Search (373 results, page 1 of 19)

  • × theme_ss:"Informetrie"
  1. Herb, U.; Beucke, D.: ¬Die Zukunft der Impact-Messung : Social Media, Nutzung und Zitate im World Wide Web (2013) 0.03 
    0.025467366 = product of:
  0.20373893 = sum of:
    0.20373893 = weight(_text_:2f in 2188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20373893 = score(doc=2188,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27188486 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032069415 = queryNorm
        0.7493574 = fieldWeight in 2188, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2188)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Content
    Vgl. unter: https://www.leibniz-science20.de%2Fforschung%2Fprojekte%2Faltmetrics-in-verschiedenen-wissenschaftsdisziplinen%2F&ei=2jTgVaaXGcK4Udj1qdgB&usg=AFQjCNFOPdONj4RKBDf9YDJOLuz3lkGYlg&sig2=5YI3KWIGxBmk5_kv0P_8iQ.
  2. Wolfram, D.: Applied informetrics for information retrieval research (2003) 0.02 
    0.02211841 = product of:
  0.08847364 = sum of:
    0.06738517 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06738517 = score(doc=4589,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09700725 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032069415 = queryNorm
        0.6946405 = fieldWeight in 4589, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4589)
    0.021088472 = product of:
      0.042176943 = sum of:
        0.042176943 = weight(_text_:system in 4589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042176943 = score(doc=4589,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10100432 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.41757566 = fieldWeight in 4589, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4589)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    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.
  3. Bookstein, A.: Informetric distributions : I. Unified overview (1990) 0.02 
    0.015276391 = product of:
  0.061105564 = sum of:
    0.030690823 = product of:
      0.061381646 = sum of:
        0.061381646 = weight(_text_:29 in 6902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.061381646 = score(doc=6902,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11281017 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.5441145 = fieldWeight in 6902, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6902)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.03041474 = product of:
      0.06082948 = sum of:
        0.06082948 = weight(_text_:22 in 6902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06082948 = score(doc=6902,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.112301625 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6902, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6902)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Date
    22. 7.2006 18:55:29
  4. Rao, I.K.: ¬The distribution of scientific productivity and social change (1978) 0.01 
    0.014779588 = product of:
  0.059118353 = sum of:
    0.017537614 = product of:
      0.03507523 = sum of:
        0.03507523 = weight(_text_:29 in 8) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03507523 = score(doc=8,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11281017 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 8, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.041580737 = product of:
      0.08316147 = sum of:
        0.08316147 = weight(_text_:etc in 8) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08316147 = score(doc=8,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17370372 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.47875473 = fieldWeight in 8, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    Results in the literature concerning the probability that an author publishes r articles in time t are reexamined, and it is found that a negative binomial distribution bits scientific productivity data (by the chi-squared goodness-of-fit-test) better than many other distribution such as geometric, logarithmic, zeta, cumulative advantage, etc. It is shown analytically that the nagative binomial distribution describes a pattern of scientific productivity under the 'success-breeds-success' condition in a wide variety of social circumstances
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 29(1978), S.111-122
  5. Marion, L.S.; McCain, K.W.: Contrasting views of software engineering journals : author cocitation choices and indexer vocabulary assignments (2001) 0.01 
    0.013926524 = product of:
  0.055706095 = sum of:
    0.016210351 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5767) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016210351 = score(doc=5767,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09700725 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032069415 = queryNorm
        0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 5767, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5767)
    0.039495744 = sum of:
      0.017573725 = weight(_text_:system in 5767) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.017573725 = score(doc=5767,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.10100432 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
            0.032069415 = queryNorm
          0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 5767, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5767)
      0.021922018 = weight(_text_:29 in 5767) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.021922018 = score(doc=5767,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.11281017 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
            0.032069415 = queryNorm
          0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 5767, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5767)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    We explore the intellectual subject structure and research themes in software engineering through the identification and analysis of a core journal literature. We examine this literature via two expert perspectives: that of the author, who identified significant work by citing it (journal cocitation analysis), and that of the professional indexer, who tags published work with subject terms to facilitate retrieval from a bibliographic database (subject profile analysis). The data sources are SCISEARCH (the on-line version of Science Citation Index), and INSPEC (a database covering software engineering, computer science, and information systems). We use data visualization tools (cluster analysis, multidimensional scaling, and PFNets) to show the "intellectual maps" of software engineering. Cocitation and subject profile analyses demonstrate that software engineering is a distinct interdisciplinary field, valuing practical and applied aspects, and spanning a subject continuum from "programming-in-the-smalI" to "programming-in-the-large." This continuum mirrors the software development life cycle by taking the operating system or major application from initial programming through project management, implementation, and maintenance. Object orientation is an integral but distinct subject area in software engineering. Key differences are the importance of management and programming: (1) cocitation analysis emphasizes project management and systems development; (2) programming techniques/languages are more influential in subject profiles; (3) cocitation profiles place object-oriented journals separately and centrally while the subject profile analysis locates these journals with the programming/languages group
