Search (20 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × year_i:[2020 TO 2030}
  • × theme_ss:"Informetrie"
  1. Zhang, Y.; Wu, M.; Zhang, G.; Lu, J.: Stepping beyond your comfort zone : diffusion-based network analytics for knowledge trajectory recommendation (2023) 0.03
    0.027774185 = product of:
      0.083322555 = sum of:
        0.083322555 = product of:
          0.124983825 = sum of:
            0.095468804 = weight(_text_:network in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.095468804 = score(doc=994,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043569047 = queryNorm
                0.492033 = fieldWeight in 994, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=994)
            0.029515022 = weight(_text_:22 in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.029515022 = score(doc=994,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15257138 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043569047 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 994, 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=994)
          0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Predicting a researcher's knowledge trajectories beyond their current foci can leverage potential inter-/cross-/multi-disciplinary interactions to achieve exploratory innovation. In this study, we present a method of diffusion-based network analytics for knowledge trajectory recommendation. The method begins by constructing a heterogeneous bibliometric network consisting of a co-topic layer and a co-authorship layer. A novel link prediction approach with a diffusion strategy is then used to capture the interactions between social elements (e.g., collaboration) and knowledge elements (e.g., technological similarity) in the process of exploratory innovation. This diffusion strategy differentiates the interactions occurring among homogeneous and heterogeneous nodes in the heterogeneous bibliometric network and weights the strengths of these interactions. Two sets of experiments-one with a local dataset and the other with a global dataset-demonstrate that the proposed method is prior to 10 selected baselines in link prediction, recommender systems, and upstream graph representation learning. A case study recommending knowledge trajectories of information scientists with topical hierarchy and explainable mediators reveals the proposed method's reliability and potential practical uses in broad scenarios.
    Date
    22. 6.2023 18:07:12
  2. Milard, B.; Pitarch, Y.: Egocentric cocitation networks and scientific papers destinies (2023) 0.03
    0.025872445 = product of:
      0.07761733 = sum of:
        0.07761733 = product of:
          0.11642599 = sum of:
            0.081007965 = weight(_text_:network in 918) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.081007965 = score(doc=918,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043569047 = queryNorm
                0.41750383 = fieldWeight in 918, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=918)
            0.035418026 = weight(_text_:22 in 918) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.035418026 = score(doc=918,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15257138 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043569047 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 918, 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=918)
          0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    To what extent is the destiny of a scientific paper shaped by the cocitation network in which it is involved? What are the social contexts that can explain these structuring? Using bibliometric data, interviews with researchers, and social network analysis, this article proposes a typology based on egocentric cocitation networks that displays a quadruple structuring (before and after publication): polarization, clusterization, atomization, and attrition. It shows that the academic capital of the authors and the intellectual resources of their research are key factors of these destinies, as are the social relations between the authors concerned. The circumstances of the publishing are also correlated with the structuring of the egocentric cocitation networks, showing how socially embedded they are. Finally, the article discusses the contribution of these original networks to the analyze of scientific production and its dynamics.
    Date
    21. 3.2023 19:22:14
  3. Lorentzen, D.G.: Bridging polarised Twitter discussions : the interactions of the users in the middle (2021) 0.02
    0.020599846 = product of:
      0.061799537 = sum of:
        0.061799537 = product of:
          0.092699304 = sum of:
            0.057281278 = weight(_text_:network in 182) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.057281278 = score(doc=182,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043569047 = queryNorm
                0.29521978 = fieldWeight in 182, 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=182)
            0.035418026 = weight(_text_:22 in 182) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.035418026 = score(doc=182,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15257138 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043569047 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 182, 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=182)
          0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose The purpose of the paper is to analyse the interactions of bridging users in Twitter discussions about vaccination. Design/methodology/approach Conversational threads were collected through filtering the Twitter stream using keywords and the most active participants in the conversations. Following data collection and anonymisation of tweets and user profiles, a retweet network was created to find users bridging the main clusters. Four conversations were selected, ranging from 456 to 1,983 tweets long, and then analysed through content analysis. Findings Although different opinions met in the discussions, a consensus was rarely built. Many sub-threads involved insults and criticism, and participants seemed not interested in shifting their positions. However, examples of reasoned discussions were also found. Originality/value The study analyses conversations on Twitter, which is rarely studied. The focus on the interactions of bridging users adds to the uniqueness of the paper.
