Search (18 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Leydesdorff, L."
  1. Leydesdorff, L.: ¬The construction and globalization of the knowledge base in inter-human communication systems (2003) 0.04 
    0.04300696 = product of:
  0.08601392 = sum of:
    0.08601392 = sum of:
      0.043780077 = weight(_text_:organization in 1621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.043780077 = score(doc=1621,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18523255 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051953442 = queryNorm
          0.23635197 = fieldWeight in 1621, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1621)
      0.042233843 = weight(_text_:22 in 1621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042233843 = score(doc=1621,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1819321 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051953442 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1621, 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=1621)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The relationship between the "knowledge base" and the "globalization" of communication systems is discussed from the perspective of communication theory. I argue that inter-human communication takes place at two levels. At the first level information is exchanged and provided with meaning and at the second level meaning can reflexively be communicated. Human language can be considered as the evolutionary achievement which enables us to use these two channels of communication simultaneously. Providing meaning with hindsight is a recursive operation: a meaning that makes a difference can be considered as knowledge. If the production of knowledge is socially organized, the perspective of hindsight can further be codified. This adds globalization to the historically stabilized patterns of communications. Globalization can be expected to transform the communications in an evolutionary mode. However, the self-organization of a knowledge-based society remains an expectation with the status of a hypothesis.
    Date
    22. 5.2003 19:48:04
  2. Leydesdorff, L.: Can networks of journal-journal citations be used as indicators of change in the social sciences? (2003) 0.04 
    0.04300696 = product of:
  0.08601392 = sum of:
    0.08601392 = sum of:
      0.043780077 = weight(_text_:organization in 4460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.043780077 = score(doc=4460,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18523255 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051953442 = queryNorm
          0.23635197 = fieldWeight in 4460, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4460)
      0.042233843 = weight(_text_:22 in 4460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042233843 = score(doc=4460,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1819321 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051953442 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4460, 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=4460)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Aggregated journal-journal citations can be used for mapping the intellectual organization of the sciences in terms of specialties because the latter can be considered as interreading communities. Can the journal-journal citations also be used as early indicators of change by comparing the files for two subsequent years? Probabilistic entropy measures enable us to analyze changes in large datasets at different levels of aggregation and in considerable detail. Compares Journal Citation Reports of the Social Science Citation Index for 1999 with similar data for 1998 and analyzes the differences using these measures. Compares the various indicators with similar developments in the Science Citation Index. Specialty formation seems a more important mechanism in the development of the social sciences than in the natural and life sciences, but the developments in the social sciences are volatile. The use of aggregate statistics based on the Science Citation Index is ill-advised in the case of the social sciences because of structural differences in the underlying dynamics.
    Date
    6.11.2005 19:02:22
  3. Leydesdorff, L.: ¬The communication of meaning and the structuration of expectations : Giddens' "structuration theory" and Luhmann's "self-organization" (2010) 0.03 
    0.028957801 = product of:
  0.057915602 = sum of:
    0.057915602 = product of:
      0.115831204 = sum of:
        0.115831204 = weight(_text_:organization in 4004) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.115831204 = score(doc=4004,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.18523255 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051953442 = queryNorm
            0.62532854 = fieldWeight in 4004, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4004)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The communication of meaning as distinct from (Shannon-type) information is central to Luhmann's social systems theory and Giddens' structuration theory of action. These theories share an emphasis on reflexivity, but focus on meaning along a divide between interhuman communication and intentful action as two different systems of reference. Recombining these two theories into a theory about the structuration of expectations, interactions, organization, and self-organization of intentional communications can be simulated based on algorithms from the computation of anticipatory systems. The self-organizing and organizing layers remain rooted in the double contingency of the human encounter, which provides the variation. Organization and self-organization of communication are reflexive upon and therefore reconstructive of each other. Using mutual information in three dimensions, the imprint of meaning processing in the modeling system on the historical organization of uncertainty in the modeled system can be measured. This is shown empirically in the case of intellectual organization as "structurating" structure in the textual domain of scientific articles.
  4. Leydesdorff, L.; Heimeriks, G.: ¬The self-organization of the European information society : the case of "biotechnology" (2001) 0.02 
    0.015797775 = product of:
  0.03159555 = sum of:
    0.03159555 = product of:
      0.0631911 = sum of:
        0.0631911 = weight(_text_:organization in 6524) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0631911 = score(doc=6524,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.18523255 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051953442 = queryNorm
            0.34114468 = fieldWeight in 6524, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6524)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Fields of technoscience like biotechnology develop in a network mode: disciplinary insights from different backgrounds are recombined as competing innovation systems are continuously reshaped. The ongoing process of integration at the European level generates an additional network of transnational collaborations. Using the title words of scientific publications in five core journals of biotechnology, multivariate analysis is used to distinguish between the intellectual organization of the publications in terms of title words and the institutional network in terms of addresses of documents. The interaction among the representation of intellectual space in terms of words and co-words, and the potentially European network system is compared with the document sets with American and Japanese addresses. The European system can also be decomposed in terms of the contributions of member states. Whereas a European vocabulary can be made visible at the global level, this communality disappears by this decomposition. The network effect at the European level can be considered as institutional more than cognitive
    Footnote
    Vgl. auch die Stellungnahme von P. van den Besselaar: Empirical evidence of self-organization? in: JASIST 54(2003) no.1, S.87-90.