    Date
    29. 9.2001 14:01:01
  6. White, H.D.: Pathfinder networks and author cocitation analysis : a remapping of paradigmatic information scientists (2003) 0.01 
    0.013926524 = product of:
  0.055706095 = sum of:
    0.016210351 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1459) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016210351 = score(doc=1459,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09700725 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032069415 = queryNorm
        0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 1459, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1459)
    0.039495744 = sum of:
      0.017573725 = weight(_text_:system in 1459) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.017573725 = score(doc=1459,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.10100432 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
            0.032069415 = queryNorm
          0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 1459, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1459)
      0.021922018 = weight(_text_:29 in 1459) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.021922018 = score(doc=1459,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.11281017 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
            0.032069415 = queryNorm
          0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 1459, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1459)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    In their 1998 article "Visualizing a discipline: An author cocitation analysis of information science, 1972-1995," White and McCain used multidimensional scaling, hierarchical clustering, and factor analysis to display the specialty groupings of 120 highly-cited ("paradigmatic") information scientists. These statistical techniques are traditional in author cocitation analysis (ACA). It is shown here that a newer technique, Pathfinder Networks (PFNETs), has considerable advantages for ACA. In PFNETs, nodes represent authors, and explicit links represent weighted paths between nodes, the weights in this case being cocitation counts. The links can be drawn to exclude all but the single highest counts for author pairs, which reduces a network of authors to only the most salient relationships. When these are mapped, dominant authors can be defined as those with relatively many links to other authors (i.e., high degree centrality). Links between authors and dominant authors define specialties, and links between dominant authors connect specialties into a discipline. Maps are made with one rather than several computer routines and in one rather than many computer passes. Also, PFNETs can, and should, be generated from matrices of raw counts rather than Pearson correlations, which removes a computational step associated with traditional ACA. White and McCain's raw data from 1998 are remapped as a PFNET. It is shown that the specialty groupings correspond closely to those seen in the factor analysis of the 1998 article. Because PFNETs are fast to compute, they are used in AuthorLink, a new Web-based system that creates live interfaces for cocited author retrieval an the fly.
    Date
    29. 3.2003 19:55:24
  7. Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.; Hooydonk, G. van: Methods for accrediting publications to authors or countries : consequences for evaluation studies (2000) 0.01 
    0.011524338 = product of:
  0.046097353 = sum of:
    0.014911801 = product of:
      0.029823601 = sum of:
        0.029823601 = weight(_text_:system in 4384) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029823601 = score(doc=4384,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.10100432 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.29527056 = fieldWeight in 4384, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4384)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.031185552 = product of:
      0.062371105 = sum of:
        0.062371105 = weight(_text_:etc in 4384) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.062371105 = score(doc=4384,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17370372 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.35906604 = fieldWeight in 4384, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4384)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    One aim of science evaluation studies is to determine quantitatively the contribution of different players (authors, departments, countries) to the whole system. This information is then used to study the evolution of the system, for instance to gauge the results of special national or international programs. Taking articles as our basic data, we want to determine the exact relative contribution of each coauthor or each country. These numbers are brought together to obtain country scores, or department scores, etc. It turns out, as we will show in this article, that different scoring methods can yield totally different rankings. Conseqeuntly, a ranking between countries, universities, research groups or authors, based on one particular accrediting methods does not contain an absolute truth about their relative importance
  8. Quoniam, L.: Bibliometric law used for information retrieval (1998) 0.01 
    0.011099116 = product of:
  0.044396464 = sum of:
    0.032094855 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1162) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032094855 = score(doc=1162,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09700725 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032069415 = queryNorm
        0.33085006 = fieldWeight in 1162, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1162)
    0.012301609 = product of:
      0.024603218 = sum of:
