Search (160 results, page 1 of 8)

  • × theme_ss:"Informetrie"
  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Liu, D.-R.; Shih, M.-J.: Hybrid-patent classification based on patent-network analysis (2011) 0.03 
    0.032542214 = product of:
  0.09762664 = sum of:
    0.09762664 = product of:
      0.14643995 = sum of:
        0.11692493 = weight(_text_:network in 4189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11692493 = score(doc=4189,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.6026149 = fieldWeight in 4189, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4189)
        0.029515022 = weight(_text_:22 in 4189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029515022 = score(doc=4189,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15257138 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4189, 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=4189)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Effective patent management is essential for organizations to maintain their competitive advantage. The classification of patents is a critical part of patent management and industrial analysis. This study proposes a hybrid-patent-classification approach that combines a novel patent-network-based classification method with three conventional classification methods to analyze query patents and predict their classes. The novel patent network contains various types of nodes that represent different features extracted from patent documents. The nodes are connected based on the relationship metrics derived from the patent metadata. The proposed classification method predicts a query patent's class by analyzing all reachable nodes in the patent network and calculating their relevance to the query patent. It then classifies the query patent with a modified k-nearest neighbor classifier. To further improve the approach, we combine it with content-based, citation-based, and metadata-based classification methods to develop a hybrid-classification approach. We evaluate the performance of the hybrid approach on a test dataset of patent documents obtained from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, and compare its performance with that of the three conventional methods. The results demonstrate that the proposed patent-network-based approach yields more accurate class predictions than the patent network-based approach.
    Date
    22. 1.2011 13:04:21
  2. Thelwall, M.; Sud, P.; Wilkinson, D.: Link and co-inlink network diagrams with URL citations or title mentions (2012) 0.03 
    0.03027831 = product of:
  0.09083493 = sum of:
    0.09083493 = product of:
      0.13625239 = sum of:
        0.10673737 = weight(_text_:network in 57) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10673737 = score(doc=57,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.5501096 = fieldWeight in 57, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=57)
        0.029515022 = weight(_text_:22 in 57) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029515022 = score(doc=57,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15257138 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 57, 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=57)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Webometric network analyses have been used to map the connectivity of groups of websites to identify clusters, important sites or overall structure. Such analyses have mainly been based upon hyperlink counts, the number of hyperlinks between a pair of websites, although some have used title mentions or URL citations instead. The ability to automatically gather hyperlink counts from Yahoo! ceased in April 2011 and the ability to manually gather such counts was due to cease by early 2012, creating a need for alternatives. This article assesses URL citations and title mentions as possible replacements for hyperlinks in both binary and weighted direct link and co-inlink network diagrams. It also assesses three different types of data for the network connections: hit count estimates, counts of matching URLs, and filtered counts of matching URLs. Results from analyses of U.S. library and information science departments and U.K. universities give evidence that metrics based upon URLs or titles can be appropriate replacements for metrics based upon hyperlinks for both binary and weighted networks, although filtered counts of matching URLs are necessary to give the best results for co-title mention and co-URL citation network diagrams.
    Date
    6. 4.2012 18:16:22
  3. Zhang, L.; Thijs, B.; Glänzel, W.: What does scientometrics share with other "metrics" sciences? (2013) 0.03 
    0.027561722 = product of:
  0.082685165 = sum of:
    0.082685165 = product of:
      0.124027744 = sum of:
        0.076375045 = weight(_text_:network in 960) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.076375045 = score(doc=960,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.3936264 = fieldWeight in 960, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=960)
        0.047652703 = weight(_text_:29 in 960) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047652703 = score(doc=960,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15326229 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 960, 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=960)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    In this article, the authors answer the question of whether the field of scientometrics/bibliometrics shares essential characteristics of "metrics" sciences. To achieve this objective, the citation network of seven selected metrics and their information environment is analyzed.