  5. Lucio-Arias, D.; Leydesdorff, L.: ¬An indicator of research front activity : measuring intellectual organization as uncertainty reduction in document sets (2009) 0.02 
    0.015797775 = product of:
  0.03159555 = sum of:
    0.03159555 = product of:
      0.0631911 = sum of:
        0.0631911 = weight(_text_:organization in 3297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0631911 = score(doc=3297,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.18523255 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051953442 = queryNorm
            0.34114468 = fieldWeight in 3297, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3297)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    When using scientific literature to model scholarly discourse, a research specialty can be operationalized as an evolving set of related documents. Each publication can be expected to contribute to the further development of the specialty at the research front. The specific combinations of title words and cited references in a paper can then be considered as a signature of the knowledge claim in the paper: New words and combinations of words can be expected to represent variation, while each paper is at the same time selectively positioned into the intellectual organization of a field using context-relevant references. Can the mutual information among these three dimensions - title words, cited references, and sequence numbers - be used as an indicator of the extent to which intellectual organization structures the uncertainty prevailing at a research front? The effect of the discovery of nanotubes (1991) on the previously existing field of fullerenes is used as a test case. Thereafter, this method is applied to science studies with a focus on scientometrics using various sample delineations. An emerging research front about citation analysis can be indicated.
  6. Leydesdorff, L.: Patent classifications as indicators of intellectual organization (2008) 0.02 
    0.015478596 = product of:
  0.030957192 = sum of:
    0.030957192 = product of:
      0.061914384 = sum of:
        0.061914384 = weight(_text_:organization in 2002) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.061914384 = score(doc=2002,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18523255 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051953442 = queryNorm
            0.33425218 = fieldWeight in 2002, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2002)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Using the 138,751 patents filed in 2006 under the Patent Cooperation Treaty, co-classification analysis is pursued on the basis of three- and four-digit codes in the International Patent Classification (IPC, 8th ed.). The co-classifications among the patents enable us to analyze and visualize the relations among technologies at different levels of aggregation. The hypothesis that classifications might be considered as the organizers of patents into classes, and therefore that co-classification patterns - more than co-citation patterns - might be useful for mapping, is not corroborated. The classifications hang weakly together, even at the four-digit level; at the country level, more specificity can be made visible. However, countries are not the appropriate units of analysis because patent portfolios are largely similar in many advanced countries in terms of the classes attributed. Instead of classes, one may wish to explore the mapping of title words as a better approach to visualize the intellectual organization of patents.
  7. Leydesdorff, L.; Hammarfelt, B.: ¬The structure of the Arts & Humanities Citation Index : a mapping on the basis of aggregated citations among 1,157 journals (2011) 0.01 
    0.01289883 = product of:
  0.02579766 = sum of:
    0.02579766 = product of:
      0.05159532 = sum of:
        0.05159532 = weight(_text_:organization in 4941) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05159532 = score(doc=4941,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18523255 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051953442 = queryNorm
            0.27854347 = fieldWeight in 4941, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4941)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Using the Arts & Humanities Citation Index (A&HCI) 2008, we apply mapping techniques previously developed for mapping journal structures in the Science and Social Sciences Citation Indices. Citation relations among the 110,718 records were aggregated at the level of 1,157 journals specific to the A&HCI, and the journal structures are questioned on whether a cognitive structure can be reconstructed and visualized. Both cosine-normalization (bottom up) and factor analysis (top down) suggest a division into approximately 12 subsets. The relations among these subsets are explored using various visualization techniques. However, we were not able to retrieve this structure using the Institute for Scientific Information Subject Categories, including the 25 categories that are specific to the A&HCI. We discuss options for validation such as against the categories of the Humanities Indicators of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the panel structure of the European Reference Index for the Humanities, and compare our results with the curriculum organization of the Humanities Section of the College of Letters and Sciences of the University of California at Los Angeles as an example of institutional organization.
  8. Leydesdorff, L.; Ahrweiler, P.: In search of a network theory of innovations : relations, positions, and perspectives (2014) 0.01 
    0.01289883 = product of:
  0.02579766 = sum of:
    0.02579766 = product of:
      0.05159532 = sum of:
        0.05159532 = weight(_text_:organization in 1531) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05159532 = score(doc=1531,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18523255 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051953442 = queryNorm
            0.27854347 = fieldWeight in 1531, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1531)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    As a complement to Nelson and Winter's (1977) article titled "In Search of a Useful Theory of Innovation," a sociological perspective on innovation networks can be elaborated using Luhmann's social systems theory, on the one hand, and Latour's "sociology of translations," on the other. Because of a common focus on communication, these perspectives can be combined as a set of methodologies. Latour's sociology of translations specifies a mechanism for generating variation in relations ("associations"), whereas Luhmann's systems perspective enables the specification of (functionally different) selection environments such as markets, professional organizations, and political control. Selection environments can be considered as mechanisms of social coordination that can self-organize-beyond the control of human agency-into regimes in terms of interacting codes of communication. Unlike relatively globalized regimes, technological trajectories are organized locally in "landscapes." A resulting "duality of structure" (Giddens, 1979) between the historical organization of trajectories and evolutionary self-organization at the regime level can be expected to drive innovation cycles. Reflexive translations add a third layer of perspectives to (a) the relational analysis of observable links that shape trajectories and (b) the positional analysis of networks in terms of latent dimensions. These three operations can be studied in a single framework, but using different methodologies. Latour's first-order associations can then be analytically distinguished from second-order translations in terms of requiring other communicative competencies. The resulting operations remain infrareflexively nested, and can therefore be used for innovative reconstructions of previously constructed boundaries.
  9. Leydesdorff, L.: ¬A sociological theory of communication : the self-organization of the knowledge-based society (2001) 0.01 
    0.010945019 = product of:
  0.021890039 = sum of:
    0.021890039 = product of:
      0.043780077 = sum of:
        0.043780077 = weight(_text_:organization in 184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043780077 = score(doc=184,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18523255 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051953442 = queryNorm
            0.23635197 = fieldWeight in 184, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=184)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
  10. Leydesdorff, L.; Bihui, J.: Mapping the Chinese Science Citation Database in terms of aggregated journal-journal citation relations (2005) 0.01 
    0.010945019 = product of:
  0.021890039 = sum of:
    0.021890039 = product of:
      0.043780077 = sum of:
        0.043780077 = weight(_text_:organization in 4813) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043780077 = score(doc=4813,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18523255 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051953442 = queryNorm
            0.23635197 = fieldWeight in 4813, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4813)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Methods developed for mapping the journal structure contained in aggregated journal-journal citations in the Science Citation Index (SCI; Thomson ISI, 2002) are applied to the Chinese Science Citation Database of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. This database covered 991 journals in 2001, of which only 37 originally had English titles; only 31 of which were covered by the SCI. Using factor-analytical and graph-analytical techniques, the authors show that the journal relations are dually structured. The main structure is the intellectual organization of the journals in journal groups (as in the international SCI), but the university-based journals provide an institutional layer that orients this structure towards practical ends (e.g., agriculture). This mechanism of integration is further distinguished from the role of general science journals. The Chinese Science Citation Database thus exhibits the characteristics of "Mode 2" or transdisciplinary science in the production of scientific knowledge more than its Western counterpart does. The contexts of application lead to correlation among the components.
  11. Leydesdorff, L.; Bensman, S.: Classification and Powerlaws : the logarithmic transformation (2006) 0.01 
    0.010945019 = product of:
  0.021890039 = sum of:
    0.021890039 = product of:
      0.043780077 = sum of:
        0.043780077 = weight(_text_:organization in 6007) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043780077 = score(doc=6007,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18523255 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051953442 = queryNorm
            0.23635197 = fieldWeight in 6007, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6007)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Logarithmic transformation of the data has been recommended by the literature in the case of highly skewed distributions such as those commonly found in information science. The purpose of the transformation is to make the data conform to the lognormal law of error for inferential purposes. How does this transformation affect the analysis? We factor analyze and visualize the citation environment of the Journal of the American Chemical Society (JACS) before and after a logarithmic transformation. The transformation strongly reduces the variance necessary for classificatory purposes and therefore is counterproductive to the purposes of the descriptive statistics. We recommend against the logarithmic transformation when sets cannot be defined unambiguously. The intellectual organization of the sciences is reflected in the curvilinear parts of the citation distributions while negative powerlaws fit excellently to the tails of the distributions.
  12. Leydesdorff, L.; Schank, T.: Dynamic animations of journal maps : indicators of structural changes and interdisciplinary developments (2008) 0.01 
    0.010945019 = product of:
  0.021890039 = sum of:
    0.021890039 = product of:
      0.043780077 = sum of:
        0.043780077 = weight(_text_:organization in 2358) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043780077 = score(doc=2358,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18523255 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051953442 = queryNorm
            0.23635197 = fieldWeight in 2358, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2358)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The dynamic analysis of structural change in the organization of the sciences requires, methodologically, the integration of multivariate and time-series analysis. Structural change - for instance, interdisciplinary development - is often an objective of government interventions. Recent developments in multidimensional scaling (MDS) enable us to distinguish the stress originating in each time-slice from the stress originating from the sequencing of time-slices, and thus to locally optimize the trade-offs between these two sources of variance in the animation. Furthermore, visualization programs like Pajek and Visone allow us to show not only the positions of the nodes, but also their relational attributes such as betweenness centrality. Betweenness centrality in the vector space can be considered as an indicator of interdisciplinarity. Using this indicator, the dynamics of the citation-impact environments of the journals Cognitive Science, Social Networks, and Nanotechnology are animated and assessed in terms of interdisciplinarity among the disciplines involved.
  13. Leydesdorff, L.; Sun, Y.: National and international dimensions of the Triple Helix in Japan : university-industry-government versus international coauthorship relations (2009) 0.01 
    0.010558461 = product of:
  0.021116922 = sum of:
    0.021116922 = product of:
      0.042233843 = sum of:
        0.042233843 = weight(_text_:22 in 2761) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042233843 = score(doc=2761,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1819321 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051953442 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2761, 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=2761)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    22. 3.2009 19:07:20
  14. Leydesdorff, L.; Bornmann, L.; Wagner, C.S.: ¬The relative influences of government funding and international collaboration on citation impact (2019) 0.01 
    0.010558461 = product of:
  0.021116922 = sum of:
    0.021116922 = product of:
      0.042233843 = sum of:
        0.042233843 = weight(_text_:22 in 4681) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042233843 = score(doc=4681,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1819321 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051953442 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    8. 1.2019 18:22:45
  15. Chen, C.; Leydesdorff, L.: Patterns of connections and movements in dual-map overlays : a new method of publication portfolio analysis (2014) 0.01 
    0.00912085 = product of:
  0.0182417 = sum of:
    0.0182417 = product of:
      0.0364834 = sum of:
        0.0364834 = weight(_text_:organization in 1200) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0364834 = score(doc=1200,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18523255 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051953442 = queryNorm
            0.19695997 = fieldWeight in 1200, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1200)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Portfolio analysis of the publication profile of a unit of interest, ranging from individuals and organizations to a scientific field or interdisciplinary programs, aims to inform analysts and decision makers about the position of the unit, where it has been, and where it may go in a complex adaptive environment. A portfolio analysis may aim to identify the gap between the current position of an organization and a goal that it intends to achieve or identify competencies of multiple institutions. We introduce a new visual analytic method for analyzing, comparing, and contrasting characteristics of publication portfolios. The new method introduces a novel design of dual-map thematic overlays on global maps of science. Each publication portfolio can be added as one layer of dual-map overlays over 2 related, but distinct, global maps of science: one for citing journals and the other for cited journals. We demonstrate how the new design facilitates a portfolio analysis in terms of patterns emerging from the distributions of citation threads and the dynamics of trajectories as a function of space and time. We first demonstrate the analysis of portfolios defined on a single source article. Then we contrast publication portfolios of multiple comparable units of interest; namely, colleges in universities and corporate research organizations. We also include examples of overlays of scientific fields. We expect that our method will provide new insights to portfolio analysis.
  16. Leydesdorff, L.; Bornmann, L.: How fractional counting of citations affects the impact factor : normalization in terms of differences in citation potentials among fields of science (2011) 0.01 
    0.008798718 = product of:
  0.017597437 = sum of:
    0.017597437 = product of:
      0.035194874 = sum of:
        0.035194874 = weight(_text_:22 in 4186) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035194874 = score(doc=4186,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1819321 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051953442 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4186, 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=4186)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    22. 1.2011 12:51:07
  17. Hellsten, I.; Leydesdorff, L.: ¬The construction of interdisciplinarity : the development of the knowledge base and programmatic focus of the journal Climatic Change, 1977-2013 (2016) 0.01 
    0.008798718 = product of:
  0.017597437 = sum of:
    0.017597437 = product of:
      0.035194874 = sum of:
        0.035194874 = weight(_text_:22 in 3089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035194874 = score(doc=3089,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1819321 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051953442 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3089, 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=3089)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    24. 8.2016 17:53:22
  18. Leydesdorff, L.; Johnson, M.W.; Ivanova, I.: Toward a calculus of redundancy : signification, codification, and anticipation in cultural evolution (2018) 0.01 
    0.008798718 = product of:
  0.017597437 = sum of:
    0.017597437 = product of:
      0.035194874 = sum of:
        0.035194874 = weight(_text_:22 in 4463) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035194874 = score(doc=4463,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1819321 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051953442 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4463, 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=4463)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    29. 9.2018 11:22:09

Authors

Years

Types

  • a 17
  • m 1

Themes