        0.024603218 = weight(_text_:system in 1162) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024603218 = score(doc=1162,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10100432 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.2435858 = fieldWeight in 1162, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1162)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    Zipf's law was used to qualify all the key words of documents in a data set. This qualification was used to build a graphical representation of the resulting indicator in each document. The graphical resolution leads to a document dispatch in a 3 dimensional space. This graphical representation was used as an information retrieval tool without using any keyword. The presentation of a case study is available on the WWW. The graph is drawn in VRML allowing a dynamic picture which is linked to a database management system (FreeWAIS)
  9. Xie, Z.; Ouyang, Z.; Li, J.; Dong, E.: Modelling transition phenomena of scientific coauthorship networks (2018) 0.01 
    0.011084691 = product of:
  0.044338763 = sum of:
    0.01315321 = product of:
      0.02630642 = sum of:
        0.02630642 = weight(_text_:29 in 4043) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02630642 = score(doc=4043,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11281017 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 4043, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4043)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.031185552 = product of:
      0.062371105 = sum of:
        0.062371105 = weight(_text_:etc in 4043) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.062371105 = score(doc=4043,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17370372 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.35906604 = fieldWeight in 4043, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4043)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    In a range of scientific coauthorship networks, transitions emerge in degree distribution, in the correlation between degree and local clustering coefficient, etc. The existence of those transitions could be regarded because of the diversity in collaboration behaviors of scientific fields. A growing geometric hypergraph built on a cluster of concentric circles is proposed to model two specific collaboration behaviors, namely the behaviors of research team leaders and those of the other team members. The model successfully predicts the transitions, as well as many common features of coauthorship networks. Particularly, it realizes a process of deriving the complex "scale-free" property from the simple "yes/no" decisions. Moreover, it provides a reasonable explanation for the emergence of transitions with the difference of collaboration behaviors between leaders and other members. The difference emerges in the evolution of research teams, which synthetically addresses several specific factors of generating collaborations, namely the communications between research teams, academic impacts and homophily of authors.
    Date
    14. 1.2018 17:03:29
  10. Egghe, L.: Type/Token-Taken informetrics (2003) 0.01 
    0.010549578 = product of:
  0.04219831 = sum of:
    0.016210351 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016210351 = score(doc=1608,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09700725 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032069415 = queryNorm
        0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 1608, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1608)
    0.02598796 = product of:
      0.05197592 = sum of:
        0.05197592 = weight(_text_:etc in 1608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05197592 = score(doc=1608,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17370372 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.2992217 = fieldWeight in 1608, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1608)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    Type/Token-Taken informetrics is a new part of informetrics that studies the use of items rather than the items itself. Here, items are the objects that are produced by the sources (e.g., journals producing articles, authors producing papers, etc.). In linguistics a source is also called a type (e.g., a word), and an item a token (e.g., the use of words in texts). In informetrics, types that occur often, for example, in a database will also be requested often, for example, in information retrieval. The relative use of these occurrences will be higher than their relative occurrences itself; hence, the name Type/ Token-Taken informetrics. This article studies the frequency distribution of Type/Token-Taken informetrics, starting from the one of Type/Token informetrics (i.e., source-item relationships). We are also studying the average number my* of item uses in Type/Token-Taken informetrics and compare this with the classical average number my in Type/Token informetrics. We show that my* >= my always, and that my* is an increasing function of my. A method is presented to actually calculate my* from my, and a given a, which is the exponent in Lotka's frequency distribution of Type/Token informetrics. We leave open the problem of developing non-Lotkaian Type/TokenTaken informetrics.
  11. Rees-Potter, L.K.: Dynamic thesaural systems : a bibliometric study of terminological and conceptual change in sociology and economics with application to the design of dynamic thesaural systems (1989) 0.01 
    0.009998886 = product of:
  0.039995544 = sum of:
    0.025936563 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5059) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025936563 = score(doc=5059,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09700725 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032069415 = queryNorm
        0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 5059, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5059)
    0.014058981 = product of:
      0.028117962 = sum of:
        0.028117962 = weight(_text_:system in 5059) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028117962 = score(doc=5059,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10100432 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.27838376 = fieldWeight in 5059, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5059)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    Thesauri have been used in the library and information science field to provide a standard descriptor language for indexers or searchers to use in an informations storage and retrieval system. One difficulty has been the maintenance and updating of thesauri since terms used to describe concepts change over time and vary between users. This study investigates a mechanism by which thesauri can be updated and maintained using citation, co-citation analysis and citation context analysis.