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
  4. Thelwall, M.; Thelwall, S.: ¬A thematic analysis of highly retweeted early COVID-19 tweets : consensus, information, dissent and lockdown life (2020) 0.01
    0.013177326 = product of:
      0.039531976 = sum of:
        0.039531976 = product of:
          0.059297964 = sum of:
            0.029782942 = weight(_text_:29 in 178) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.029782942 = score(doc=178,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15326229 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043569047 = queryNorm
                0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 178, 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=178)
            0.029515022 = weight(_text_:22 in 178) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.029515022 = score(doc=178,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15257138 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043569047 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 178, 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=178)
          0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose Public attitudes towards COVID-19 and social distancing are critical in reducing its spread. It is therefore important to understand public reactions and information dissemination in all major forms, including on social media. This article investigates important issues reflected on Twitter in the early stages of the public reaction to COVID-19. Design/methodology/approach A thematic analysis of the most retweeted English-language tweets mentioning COVID-19 during March 10-29, 2020. Findings The main themes identified for the 87 qualifying tweets accounting for 14 million retweets were: lockdown life; attitude towards social restrictions; politics; safety messages; people with COVID-19; support for key workers; work; and COVID-19 facts/news. Research limitations/implications Twitter played many positive roles, mainly through unofficial tweets. Users shared social distancing information, helped build support for social distancing, criticised government responses, expressed support for key workers and helped each other cope with social isolation. A few popular tweets not supporting social distancing show that government messages sometimes failed. Practical implications Public health campaigns in future may consider encouraging grass roots social web activity to support campaign goals. At a methodological level, analysing retweet counts emphasised politics and ignored practical implementation issues. Originality/value This is the first qualitative analysis of general COVID-19-related retweeting.
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
  5. Zhu, Y.; Quan, L.; Chen, P.-Y.; Kim, M.C.; Che, C.: Predicting coauthorship using bibliographic network embedding (2023) 0.01
    0.0118597075 = product of:
      0.035579123 = sum of:
        0.035579123 = product of:
          0.10673737 = sum of:
            0.10673737 = weight(_text_:network in 917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.10673737 = score(doc=917,freq=10.0), product of:
                0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043569047 = queryNorm
                0.5501096 = fieldWeight in 917, 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=917)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Coauthorship prediction applies predictive analytics to bibliographic data to predict authors who are highly likely to be coauthors. In this study, we propose an approach for coauthorship prediction based on bibliographic network embedding through a graph-based bibliographic data model that can be used to model common bibliographic data, including papers, terms, sources, authors, departments, research interests, universities, and countries. A real-world dataset released by AMiner that includes more than 2 million papers, 8 million citations, and 1.7 million authors were integrated into a large bibliographic network using the proposed bibliographic data model. Translation-based methods were applied to the entities and relationships to generate their low-dimensional embeddings while preserving their connectivity information in the original bibliographic network. We applied machine learning algorithms to embeddings that represent the coauthorship relationships of the two authors and achieved high prediction results. The reference model, which is the combination of a network embedding size of 100, the most basic translation-based method, and a gradient boosting method achieved an F1 score of 0.9 and even higher scores are obtainable with different embedding sizes and more advanced embedding methods. Thus, the strengths of the proposed approach lie in its customizable components under a unified framework.
  6. Jiang, X.; Zhu, X.; Chen, J.: Main path analysis on cyclic citation networks (2020) 0.01
    0.00918649 = product of:
      0.02755947 = sum of:
        0.02755947 = product of:
          0.08267841 = sum of:
            0.08267841 = weight(_text_:network in 5813) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08267841 = score(doc=5813,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043569047 = queryNorm
                0.42611307 = fieldWeight in 5813, 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=5813)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Main path analysis is a famous network-based method for understanding the evolution of a scientific domain. Most existing methods have two steps, weighting citation arcs based on search path counting and exploring main paths in a greedy fashion, with the assumption that citation networks are acyclic. The only available proposal that avoids manual cycle removal is to preprint transform a cyclic network to an acyclic counterpart. Through a detailed discussion about the issues concerning this approach, especially deriving the "de-preprinted" main paths for the original network, this article proposes an alternative solution with two-fold contributions. Based on the argument that a publication cannot influence itself through a citation cycle, the SimSPC algorithm is proposed to weight citation arcs by counting simple search paths. A set of algorithms are further proposed for main path exploration and extraction directly from cyclic networks based on a novel data structure main path tree. The experiments on two cyclic citation networks demonstrate the usefulness of the alternative solution. In the meanwhile, experiments show that publications in strongly connected components may sit on the turning points of main path networks, which signifies the necessity of a systematic way of dealing with citation cycles.
  7. Costas, R.; Rijcke, S. de; Marres, N.: "Heterogeneous couplings" : operationalizing network perspectives to study science-society interactions through social media metrics (2021) 0.01
    0.00918649 = product of:
      0.02755947 = sum of:
        0.02755947 = product of:
          0.08267841 = sum of:
            0.08267841 = weight(_text_:network in 215) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08267841 = score(doc=215,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043569047 = queryNorm
                0.42611307 = fieldWeight in 215, 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=215)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Social media metrics have a genuine networked nature, reflecting the networking characteristics of the social media platform from where they are derived. This networked nature has been relatively less explored in the literature on altmetrics, although new network-level approaches are starting to appear. A general conceptualization of the role of social media networks in science communication, and particularly of social media as a specific type of interface between science and society, is still missing. The aim of this paper is to provide a conceptual framework for appraising interactions between science and society in multiple directions, in what we call heterogeneous couplings. Heterogeneous couplings are conceptualized as the co-occurrence of science and non-science objects, actors, and interactions in online media environments. This conceptualization provides a common framework to study the interactions between science and non-science actors as captured via online and social media platforms. The conceptualization of heterogeneous couplings opens wider opportunities for the development of network applications and analyses of the interactions between societal and scholarly entities in social media environments, paving the way toward more advanced forms of altmetrics, social (media) studies of science, and the conceptualization and operationalization of more advanced science-society studies.
  8. Roszkowski, M.: ¬The sociological and ontological dimensions of the knowledge organization domain on Google Scholar citations (2020) 0.01
    0.0053038225 = product of:
      0.015911467 = sum of:
        0.015911467 = product of:
          0.047734402 = sum of:
            0.047734402 = weight(_text_:network in 5759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.047734402 = score(doc=5759,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043569047 = queryNorm
                0.2460165 = fieldWeight in 5759, 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=5759)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    This study aims to identify the profiles of researchers in the knowledge organization domain on Google Scholar Citations (GSC) and investigate its sociological and ontological dimensions. The sociological dimension is related to GSC users who declared research interests that fall within the scope of the knowledge organization domain. The ontological dimension is based on the study of these concepts. Domain analysis was used as a methodological framework for this study. A search was conducted on GSC using keywords in order to create a list of scholars who declared the knowledge organization domain as one of their research interests in their Google Scholar Profiles (GSPs). Next, the search for GSPs of authors who had published their papers in the Knowledge Organization journal from 2000 to 2019 was conducted. The results showed that there were 379 publicly available GSPs. Analysis of the affiliated institutions showed that the majority of them were based respectively in the USA, Brazil, and then in India. The ontological dimension of the knowledge organization domain on GSC was examined by studying keywords attached to GSPs. The most frequently used keywords were identified and using network analysis five clusters that represented the main areas of interest were extracted.
  9. Lu, C.; Zhang, Y.; Ahn, Y.-Y.; Ding, Y.; Zhang, C.; Ma, D.: Co-contributorship network and division of labor in individual scientific collaborations (2020) 0.01
    0.0053038225 = product of:
      0.015911467 = sum of:
        0.015911467 = product of:
          0.047734402 = sum of:
            0.047734402 = weight(_text_:network in 5963) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.047734402 = score(doc=5963,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043569047 = queryNorm
                0.2460165 = fieldWeight in 5963, 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=5963)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
  10. Zhang, Y.; Zhang, C.: Enhancing keyphrase extraction from microblogs using human reading time (2021) 0.01
    0.0053038225 = product of:
      0.015911467 = sum of:
        0.015911467 = product of:
          0.047734402 = sum of:
            0.047734402 = weight(_text_:network in 237) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.047734402 = score(doc=237,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043569047 = queryNorm
                0.2460165 = fieldWeight in 237, 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=237)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The premise of manual keyphrase annotation is to read the corresponding content of an annotated object. Intuitively, when we read, more important words will occupy a longer reading time. Hence, by leveraging human reading time, we can find the salient words in the corresponding content. However, previous studies on keyphrase extraction ignore human reading features. In this article, we aim to leverage human reading time to extract keyphrases from microblog posts. There are two main tasks in this study. One is to determine how to measure the time spent by a human on reading a word. We use eye fixation durations (FDs) extracted from an open source eye-tracking corpus. Moreover, we propose strategies to make eye FD more effective on keyphrase extraction. The other task is to determine how to integrate human reading time into keyphrase extraction models. We propose two novel neural network models. The first is a model in which the human reading time is used as the ground truth of the attention mechanism. In the second model, we use human reading time as the external feature. Quantitative and qualitative experiments show that our proposed models yield better performance than the baseline models on two microblog datasets.
  11. Ikae, C.; Savoy, J.: Gender identification on Twitter (2022) 0.01
    0.0053038225 = product of:
      0.015911467 = sum of:
        0.015911467 = product of:
          0.047734402 = sum of:
            0.047734402 = weight(_text_:network in 445) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.047734402 = score(doc=445,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043569047 = queryNorm
                0.2460165 = fieldWeight in 445, 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=445)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    To determine the author of a text's gender, various feature types have been suggested (e.g., function words, n-gram of letters, etc.) leading to a huge number of stylistic markers. To determine the target category, different machine learning models have been suggested (e.g., logistic regression, decision tree, k nearest-neighbors, support vector machine, naïve Bayes, neural networks, and random forest). In this study, our first objective is to know whether or not the same model always proposes the best effectiveness when considering similar corpora under the same conditions. Thus, based on 7 CLEF-PAN collections, this study analyzes the effectiveness of 10 different classifiers. Our second aim is to propose a 2-stage feature selection to reduce the feature size to a few hundred terms without any significant change in the performance level compared to approaches using all the attributes (increase of around 5% after applying the proposed feature selection). Based on our experiments, neural network or random forest tend, on average, to produce the highest effectiveness. Moreover, empirical evidence indicates that reducing the feature set size to around 300 without penalizing the effectiveness is possible. Finally, based on such reduced feature sizes, an analysis reveals some of the specific terms that clearly discriminate between the 2 genders.
  12. Manley, S.: Letters to the editor and the race for publication metrics (2022) 0.00
    0.004591226 = product of:
      0.013773678 = sum of:
        0.013773678 = product of:
          0.04132103 = sum of:
            0.04132103 = weight(_text_:22 in 547) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04132103 = score(doc=547,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15257138 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043569047 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 547, 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=547)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    6. 4.2022 19:22:26
  13. Zhao, D.; Strotmann, A.: Mapping knowledge domains on Wikipedia : an author bibliographic coupling analysis of traditional Chinese medicine (2022) 0.00
    0.004243058 = product of:
      0.012729174 = sum of:
        0.012729174 = product of:
          0.038187522 = sum of:
            0.038187522 = weight(_text_:network in 608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.038187522 = score(doc=608,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19402927 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043569047 = queryNorm
                0.1968132 = fieldWeight in 608, 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=608)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose Wikipedia has the lofty goal of compiling all human knowledge. The purpose of the present study is to map the structure of the Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) knowledge domain on Wikipedia, to identify patterns of knowledge representation on Wikipedia and to test the applicability of author bibliographic coupling analysis, an effective method for mapping knowledge domains represented in published scholarly documents, for Wikipedia data. Design/methodology/approach We adapted and followed the well-established procedures and techniques for author bibliographic coupling analysis (ABCA). Instead of bibliographic data from a citation database, we used all articles on TCM downloaded from the English version of Wikipedia as our dataset. An author bibliographic coupling network was calculated and then factor analyzed using SPSS. Factor analysis results were visualized. Factors were labeled upon manual examination of articles that authors who load primarily in each factor have significantly contributed references to. Clear factors were interpreted as topics. Findings Seven TCM topic areas are represented on Wikipedia, among which Acupuncture-related practices, Falun Gong and Herbal Medicine attracted the most significant contributors to TCM. Acupuncture and Qi Gong have the most connections to the TCM knowledge domain and also serve as bridges for other topics to connect to the domain. Herbal medicine is weakly linked to and non-herbal medicine is isolated from the rest of the TCM knowledge domain. It appears that specific topics are represented well on Wikipedia but their conceptual connections are not. ABCA is effective for mapping knowledge domains on Wikipedia but document-based bibliographic coupling analysis is not. Originality/value Given the prominent position of Wikipedia for both information users and for researchers on knowledge organization and information retrieval, it is important to study how well knowledge is represented and structured on Wikipedia. Such studies appear largely missing although studies from different perspectives both about Wikipedia and using Wikipedia as data are abundant. Author bibliographic coupling analysis is effective for mapping knowledge domains represented in published scholarly documents but has never been applied to mapping knowledge domains represented on Wikipedia.