    Date
    25. 6.2013 20:29:05
  4. Stvilia, B.; Hinnant, C.C.; Schindler, K.; Worrall, A.; Burnett, G.; Burnett, K.; Kazmer, M.M.; Marty, P.F.: Composition of scientific teams and publication productivity at a national science lab (2011) 0.02 
    0.024931874 = product of:
  0.07479562 = sum of:
    0.07479562 = product of:
      0.11219343 = sum of:
        0.08267841 = weight(_text_:network in 4191) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08267841 = score(doc=4191,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.42611307 = fieldWeight in 4191, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4191)
        0.029515022 = weight(_text_:22 in 4191) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029515022 = score(doc=4191,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15257138 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4191, 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=4191)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    The production of scientific knowledge has evolved from a process of inquiry largely based on the activities of individual scientists to one grounded in the collaborative efforts of specialized research teams. This shift brings to light a new question: how the composition of scientific teams affects their production of knowledge. This study employs data from 1,415 experiments conducted at the National High Magnetic Field Laboratory (NHMFL) between 2005 and 2008 to identify and select a sample of 89 teams and examine whether team diversity and network characteristics affect productivity. The study examines how the diversity of science teams along several variables affects overall team productivity. Results indicate several diversity measures associated with network position and team productivity. Teams with mixed institutional associations were more central to the overall network compared with teams that primarily comprised NHMFL's own scientists. Team cohesion was positively related to productivity. The study indicates that high productivity in teams is associated with high disciplinary diversity and low seniority diversity of team membership. Finally, an increase in the share of senior members negatively affects productivity, and teams with members in central structural positions perform better than other teams.
    Date
    22. 1.2011 13:19:42
  5. Kuan, C.-H.; Liu, J.S.: ¬A new approach for main path analysis : decay in knowledge diffusion (2016) 0.02 
    0.024931874 = product of:
  0.07479562 = sum of:
    0.07479562 = product of:
      0.11219343 = sum of:
        0.08267841 = weight(_text_:network in 2649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08267841 = score(doc=2649,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.42611307 = fieldWeight in 2649, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2649)
        0.029515022 = weight(_text_:22 in 2649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029515022 = score(doc=2649,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15257138 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2649, 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=2649)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Main path analysis is a powerful tool for extracting the backbones of a directed network and has been applied widely in bibliometric studies. In contrast to the no-decay assumption in the traditional approach, this study proposes a novel technique by assuming that the strength of knowledge decays when knowledge contained in one document is passed on to another document down the citation chain. We propose three decay models, arithmetic decay, geometric decay, and harmonic decay, along with their theoretical properties. In general, results of the proposed decay models depend largely on the local structure of a citation network as opposed to the global structure in the traditional approach. Thus, the significance of citation links and the associated documents that are overemphasized by the global structure in the traditional no-decay approach is treated more properly. For example, the traditional approach commonly assigns high value to documents that heavily reference others, such as review articles. Specifically in the geometric and harmonic decay models, only truly significant review articles will be included in the resulting main paths. We demonstrate this new approach and its properties through the DNA literature citation network.
    Date
    22. 1.2016 14:23:00
  6. Yan, E.: Finding knowledge paths among scientific disciplines (2014) 0.02 
    0.024277154 = product of:
  0.07283146 = sum of:
    0.07283146 = product of:
      0.109247185 = sum of:
        0.06750664 = weight(_text_:network in 1534) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06750664 = score(doc=1534,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.34791988 = fieldWeight in 1534, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1534)
        0.041740544 = weight(_text_:22 in 1534) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041740544 = score(doc=1534,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15257138 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 1534, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1534)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    This paper uncovers patterns of knowledge dissemination among scientific disciplines. Although the transfer of knowledge is largely unobservable, citations from one discipline to another have been proven to be an effective proxy to study disciplinary knowledge flow. This study constructs a knowledge-flow network in which a node represents a Journal Citation Reports subject category and a link denotes the citations from one subject category to another. Using the concept of shortest path, several quantitative measurements are proposed and applied to a knowledge-flow network. Based on an examination of subject categories in Journal Citation Reports, this study indicates that social science domains tend to be more self-contained, so it is more difficult for knowledge from other domains to flow into them; at the same time, knowledge from science domains, such as biomedicine-, chemistry-, and physics-related domains, can access and be accessed by other domains more easily. This study also shows that social science domains are more disunified than science domains, because three fifths of the knowledge paths from one social science domain to another require at least one science domain to serve as an intermediate. This work contributes to discussions on disciplinarity and interdisciplinarity by providing empirical analysis.