  12. Harter, S.P.; Cheng, Y.-R.: Colinked descriptors : improving vocabulary selection for end-user searching (1996) 0.01 
    0.009513528 = product of:
  0.038054112 = sum of:
    0.027509877 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4216) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027509877 = score(doc=4216,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09700725 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032069415 = queryNorm
        0.2835858 = fieldWeight in 4216, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4216)
    0.010544236 = product of:
      0.021088472 = sum of:
        0.021088472 = weight(_text_:system in 4216) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021088472 = score(doc=4216,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10100432 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.20878783 = fieldWeight in 4216, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4216)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    This article introduces a new concept and technique for information retrieval called 'colinked descriptors'. Borrowed from an analogous idea in bibliometrics - cocited references - colinked descriptors provide a theory and method for identifying search terms that, by hypothesis, will be superior to those entered initially by a searcher. The theory suggests a means of moving automatically from 2 or more initial search terms, to other terms that should be superior in retrieval performance to the 2 original terms. A research project designed to test this colinked descriptor hypothesis is reported. The results suggest that the approach is effective, although methodological problems in testing the idea are reported. Algorithms to generate colinked descriptors can be incorporated easily into system interfaces, front-end or pre-search systems, or help software, in any database that employs a thesaurus. The potential use of colinked descriptors is a strong argument for building richer and more complex thesauri that reflect as many legitimate links among descriptors as possible
  13. Bookstein, A.; Raita, T.: Discovering term occurence structure in text (2001) 0.01 
    0.009509975 = product of:
  0.0380399 = sum of:
    0.02269449 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02269449 = score(doc=5751,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09700725 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032069415 = queryNorm
        0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 5751, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5751)
    0.015345411 = product of:
      0.030690823 = sum of:
        0.030690823 = weight(_text_:29 in 5751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030690823 = score(doc=5751,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11281017 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 5751, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5751)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    This article examines some consequences for information control of the tendency of occurrences of contentbearing terms to appear together, or clump. Properties of previously defined clumping measures are reviewed and extended, and the significance of these measures for devising retrieval strategies discussed. A new type of clumping measure, which extends the earlier measures by permitting gaps within a clump, is defined, and several variants examined. Experiments are carried out that indicate the relation between the new measure and one of the earlier measures, as well as the ability of the two types of measure to predict compression efficiency
    Date
    29. 9.2001 14:00:18
  14. Ding, Y.: Applying weighted PageRank to author citation networks (2011) 0.01 
    0.009475465 = product of:
  0.03790186 = sum of:
    0.02269449 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02269449 = score(doc=4188,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09700725 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032069415 = queryNorm
        0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 4188, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4188)
    0.01520737 = product of:
      0.03041474 = sum of:
        0.03041474 = weight(_text_:22 in 4188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03041474 = score(doc=4188,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.112301625 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4188, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4188)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    This article aims to identify whether different weighted PageRank algorithms can be applied to author citation networks to measure the popularity and prestige of a scholar from a citation perspective. Information retrieval (IR) was selected as a test field and data from 1956-2008 were collected from Web of Science. Weighted PageRank with citation and publication as weighted vectors were calculated on author citation networks. The results indicate that both popularity rank and prestige rank were highly correlated with the weighted PageRank. Principal component analysis was conducted to detect relationships among these different measures. For capturing prize winners within the IR field, prestige rank outperformed all the other measures
    Date
    22. 1.2011 13:02:21
  15. Costas, R.; Zahedi, Z.; Wouters, P.: ¬The thematic orientation of publications mentioned on social media : large-scale disciplinary comparison of social media metrics with citations (2015) 0.01 
    0.009212592 = product of:
  0.07370073 = sum of:
    0.07370073 = sum of:
      0.05197592 = weight(_text_:etc in 2598) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05197592 = score(doc=2598,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17370372 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
            0.032069415 = queryNorm
          0.2992217 = fieldWeight in 2598, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2598)
      0.021724815 = weight(_text_:22 in 2598) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.021724815 = score(doc=2598,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.112301625 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.032069415 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2598, 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=2598)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to analyze the disciplinary orientation of scientific publications that were mentioned on different social media platforms, focussing on their differences and similarities with citation counts. Design/methodology/approach - Social media metrics and readership counts, associated with 500,216 publications and their citation data from the Web of Science database, were collected from Altmetric.com and Mendeley. Results are presented through descriptive statistical analyses together with science maps generated with VOSviewer. Findings - The results confirm Mendeley as the most prevalent social media source with similar characteristics to citations in their distribution across fields and their density in average values per publication. The humanities, natural sciences, and engineering disciplines have a much lower presence of social media metrics. Twitter has a stronger focus on general medicine and social sciences. Other sources (blog, Facebook, Google+, and news media mentions) are more prominent in regards to multidisciplinary journals. Originality/value - This paper reinforces the relevance of Mendeley as a social media source for analytical purposes from a disciplinary perspective, being particularly relevant for the social sciences (together with Twitter). Key implications for the use of social media metrics on the evaluation of research performance (e.g. the concentration of some social media metrics, such as blogs, news items, etc., around multidisciplinary journals) are identified.