  14. Liu, M.; Bu, Y.; Chen, C.; Xu, J.; Li, D.; Leng, Y.; Freeman, R.B.; Meyer, E.T.; Yoon, W.; Sung, M.; Jeong, M.; Lee, J.; Kang, J.; Min, C.; Zhai, Y.; Song, M.; Ding, Y.: Pandemics are catalysts of scientific novelty : evidence from COVID-19 (2022) 0.00
    0.003309216 = product of:
      0.009927647 = sum of:
        0.009927647 = product of:
          0.029782942 = sum of:
            0.029782942 = weight(_text_:29 in 633) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.029782942 = score(doc=633,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15326229 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043569047 = queryNorm
                0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 633, 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=633)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Scientific novelty drives the efforts to invent new vaccines and solutions during the pandemic. First-time collaboration and international collaboration are two pivotal channels to expand teams' search activities for a broader scope of resources required to address the global challenge, which might facilitate the generation of novel ideas. Our analysis of 98,981 coronavirus papers suggests that scientific novelty measured by the BioBERT model that is pretrained on 29 million PubMed articles, and first-time collaboration increased after the outbreak of COVID-19, and international collaboration witnessed a sudden decrease. During COVID-19, papers with more first-time collaboration were found to be more novel and international collaboration did not hamper novelty as it had done in the normal periods. The findings suggest the necessity of reaching out for distant resources and the importance of maintaining a collaborative scientific community beyond nationalism during a pandemic.
  15. Jiao, H.; Qiu, Y.; Ma, X.; Yang, B.: Dissmination effect of data papers on scientific datasets (2024) 0.00
    0.003309216 = product of:
      0.009927647 = sum of:
        0.009927647 = product of:
          0.029782942 = sum of:
            0.029782942 = weight(_text_:29 in 1204) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.029782942 = score(doc=1204,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15326229 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043569047 = queryNorm
                0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 1204, 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=1204)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    7. 1.2024 18:24:29
  16. Wang, S.; Ma, Y.; Mao, J.; Bai, Y.; Liang, Z.; Li, G.: Quantifying scientific breakthroughs by a novel disruption indicator based on knowledge entities : On the rise of scrape-and-report scholarship in online reviews research (2023) 0.00
    0.003279447 = product of:
      0.009838341 = sum of:
        0.009838341 = product of:
          0.029515022 = sum of:
            0.029515022 = weight(_text_:22 in 882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.029515022 = score(doc=882,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15257138 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043569047 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 882, 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=882)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    22. 1.2023 18:37:33
  17. Cerda-Cosme, R.; Méndez, E.: Analysis of shared research data in Spanish scientific papers about COVID-19 : a first approach (2023) 0.00
    0.003279447 = product of:
      0.009838341 = sum of:
        0.009838341 = product of:
          0.029515022 = sum of:
            0.029515022 = weight(_text_:22 in 916) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.029515022 = score(doc=916,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15257138 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043569047 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 916, 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=916)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    21. 3.2023 19:22:02
  18. Asubiaro, T.V.; Onaolapo, S.: ¬A comparative study of the coverage of African journals in Web of Science, Scopus, and CrossRef (2023) 0.00
    0.003279447 = product of:
      0.009838341 = sum of:
        0.009838341 = product of:
          0.029515022 = sum of:
            0.029515022 = weight(_text_:22 in 992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.029515022 = score(doc=992,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15257138 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043569047 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 992, 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=992)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    22. 6.2023 14:09:06
  19. Thelwall, M.; Kousha, K.; Abdoli, M.; Stuart, E.; Makita, M.; Wilson, P.; Levitt, J.: Why are coauthored academic articles more cited : higher quality or larger audience? (2023) 0.00
    0.003279447 = product of:
      0.009838341 = sum of:
        0.009838341 = product of:
          0.029515022 = sum of:
            0.029515022 = weight(_text_:22 in 995) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.029515022 = score(doc=995,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15257138 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043569047 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 995, 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=995)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    22. 6.2023 18:11:50
  20. Vakkari, P.; Järvelin, K.; Chang, Y.-W.: ¬The association of disciplinary background with the evolution of topics and methods in Library and Information Science research 1995-2015 (2023) 0.00
    0.003279447 = product of:
      0.009838341 = sum of:
        0.009838341 = product of:
          0.029515022 = sum of:
            0.029515022 = weight(_text_:22 in 998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.029515022 = score(doc=998,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15257138 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043569047 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 998, 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=998)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    22. 6.2023 18:15:06