    Date
    26.10.2014 20:22:22
  7. Jiang, Z.; Liu, X.; Chen, Y.: Recovering uncaptured citations in a scholarly network : a two-step citation analysis to estimate publication importance (2016) 0.02 
    0.021619909 = product of:
  0.064859726 = sum of:
    0.064859726 = product of:
      0.097289585 = sum of:
        0.06750664 = weight(_text_:network in 3018) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06750664 = score(doc=3018,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.34791988 = fieldWeight in 3018, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3018)
        0.029782942 = weight(_text_:29 in 3018) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029782942 = score(doc=3018,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15326229 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 3018, 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=3018)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    The citation relationships between publications, which are significant for assessing the importance of scholarly components within a network, have been used for various scientific applications. Missing citation metadata in scholarly databases, however, create problems for classical citation-based ranking algorithms and challenge the performance of citation-based retrieval systems. In this research, we utilize a two-step citation analysis method to investigate the importance of publications for which citation information is partially missing. First, we calculate the importance of the author and then use his importance to estimate the publication importance for some selected articles. To evaluate this method, we designed a simulation experiment-"random citation-missing"-to test the two-step citation analysis that we carried out with the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) Digital Library (DL). In this experiment, we simulated different scenarios in a large-scale scientific digital library, from high-quality citation data, to very poor quality data, The results show that a two-step citation analysis can effectively uncover the importance of publications in different situations. More importantly, we found that the optimized impact from the importance of an author (first step) is exponentially increased when the quality of citation decreases. The findings from this study can further enhance citation-based publication-ranking algorithms for real-world applications.
    Date
    12. 6.2016 20:31:29
  8. Ohly, P.: Dimensions of globality : a bibliometric analysis (2016) 0.02 
    0.02108372 = product of:
  0.06325116 = sum of:
    0.06325116 = product of:
      0.09487674 = sum of:
        0.047652703 = weight(_text_:29 in 4942) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047652703 = score(doc=4942,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15326229 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = 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)
        0.047224034 = weight(_text_:22 in 4942) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047224034 = score(doc=4942,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15257138 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = 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)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    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
  9. Zhao, R.; Wei, M.; Quan, W.: Evolution of think tanks studies in view of a scientometrics perspective (2017) 0.02 
    0.020671291 = product of:
  0.062013872 = sum of:
    0.062013872 = product of:
      0.093020804 = sum of:
        0.057281278 = weight(_text_:network in 3843) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.057281278 = score(doc=3843,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.29521978 = fieldWeight in 3843, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3843)
        0.035739526 = weight(_text_:29 in 3843) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035739526 = score(doc=3843,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15326229 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 3843, 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=3843)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    The paper presents a scientometrics analysis of research work done on the emerging area of think tanks, which are regarded as a domain of information science. Research on think tanks started during the last century and in recent years has gained tremendous momentum. It is considered one of the most important emerging domains of research in information science. We have analyzed the research output data on think tanks during 2006-2016 indexed in the Web of KnowledgeT and Scopus®. Our study objectively explores the document co-citation clusters of 1,450 bibliographic records to identify the origin of think tanks and hot research specialties of the domain. CiteSpace was used to visualize the perspective of the think tanks domain. Pivotal articles, prominent authors, active disciplines and institutions have been identified by network analysis. This article describes the latest development of a generic approach to detect and visualize emerging trends and transient patterns in think tanks.
    Date
    29. 9.2017 18:46:06
  10. Frandsen, T.F.; Nicolaisen, J.: ¬The ripple effect : citation chain reactions of a nobel prize (2013) 0.02 
    0.020599846 = product of:
  0.061799537 = sum of:
    0.061799537 = product of:
      0.092699304 = sum of:
        0.057281278 = weight(_text_:network in 654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.057281278 = score(doc=654,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.29521978 = fieldWeight in 654, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=654)
        0.035418026 = weight(_text_:22 in 654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035418026 = score(doc=654,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15257138 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 654, 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=654)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    This paper explores the possible citation chain reactions of a Nobel Prize using the mathematician Robert J. Aumann as a case example. The results show that the award of the Nobel Prize in 2005 affected not only the citations to his work, but also affected the citations to the references in his scientific oeuvre. The results indicate that the spillover effect is almost as powerful as the effect itself. We are consequently able to document a ripple effect in which the awarding of the Nobel Prize ignites a citation chain reaction to Aumann's scientific oeuvre and to the references in its nearest citation network. The effect is discussed using innovation decision process theory as a point of departure to identify the factors that created a bandwagon effect leading to the reported observations.
    Date
    22. 3.2013 16:21:09
  11. Kumar, S.: Co-authorship networks : a review of the literature (2015) 0.02 
    0.020599846 = product of:
  0.061799537 = sum of:
    0.061799537 = product of:
      0.092699304 = sum of:
        0.057281278 = weight(_text_:network in 2586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.057281278 = score(doc=2586,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.29521978 = fieldWeight in 2586, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2586)
        0.035418026 = weight(_text_:22 in 2586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035418026 = score(doc=2586,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15257138 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2586, 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=2586)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to attempt to provide a review of the growing literature on co-authorship networks and the research gaps that may be investigated for future studies in this field. Design/methodology/approach - The existing literature on co-authorship networks was identified, evaluated and interpreted. Narrative review style was followed. Findings - Co-authorship, a proxy of research collaboration, is a key mechanism that links different sets of talent to produce a research output. Co-authorship could also be seen from the perspective of social networks. An in-depth analysis of such knowledge networks provides an opportunity to investigate its structure. Patterns of these relationships could reveal, for example, the mechanism that shapes our scientific community. The study provides a review of the expanding literature on co-authorship networks. Originality/value - This is one of the first comprehensive reviews of network-based studies on co-authorship. The field is fast evolving, opening new gaps for potential research. The study identifies some of these gaps.
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
  12. Ridenour, L.: Boundary objects : measuring gaps and overlap between research areas (2016) 0.02 
    0.020599846 = product of:
  0.061799537 = sum of:
    0.061799537 = product of:
      0.092699304 = sum of:
        0.057281278 = weight(_text_:network in 2835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.057281278 = score(doc=2835,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.29521978 = fieldWeight in 2835, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2835)
        0.035418026 = weight(_text_:22 in 2835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035418026 = score(doc=2835,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15257138 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2835, 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=2835)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    The aim of this paper is to develop methodology to determine conceptual overlap between research areas. It investigates patterns of terminology usage in scientific abstracts as boundary objects between research specialties. Research specialties were determined by high-level classifications assigned by Thomson Reuters in their Essential Science Indicators file, which provided a strictly hierarchical classification of journals into 22 categories. Results from the query "network theory" were downloaded from the Web of Science. From this file, two top-level groups, economics and social sciences, were selected and topically analyzed to provide a baseline of similarity on which to run an informetric analysis. The Places & Spaces Map of Science (Klavans and Boyack 2007) was used to determine the proximity of disciplines to one another in order to select the two disciplines use in the analysis. Groups analyzed share common theories and goals; however, groups used different language to describe their research. It was found that 61% of term words were shared between the two groups.
  13. Shen, J.; Yao, L.; Li, Y.; Clarke, M.; Wang, L.; Li, D.: Visualizing the history of evidence-based medicine : a bibliometric analysis (2013) 0.02 
    0.017226078 = product of:
  0.051678233 = sum of:
    0.051678233 = product of:
      0.077517346 = sum of:
        0.047734402 = weight(_text_:network in 1090) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047734402 = score(doc=1090,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.2460165 = fieldWeight in 1090, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1090)
        0.029782942 = weight(_text_:29 in 1090) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029782942 = score(doc=1090,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15326229 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 1090, 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=1090)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    The aim of this paper is to visualize the history of evidence-based medicine (EBM) and to examine the characteristics of EBM development in China and the West. We searched the Web of Science and the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure database for papers related to EBM. We applied information visualization techniques, citation analysis, cocitation analysis, cocitation cluster analysis, and network analysis to construct historiographies, themes networks, and chronological theme maps regarding EBM in China and the West. EBM appeared to develop in 4 stages: incubation (1972-1992 in the West vs. 1982-1999 in China), initiation (1992-1993 vs. 1999-2000), rapid development (1993-2000 vs. 2000-2004), and stable distribution (2000 onwards vs. 2004 onwards). Although there was a lag in EBM initiation in China compared with the West, the pace of development appeared similar. Our study shows that important differences exist in research themes, domain structures, and development depth, and in the speed of adoption between China and the West. In the West, efforts in EBM have shifted from education to practice, and from the quality of evidence to its translation. In China, there was a similar shift from education to practice, and from production of evidence to its translation. In addition, this concept has diffused to other healthcare areas, leading to the development of evidence-based traditional Chinese medicine, evidence-based nursing, and evidence-based policy making.
    Date
    28.10.2013 17:29:49
  14. Tu, Y.-N.; Hsu, S.-L.: Constructing conceptual trajectory maps to trace the development of research fields (2016) 0.02 
    0.017226078 = product of:
  0.051678233 = sum of:
    0.051678233 = product of:
      0.077517346 = sum of:
        0.047734402 = weight(_text_:network in 3059) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047734402 = score(doc=3059,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.2460165 = fieldWeight in 3059, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3059)
        0.029782942 = weight(_text_:29 in 3059) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029782942 = score(doc=3059,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15326229 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 3059, 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=3059)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    This study proposes a new method to construct and trace the trajectory of conceptual development of a research field by combining main path analysis, citation analysis, and text-mining techniques. Main path analysis, a method used commonly to trace the most critical path in a citation network, helps describe the developmental trajectory of a research field. This study extends the main path analysis method and applies text-mining techniques in the new method, which reflects the trajectory of conceptual development in an academic research field more accurately than citation frequency, which represents only the articles examined. Articles can be merged based on similarity of concepts, and by merging concepts the history of a research field can be described more precisely. The new method was applied to the "h-index" and "text mining" fields. The precision, recall, and F-measures of the h-index were 0.738, 0.652, and 0.658 and those of text-mining were 0.501, 0.653, and 0.551, respectively. Last, this study not only establishes the conceptual trajectory map of a research field, but also recommends keywords that are more precise than those used currently by researchers. These precise keywords could enable researchers to gather related works more quickly than before.