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
  16. Ohly, P.: Dimensions of globality : a bibliometric analysis (2016) 0.01 
    0.008729367 = product of:
  0.034917466 = sum of:
    0.017537614 = product of:
      0.03507523 = sum of:
        0.03507523 = weight(_text_:29 in 4942) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03507523 = score(doc=4942,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11281017 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 4942, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4942)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.017379852 = product of:
      0.034759704 = sum of:
        0.034759704 = weight(_text_:22 in 4942) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034759704 = score(doc=4942,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.112301625 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4942, 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=4942)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Date
    20. 1.2019 11:22:31
    Source
    Knowledge organization for a sustainable world: challenges and perspectives for cultural, scientific, and technological sharing in a connected society : proceedings of the Fourteenth International ISKO Conference 27-29 September 2016, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil / organized by International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), ISKO-Brazil, São Paulo State University ; edited by José Augusto Chaves Guimarães, Suellen Oliveira Milani, Vera Dodebei
  17. Lin, X.; White, H.D.; Buzydlowski, J.: Real-time author co-citation mapping for online searching (2003) 0.01 
    0.008591056 = product of:
  0.034364223 = sum of:
    0.019452421 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1080) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019452421 = score(doc=1080,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09700725 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032069415 = queryNorm
        0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 1080, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1080)
    0.014911801 = product of:
      0.029823601 = sum of:
        0.029823601 = weight(_text_:system in 1080) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029823601 = score(doc=1080,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.10100432 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.29527056 = fieldWeight in 1080, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1080)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    Author searching is traditionally based on the matching of name strings. Special characteristics of authors as personal names and subject indicators are not considered. This makes it difficult to identify a set of related authors or to group authors by subjects in retrieval systems. In this paper, we describe the design and implementation of a prototype visualization system to enhance author searching. The system, called AuthorLink, is based on author co-citation analysis and visualization mapping algorithms such as Kohonen's feature maps and Pathfinder networks. AuthorLink produces interactive author maps in real time from a database of 1.26 million records supplied by the Institute for Scientific Information. The maps show subject groupings and more fine-grained intellectual connections among authors. Through the interactive interface the user can take advantage of such information to refine queries and retrieve documents through point-and-click manipulation of the authors' names.
  18. Glänzel, W.: Bibliometrics-aided retrieval - where information retrieval meets scientometrics (2015) 0.01 
    0.008423146 = product of:
  0.06738517 = sum of:
    0.06738517 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06738517 = score(doc=1690,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09700725 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032069415 = queryNorm
        0.6946405 = fieldWeight in 1690, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1690)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Footnote
    Beitrag in einem Special Issue "Combining bibliometrics and information retrieval"
  19. Menczer, F.: Lexical and semantic clustering by Web links (2004) 0.01 
    0.008151408 = product of:
  0.032605633 = sum of:
    0.019452421 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3090) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019452421 = score(doc=3090,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09700725 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032069415 = queryNorm
        0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 3090, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3090)
    0.01315321 = product of:
      0.02630642 = sum of:
        0.02630642 = weight(_text_:29 in 3090) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02630642 = score(doc=3090,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11281017 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 3090, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3090)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Date
    9. 1.2005 19:20:29
    Theme
    Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
  20. Zhang, Y.; Jansen, B.J.; Spink, A.: Identification of factors predicting clickthrough in Web searching using neural network analysis (2009) 0.01 
    0.008121828 = product of:
  0.03248731 = sum of:
    0.019452421 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019452421 = score(doc=2742,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09700725 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032069415 = queryNorm
        0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 2742, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2742)
    0.013034889 = product of:
      0.026069777 = sum of:
        0.026069777 = weight(_text_:22 in 2742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026069777 = score(doc=2742,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.112301625 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2742, 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=2742)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    In this research, we aim to identify factors that significantly affect the clickthrough of Web searchers. Our underlying goal is determine more efficient methods to optimize the clickthrough rate. We devise a clickthrough metric for measuring customer satisfaction of search engine results using the number of links visited, number of queries a user submits, and rank of clicked links. We use a neural network to detect the significant influence of searching characteristics on future user clickthrough. Our results show that high occurrences of query reformulation, lengthy searching duration, longer query length, and the higher ranking of prior clicked links correlate positively with future clickthrough. We provide recommendations for leveraging these findings for improving the performance of search engine retrieval and result ranking, along with implications for search engine marketing.
    Date
    22. 3.2009 17:49:11

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 341
  • d 27
  • sp 2
  • m 1
  • ro 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 360
  • m 9
  • el 5
  • s 3
  • r 2
  • b 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications