SCI) oder vielleicht zukünftig das Konkurrenzprodukt SCOPUS des Wissenschaftskonzerns Reed Elsevier. Die Digitalisierung der Wissenschaft in ihrem kompletten Lebenszyklus, die zunehmende Nutzung und Akzeptanz von Dokumentenrepositorien, Institutsservern und anderen elektronischen Publikationsformen im Rahmen von E-Science erfordern und ermöglichen zugleich den Nachweis von Output und Rezeption durch neue bibliometrische Formen, etwa der Webometrie (Webmetrics). Im vorliegenden Paper haben wir hierzu Analysen durchgeführt und stellen eine Abschätzung vor, wie sich der Anteil von webometrisch erfassbarer und zugänglicher wissenschaftlicher Literatur im Vergleich zu Literatur, die mit den Standardsystemen nachgewiesen werden kann im Laufe der letzten Jahre verändert hat. Dabei haben wir unterschiedliche Disziplinen und Länder berücksichtigt. Zudem wird ein Vergleich der webometrischen Nachweisqualität so unterschiedlicher Systeme wie SCI, SCOPUS und Google Scholar vorgestellt.

0.0065844175 = product of:
  0.02633767 = sum of:
    0.02633767 = weight(_text_:information in 3816) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02633767 = score(doc=3816,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.42933714 = fieldWeight in 3816, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3816)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Information scattering is an often observed phenomenon related to information collections where there are a few sources that have many items of relevant information about a topic, while most sources have only a few. This entry discusses the original discovery of the phenomenon, the types of information scattering observed across many different information collections, methods that have been used to analyze the phenomenon, explanations for why and how information scattering occurs, and how these results have informed the design of systems and search strategies. The entry concludes with future challenges related to building computational models to more precisely describe the process of information scatter, and algorithms which help users to gather highly scattered information.

Source

Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed. Ed.: M.J. Bates

0.006182458 = product of:
  0.024729831 = sum of:
    0.024729831 = weight(_text_:information in 4589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024729831 = score(doc=4589,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.40312737 = fieldWeight in 4589, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4589)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The author demonstrates how informetric analysis of information retrieval system content and use provides valuable insights that have applications for the modelling, design, and evaluation of information retrieval systems.

0.0053541656 = product of:
  0.021416662 = sum of:
    0.021416662 = weight(_text_:information in 817) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021416662 = score(doc=817,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.34911853 = fieldWeight in 817, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=817)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

A scientometric model (ISI-S model) is introduced for describing the institutionalization process of scientific information. The central concept of ISI-S is that the scientific information published may develop with time through permanent evaluation and modification processes toward a cognitive consensus of distinguished authors of the respective scientific field or discipline. ISI-S describes the information and knowledge systems of science as a global network of interdependent information and knowledge clusters that are dynamically changing by their content and size. ISI-S assumes sets of information with short- or long-term impact and information integrated into the basic scientific knowledge or common knowledge. The type of the information sources (e.g., lecture, journal paper, review, monograph, book, textbook, lexicon) and the length of the impact are related to the grade of institutionalization. References are considered as proofs of manifested impact. The relative and absolute development of scientific knowledge seems to be slower than the increase of the number of publications.

Footnote

Artikel in einem Themenheft "Current theory in library and information science"

0.0053210123 = product of:
  0.02128405 = sum of:
    0.02128405 = weight(_text_:information in 3753) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02128405 = score(doc=3753,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.3469568 = fieldWeight in 3753, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3753)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This entry presents an account of the core concerns of information science through such means as definitional sketches, identification of themes, historical notes, and bibliometric evidence, including a citation-based map of 121 prominent information scientists of the twentieth century. The attempt throughout is to give concrete and pithy descriptions, to provide numerous specific examples, and to take a critical view of certain received language and ideas in library and information science.

Source

Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed. Ed.: M.J. Bates

0.0050479556 = product of:
  0.020191822 = sum of:
    0.020191822 = weight(_text_:information in 6487) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020191822 = score(doc=6487,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.3291521 = fieldWeight in 6487, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6487)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Information processing and management. 37(2001) no.6, S.817-842

0.0050479556 = product of:
  0.020191822 = sum of:
    0.020191822 = weight(_text_:information in 2389) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020191822 = score(doc=2389,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.3291521 = fieldWeight in 2389, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2389)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This article analyzes the collaboration trends, authorship and keywords of all research articles published in the Journal of American Society for Information Science and Technology (JASIST). Comparing the articles between two 10-year periods, namely, 1988-1997 and 1998-2007, the three-fold objectives are to analyze the shifts in (a) authors' collaboration trends (b) top authors, their affiliations as well as the pattern of coauthorship among them, and (c) top keywords and the subdisciplines from which they emerge. The findings reveal a distinct tendency towards collaboration among authors, with external collaborations becoming more prevalent. Top authors have grown in diversity from those being affiliated predominantly with library/information-related departments to include those from information systems management, information technology, businesss, and the humanities. Amid heterogeneous clusters of collaboration among top authors, strongly connected cross-disciplinary coauthor pairs have become more prevalent. Correspondingly, the distribution of top keywords' occurrences that leans heavily on core information science has shifted towards other subdisciplines such as information technology and sociobehavioral science.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.13, S.2156-2170

0.004759258 = product of:
  0.019037032 = sum of:
    0.019037032 = weight(_text_:information in 4680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019037032 = score(doc=4680,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.3103276 = fieldWeight in 4680, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4680)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Annual review of information science and technology. 41(2007), S.xxx-xxx

0.004759258 = product of:
  0.019037032 = sum of:
    0.019037032 = weight(_text_:information in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019037032 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.3103276 = fieldWeight in 6091, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6091)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Annual review of information science and technology. 41(2007), S.xxx-xxx

0.004759258 = product of:
  0.019037032 = sum of:
    0.019037032 = weight(_text_:information in 4859) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019037032 = score(doc=4859,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.3103276 = fieldWeight in 4859, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4859)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This paper has a dual character dictated by its twofold purpose. First, it is a speculative historiographic essay containing an attempt to fix the present posotion of library and information science within the context of the probabilisitc revolution that has been encompassing all of science. Second, it comprises a guide to practitioners engaged in statistical research in library and information science

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 51(2000) no.9, S.816-833

0.004759258 = product of:
  0.019037032 = sum of:
    0.019037032 = weight(_text_:information in 3807) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019037032 = score(doc=3807,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.3103276 = fieldWeight in 3807, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3807)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Hertzel marshals a vast amount of information on the origins and development of one of the core areas of information science research-bibliometrics, or, as it is also known, informetrics. The study of the statistical properties of the domain of recorded information is a large field with an extensive body of research results.

Source

Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed. Ed.: M.J. Bates

0.0047219303 = product of:
  0.018887721 = sum of:
    0.018887721 = weight(_text_:information in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018887721 = score(doc=201,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.3078936 = fieldWeight in 201, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=201)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Research patterns could enhance understanding of the Information Systems (IS) field. Citation analysis is the methodology commonly used to determine such research patterns. In this study, the citation methodology is applied to one of the top-ranked Information Systems conferences - International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS). Information is extracted from papers in the proceedings of ICIS 2000 to 2002. A total of 145 base articles and 4,226 citations are used. Research patterns are obtained using total citations, citations per journal or conference, and overlapping citations. We then provide the citation ranking of journals and conferences. We also examine the difference between the citation ranking in this study and the ranking of IS journals and IS conferences in other studies. Based on the comparison, we confirm that IS research is a multidisciplinary research area. We also identify the most cited papers and authors in the IS research area, and the organizations most active in producing papers in the top-rated IS conference. We discuss the findings and implications of the study.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.9, S.1263-1274

0.0047031553 = product of:
  0.018812621 = sum of:
    0.018812621 = weight(_text_:information in 3684) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018812621 = score(doc=3684,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.30666938 = fieldWeight in 3684, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3684)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The rapid development of Web sites providing extensive coverage of a topic, coupled with the development of powerful search engines (designed to help users find such Web sites), suggests that users can easily find comprehensive information about a topic. In domains such as consumer healthcare, finding comprehensive information about a topic is critical as it can improve a patient's judgment in making healthcare decisions, and can encourage higher compliance with treatment. However, recent studies show that despite using powerful search engines, many healthcare information seekers have difficulty finding comprehensive information even for narrow healthcare topics because the relevant information is scattered across many Web sites. To date, no studies have analyzed how facts related to a search topic are distributed across relevant Web pages and Web sites. In this study, the distribution of facts related to five common healthcare topics across high-quality sites is analyzed, and the reasons underlying those distributions are explored. The analysis revealed the existence of few pages that had many facts, many pages that had few facts, and no single page or site that provided all the facts. While such a distribution conforms to other information-related phenomena, a deeper analysis revealed that the distributions were caused by a trade-off between depth and breadth, leading to the existence of general, specialized, and sparse pages. Furthermore, the results helped to make explicit the knowledge needed by searchers to find comprehensive healthcare information, and suggested the motivation to explore distribution-conscious approaches for the development of future search systems, search interfaces, Web page designs, and training.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 56(2005) no.9, S.989-1003

0.0047031553 = product of:
  0.018812621 = sum of:
    0.018812621 = weight(_text_:information in 1079) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018812621 = score(doc=1079,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.30666938 = fieldWeight in 1079, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1079)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Information landscaping--an integration of information mapping, charting, querying and reporting techniques--has been developed to enable the construction of a total quality knowledge management system focusing on a particular subject information field. The techniques apply five major parameters of the Fuzzy commonality model (FCM) including unionization, quantity, continuity or stability, changeability, and critical probability, to construct a series of information maps (infomaps) and a set of chronological-statistical charts (infocharts). The infomaps and infocharts are used as the blueprints and navigation agents for building and developing a web-based subject experts depository and query-report system. Focusing on the subject experts/expertise, this system enables a researcher to expedite a query search through infomaps (qualitative reference) and infocharts (quantitative reference). The entropy measurement and the entropy constant (the square root of the average entropy measure) are calculated to compare with the critical probability of the FCM. This leads to the finding of a set of regression straight lines and the establishment of an information oscillogram. The tropics (upper limit, middle range, lower limit), and the potential/solstitial population and its growth rate within a subject information domain during a particular time period can be determined. They can effectively and efficiently guide librarians and information professionals towards the construction and the continuous development of an electronic collection. The cultivation of a virtual learning and referencing environment can also be created by utilizing this data.

Source

Information processing and management. 39(2003) no.4, S.639-664

0.004608132 = product of:
  0.018432528 = sum of:
    0.018432528 = weight(_text_:information in 76) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018432528 = score(doc=76,freq=30.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.3004734 = fieldWeight in 76, product of:
          5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
            30.0 = termFreq=30.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=76)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

According to Jean M. Tague-Sutcliffe "informetrics" is "the study of the quantitative aspects of information in any form, not just records or bibliographies, and in any social group, not just scientists" (Tague-Sutcliffe, 1992, 1). Leo Egghe also defines "informetrics" in a very broad sense. "(W)e will use the term' informetrics' as the broad term comprising all-metrics studies related to information science, including bibliometrics (bibliographies, libraries,...), scientometrics (science policy, citation analysis, research evaluation,...), webometrics (metrics of the web, the Internet or other social networks such as citation or collaboration networks), ..." (Egghe, 2005b,1311). According to Concepcion S. Wilson "informetrics" is "the quantitative study of collections of moderatesized units of potentially informative text, directed to the scientific understanding of information processes at the social level" (Wilson, 1999, 211). We should add to Wilson's units of text also digital collections of images, videos, spoken documents and music. Dietmar Wolfram divides "informetrics" into two aspects, "system-based characteristics that arise from the documentary content of IR systems and how they are indexed, and usage-based characteristics that arise how users interact with system content and the system interfaces that provide access to the content" (Wolfram, 2003, 6). We would like to follow Tague-Sutcliffe, Egghe, Wilson and Wolfram (and others, for example Björneborn & Ingwersen, 2004) and call this broad research of empirical information science "informetrics". Informetrics includes therefore all quantitative studies in information science. If a scientist performs scientific investigations empirically, e.g. on information users' behavior, on scientific impact of academic journals, on the development of the patent application activity of a company, on links of Web pages, on the temporal distribution of blog postings discussing a given topic, on availability, recall and precision of retrieval systems, on usability of Web sites, and so on, he or she contributes to informetrics. We see three subject areas in information science in which such quantitative research takes place, - information users and information usage, - evaluation of information systems, - information itself, Following Wolfram's article, we divide his system-based characteristics into the "information itself "-category and the "information system"-category. Figure 1 is a simplistic graph of subjects and research areas of informetrics as an empirical information science.

Source

Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 57(2006) H.8, S.385-389

0.004371658 = product of:
  0.017486632 = sum of:
    0.017486632 = weight(_text_:information in 6976) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017486632 = score(doc=6976,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.2850541 = fieldWeight in 6976, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6976)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

There are regularities in the statistical information provided by natural language terms about neighboring terms. We find that when phrase rank increases, moving from common to less common phrases, the value of the expected mutual information measure (EMIM) between the terms regularly decreases. Luhn's model suggests that midrange terms are the best index terms and relevance discriminators. We suggest reasons for this principle based on the empirical relationships shown here between the rank of terms within phrases and the average mutual information between terms, which we refer to as the Inverse Representation- EMIM principle. We also suggest an Inverse EMIM term weight for indexing or retrieval applications that is consistent with Luhn's distribution. An information theoretic interpretation of Zipf's Law is provided. Using the regularity noted here, we suggest that Zipf's Law is a consequence of the statistical dependencies that exist between terms, described here using information theoretic concepts.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 52(2001) no.12, S.1019-1025

0.004371658 = product of:
  0.017486632 = sum of:
    0.017486632 = weight(_text_:information in 2070) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017486632 = score(doc=2070,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.2850541 = fieldWeight in 2070, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2070)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This study employed the Perl program, Excel software, and some bibliometric techniques to investigate growth pattern, journal characteristics, and author productivity of the subject indexing literature from 1977 to 2000, based an the subject search of a descriptor field in the Library and Information Science Abstracts (LISA) database. The literature growth from 1977 to 2000 in subject indexing could be fitted well by the logistic curve. The Bradford plot of journal literature fits the typical Bradford-Zipf S-shaped curve. Twenty core journals making a significant contribution could be identified from the Bradford-Zipf distribution. Four major research topics in the area of subject indexing were identified as: (1) information organization, (2) information processing, (3) information storage and retrieval, and (4) information systems and services. It was also found that a vast majority of authors (76.7%) contributed only one article, which is a much larger percentage than the 60% of original Lotka's data. The 15 most productive authors and the key concepts of their research were identified.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 55(2004) no.1, S.64-73

0.0042066295 = product of:
  0.016826518 = sum of:
    0.016826518 = weight(_text_:information in 4853) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016826518 = score(doc=4853,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.27429342 = fieldWeight in 4853, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4853)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The author describes an exploratory analysis of the influence of place and proximity on collaboration. Bibliometric data and biographical information are combined to reveal the extent to which co-authorship relationships are a function of physical collocation.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.6, S.1002-1006

0.004164351 = product of:
  0.016657405 = sum of:
    0.016657405 = weight(_text_:information in 2584) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016657405 = score(doc=2584,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 2584, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2584)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Information processing and management. 38(2002) no.4, S.491-508

0.004164351 = product of:
  0.016657405 = sum of:
    0.016657405 = weight(_text_:information in 3471) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016657405 = score(doc=3471,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 3471, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3471)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The use of Pearson's correlation coefficient in Author Cocitation Analysis was compared with Salton's cosine measure in a number of recent contributions. Unlike the Pearson correlation, the cosine is insensitive to the number of zeros. However, one has the option of applying a logarithmic transformation in correlation analysis. Information caiculus is based an both the logarithmic transformation and provides a non-parametric statistics. Using this methodology, one can cluster a document set in a precise way and express the differences in terms of bits of information. The algorithm is explained and used an the data set, which was made the subject of this discussion.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 56(2005) no.7, S.769-772