    Date
    21. 7.2016 19:29:19
  15. Castanha, R.C.G.; Wolfram, D.: ¬The domain of knowledge organization : a bibliometric analysis of prolific authors and their intellectual space (2018) 0.02 
    0.01716654 = product of:
  0.051499616 = sum of:
    0.051499616 = product of:
      0.07724942 = sum of:
        0.047734402 = weight(_text_:network in 4150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047734402 = score(doc=4150,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.2460165 = fieldWeight in 4150, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4150)
        0.029515022 = weight(_text_:22 in 4150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029515022 = score(doc=4150,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15257138 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4150, 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=4150)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    The domain of knowledge organization (KO) represents a foundational area of information science. One way to better understand the intellectual structure of the KO domain is to apply bibliometric methods to key contributors to the literature. This study analyzes the most prolific contributing authors to the journal Knowledge Organization, the sources they cite and the citations they receive for the period 1993 to 2016. The analyses were conducted using visualization outcomes of citation, co-citation and author bibliographic coupling analysis to reveal theoretical points of reference among authors and the most prominent research themes that constitute this scientific community. Birger Hjørland was the most cited author, and was situated at or near the middle of each of the maps based on different citation relationships. The proximities between authors resulting from the different citation relationships demonstrate how authors situate themselves intellectually through the citations they give and how other authors situate them through the citations received. There is a consistent core of theoretical references as well among the most productive authors. We observed a close network of scholarly communication between the authors cited in this core, which indicates the actual role of the journal Knowledge Organization as a space for knowledge construction in the area of knowledge organization.
    Source
    Knowledge organization. 45(2018) no.1, S.13-22
  16. Ortega, J.L.: ¬The presence of academic journals on Twitter and its relationship with dissemination (tweets) and research impact (citations) (2017) 0.02 
    0.01716654 = product of:
  0.051499616 = sum of:
    0.051499616 = product of:
      0.07724942 = sum of:
        0.047734402 = weight(_text_:network in 4410) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047734402 = score(doc=4410,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.2460165 = fieldWeight in 4410, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4410)
        0.029515022 = weight(_text_:22 in 4410) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029515022 = score(doc=4410,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15257138 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4410, 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=4410)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyze the relationship between dissemination of research papers on Twitter and its influence on research impact. Design/methodology/approach Four types of journal Twitter accounts (journal, owner, publisher and no Twitter account) were defined to observe differences in the number of tweets and citations. In total, 4,176 articles from 350 journals were extracted from Plum Analytics. This altmetric provider tracks the number of tweets and citations for each paper. Student's t-test for two-paired samples was used to detect significant differences between each group of journals. Regression analysis was performed to detect which variables may influence the getting of tweets and citations. Findings The results show that journals with their own Twitter account obtain more tweets (46 percent) and citations (34 percent) than journals without a Twitter account. Followers is the variable that attracts more tweets (ß=0.47) and citations (ß=0.28) but the effect is small and the fit is not good for tweets (R2=0.46) and insignificant for citations (R2=0.18). Originality/value This is the first study that tests the performance of research journals on Twitter according to their handles, observing how the dissemination of content in this microblogging network influences the citation of their papers.
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
  17. Huang, M.-H.; Huang, W.-T.; Chang, C.-C.; Chen, D. Z.; Lin, C.-P.: The greater scattering phenomenon beyond Bradford's law in patent citation (2014) 0.02 
    0.01581279 = product of:
  0.04743837 = sum of:
    0.04743837 = product of:
      0.07115755 = sum of:
        0.035739526 = weight(_text_:29 in 1352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035739526 = score(doc=1352,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15326229 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 1352, 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=1352)
        0.035418026 = weight(_text_:22 in 1352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035418026 = score(doc=1352,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15257138 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1352, 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=1352)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Date
    22. 8.2014 17:11:29
  18. Franceschet, M.: Collaboration in computer science : a network science approach (2011) 0.02 
    0.015589992 = product of:
  0.046769973 = sum of:
    0.046769973 = product of:
      0.14030991 = sum of:
        0.14030991 = weight(_text_:network in 4765) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14030991 = score(doc=4765,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.72313786 = fieldWeight in 4765, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4765)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Co-authorship in publications within a discipline uncovers interesting properties of the analyzed field. We represent collaboration in academic papers of computer science in terms of differently grained networks, namely affiliation and collaboration networks. We also build those sub-networks that emerge from either conference or journal co-authorship only. We take advantage of the network science paraphernalia to take a picture of computer science collaboration including all papers published in the field since 1936. Furthermore, we observe how collaboration in computer science evolved over time since 1960. We investigate bibliometric properties such as size of the discipline, productivity of scholars, and collaboration level in papers, as well as global network properties such as reachability and average separation distance among scholars, distribution of the number of scholar collaborators, network resilience and dependence on star collaborators, network clustering, and network assortativity by number of collaborators.
  19. Zhao, R.; Wu, S.: ¬The network pattern of journal knowledge transfer in library and information science in China (2014) 0.01 
    0.014231651 = product of:
  0.042694952 = sum of:
    0.042694952 = product of:
      0.12808485 = sum of:
        0.12808485 = weight(_text_:network in 1392) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12808485 = score(doc=1392,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.6601316 = fieldWeight in 1392, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1392)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Using the library and information science journals 2003-2012 in Nanjing University's Chinese Social Sciences Citation Index as data sources, the paper reveals the citation structure implied in these journals by applying social network analysis. Results show that, first, journal knowledge transfer activity in library and information science is frequent, and both the level of knowledge and discipline integration as well as the knowledge gap influenced knowledge transfer activity. According to the out-degree and in-degree, journals can be divided into three kinds. Second, based on professional bias and citation frequency, the knowledge transfer network can be divided into four blocks. With the change of discipline capacity and knowledge gap among journals, the "core-periphery" structure of the knowledge transfer network is getting weaker. Finally, regions of the knowledge transfer network evolved from a "weak-weak" subgroup to a "strong-weak" subgroup or a "weak-strong" subgroup, and then move to a "strong-strong" subgroup.
  20. Freitas, J.L.; Gabriel Jr., R.F.; Bufrem, L.S.: Theoretical approximations between Brazilian and Spanish authors' production in the field of knowledge organization in the production of journals on information science in Brazil (2012) 0.01 
    0.013733232 = product of:
  0.041199695 = sum of:
    0.041199695 = product of:
      0.06179954 = sum of:
        0.038187522 = weight(_text_:network in 144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038187522 = score(doc=144,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.1968132 = fieldWeight in 144, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=144)
        0.023612017 = weight(_text_:22 in 144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023612017 = score(doc=144,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15257138 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043569047 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 144, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=144)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    This work identifies and analyzes literature about knowledge organization (KO), expressed in scientific journals' communication of information science (IS). It performs an exploratory study on the Base de Dados Referencial de Artigos de Periódicos em Ciência da Informação (BRAPCI, Reference Database of Journal Articles on Information Science) between the years 2000 and 2010. The descriptors relating to "knowledge organization" are used in order to recover and analyze the corresponding articles and to identify descriptors and concepts which integrate the semantic universe related to KO. Through the analysis of content, based on metrical studies, this article gathers and interprets data relating to documents and authors. Through this, it demonstrates the development of this field and its research fronts according to the observed characteristics, as well as noting the transformation indicative in the production of knowledge. The work describes the influences of the Spanish researchers on Brazilian literature in the fields of knowledge and information organization. As a result, it presents the most cited and productive authors, the theoretical currents which support them, and the most significant relationships of the Spanish-Brazilian authors network. Based on the constant key-words analysis in the cited articles, the co-existence of the French conception current and the incipient Spanish influence in Brazil is observed. Through this, it contributes to the comprehension of the thematic range relating to KO, stimulating both criticism and self-criticism, debate and knowledge creation, based on studies that have been developed and institutionalized in academic contexts in Spain and Brazil.
    Content
    Beitrag einer Section "Selected Papers from the 1ST Brazilian Conference on Knowledge Organization And Representation, Faculdade de Ciência da Informação, Campus Universitário Darcy Ribeiro Brasília, DF Brasil, October 20-22, 2011" Vgl.: http://www.ergon-verlag.de/isko_ko/downloads/ko_39_2012_3_g.pdf.

Authors

Languages

  • e 150
  • d 10
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 158
  • el 4
  • m 2
  • s 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications