Search (131 results, page 1 of 7)

  • × theme_ss:"Informetrie"
  1. Herb, U.; Beucke, D.: ¬Die Zukunft der Impact-Messung : Social Media, Nutzung und Zitate im World Wide Web (2013) 0.07 
    0.07241859 = product of:
  0.28967437 = sum of:
    0.28967437 = weight(_text_:2f in 2188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.28967437 = score(doc=2188,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.3865637 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045596033 = queryNorm
        0.7493574 = fieldWeight in 2188, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2188)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Content
    Vgl. unter: https://www.leibniz-science20.de%2Fforschung%2Fprojekte%2Faltmetrics-in-verschiedenen-wissenschaftsdisziplinen%2F&ei=2jTgVaaXGcK4Udj1qdgB&usg=AFQjCNFOPdONj4RKBDf9YDJOLuz3lkGYlg&sig2=5YI3KWIGxBmk5_kv0P_8iQ.
  2. Haiqi, Z.: ¬The literature of Qigong : publication patterns and subject headings (1997) 0.07 
    0.06946363 = product of:
  0.13892727 = sum of:
    0.117305554 = weight(_text_:headings in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.117305554 = score(doc=862,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22113821 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045596033 = queryNorm
        0.5304626 = fieldWeight in 862, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=862)
    0.021621715 = product of:
      0.04324343 = sum of:
        0.04324343 = weight(_text_:22 in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04324343 = score(doc=862,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15966953 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045596033 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 862, 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=862)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Reports results of a bibliometric study of the literature of Qigong: a relaxation technique used to teach patients to control their heart rate, blood pressure, temperature and other involuntary functions through controlles breathing. All articles indexed in the MEDLINE CD-ROM database, between 1965 and 1995 were identified using 'breathing exercises' MeSH term. The articles were analyzed for geographical and language distribution and a ranking exercise enabled a core list of periodicals to be identified. In addition, the study shed light on the changing frequency of the MeSH terms and evaluated the research areas by measuring the information from these respective MeSH headings
    Source
    International forum on information and documentation. 22(1997) no.3, S.38-44
  3. Ridenour, L.: Boundary objects : measuring gaps and overlap between research areas (2016) 0.03 
    0.030295122 = product of:
  0.12118049 = sum of:
    0.12118049 = sum of:
      0.08411469 = weight(_text_:terminology in 2835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08411469 = score(doc=2835,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.24053115 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.2752647 = idf(docFreq=614, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045596033 = queryNorm
          0.34970397 = fieldWeight in 2835, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.2752647 = idf(docFreq=614, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2835)
      0.037065797 = weight(_text_:22 in 2835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.037065797 = score(doc=2835,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15966953 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045596033 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    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.
  4. Bookstein, A.: Scientometrics: new opportunities (1994) 0.03 
    0.028038232 = product of:
  0.11215293 = sum of:
    0.11215293 = product of:
      0.22430585 = sum of:
        0.22430585 = weight(_text_:terminology in 5062) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.22430585 = score(doc=5062,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24053115 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.2752647 = idf(docFreq=614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045596033 = queryNorm
            0.9325439 = fieldWeight in 5062, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.2752647 = idf(docFreq=614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5062)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Content
    Discusses bibliometrics, its institutionalisation, terminology, quality control and bibliometric research
  5. Leydesdorff, L.; Rotolo, D.; Rafols, I.: Bibliometric perspectives on medical innovation using the medical subject headings of PubMed (2012) 0.03 
    0.025136905 = product of:
  0.10054762 = sum of:
    0.10054762 = weight(_text_:headings in 494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10054762 = score(doc=494,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22113821 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045596033 = queryNorm
        0.45468226 = fieldWeight in 494, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=494)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Multiple perspectives on the nonlinear processes of medical innovations can be distinguished and combined using the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) of the MEDLINE database. Focusing on three main branches-"diseases," "drugs and chemicals," and "techniques and equipment"-we use base maps and overlay techniques to investigate the translations and interactions and thus to gain a bibliometric perspective on the dynamics of medical innovations. To this end, we first analyze the MEDLINE database, the MeSH index tree, and the various options for a static mapping from different perspectives and at different levels of aggregation. Following a specific innovation (RNA interference) over time, the notion of a trajectory which leaves a signature in the database is elaborated. Can the detailed index terms describing the dynamics of research be used to predict the diffusion dynamics of research results? Possibilities are specified for further integration between the MEDLINE database on one hand, and the Science Citation Index and Scopus (containing citation information) on the other.
  6. Leydesdorff, L.; Opthof, T.: Citation analysis with medical subject Headings (MeSH) using the Web of Knowledge : a new routine (2013) 0.03 
    0.025136905 = product of:
  0.10054762 = sum of:
    0.10054762 = weight(_text_:headings in 943) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10054762 = score(doc=943,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22113821 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045596033 = queryNorm
        0.45468226 = fieldWeight in 943, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=943)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Citation analysis of documents retrieved from the Medline database (at the Web of Knowledge) has been possible only on a case-by-case basis. A technique is presented here for citation analysis in batch mode using both Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) at the Web of Knowledge and the Science Citation Index at the Web of Science (WoS). This freeware routine is applied to the case of "Brugada Syndrome," a specific disease and field of research (since 1992). The journals containing these publications, for example, are attributed to WoS categories other than "cardiac and cardiovascular systems", perhaps because of the possibility of genetic testing for this syndrome in the clinic. With this routine, all the instruments available for citation analysis can now be used on the basis of MeSH terms. Other options for crossing between Medline, WoS, and Scopus are also reviewed.
  7. Torvik, V.I.; Weeber, M.; Swanson, D.R.; Smalheiser, N.R.: ¬A probabilistic similarity metric for medline mecords : a model for author name disambiguation (2005) 0.02 
    0.017774476 = product of:
  0.0710979 = sum of:
    0.0710979 = weight(_text_:headings in 3308) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0710979 = score(doc=3308,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22113821 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045596033 = queryNorm
        0.3215089 = fieldWeight in 3308, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3308)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    We present a model for estimating the probability that a pair of author names (sharing last name and first initial), appearing an two different Medline articles, refer to the same individual. The model uses a simple yet powerful similarity profile between a pair of articles, based an title, journal name, coauthor names, medical subject headings (MeSH), language, affiliation, and name attributes (prevalence in the literature, middle initial, and suffix). The similarity profile distribution is computed from reference sets consisting of pairs of articles containing almost exclusively author matches versus nonmatches, generated in an unbiased manner. Although the match set is generated automatically and might contain a small proportion of nonmatches, the model is quite robust against contamination with nonmatches. We have created a free, public service ("Author-ity": http://arrowsmith.psych.uic.edu) that takes as input an author's name given an a specific article, and gives as output a list of all articles with that (last name, first initial) ranked by decreasing similarity, with match probability indicated.
  8. Bensman, S.J.; Leydesdorff, L.: Definition and identification of journals as bibliographic and subject entities : librarianship versus ISI Journal Citation Reports methods and their effect on citation measures (2009) 0.02 
    0.017774476 = product of:
  0.0710979 = sum of:
    0.0710979 = weight(_text_:headings in 2840) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0710979 = score(doc=2840,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22113821 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045596033 = queryNorm
        0.3215089 = fieldWeight in 2840, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2840)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    This paper explores the ISI Journal Citation Reports (JCR) bibliographic and subject structures through Library of Congress (LC) and American research libraries cataloging and classification methodology. The 2006 Science Citation Index JCR Behavioral Sciences subject category journals are used as an example. From the library perspective, the main fault of the JCR bibliographic structure is that the JCR mistakenly identifies journal title segments as journal bibliographic entities, seriously affecting journal rankings by total cites and the impact factor. In respect to JCR subject structure, the title segment, which constitutes the JCR bibliographic basis, is posited as the best bibliographic entity for the citation measurement of journal subject relationships. Through factor analysis and other methods, the JCR subject categorization of journals is tested against their LC subject headings and classification. The finding is that JCR and library journal subject analyses corroborate, clarify, and correct each other.
  9. Rotolo, D.; Leydesdorff, L.: Matching Medline/PubMed data with Web of Science: A routine in R language (2015) 0.02 
    0.017774476 = product of:
  0.0710979 = sum of:
    0.0710979 = weight(_text_:headings in 2224) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0710979 = score(doc=2224,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22113821 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045596033 = queryNorm
        0.3215089 = fieldWeight in 2224, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2224)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    We present a novel routine, namely medlineR, based on the R language, that allows the user to match data from Medline/PubMed with records indexed in the ISI Web of Science (WoS) database. The matching allows exploiting the rich and controlled vocabulary of medical subject headings (MeSH) of Medline/PubMed with additional fields of WoS. The integration provides data (e.g., citation data, list of cited reference, list of the addresses of authors' host organizations, WoS subject categories) to perform a variety of scientometric analyses. This brief communication describes medlineR, the method on which it relies, and the steps the user should follow to perform the matching across the two databases. To demonstrate the differences from Leydesdorff and Opthof (Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(5), 1076-1080), we conclude this artcle by testing the routine on the MeSH category "Burgada syndrome."
  10. Nicholls, P.T.: Empirical validation of Lotka's law (1986) 0.01 
    0.012355265 = product of:
  0.04942106 = sum of:
    0.04942106 = product of:
      0.09884212 = sum of:
        0.09884212 = weight(_text_:22 in 5509) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09884212 = score(doc=5509,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15966953 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045596033 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 5509, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5509)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Information processing and management. 22(1986), S.417-419
  11. Nicolaisen, J.: Citation analysis (2007) 0.01 
    0.012355265 = product of:
  0.04942106 = sum of:
    0.04942106 = product of:
      0.09884212 = sum of:
        0.09884212 = weight(_text_:22 in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09884212 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15966953 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045596033 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 6091, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6091)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    13. 7.2008 19:53:22
  12. Fiala, J.: Information flood : fiction and reality (1987) 0.01 
    0.012355265 = product of:
  0.04942106 = sum of:
    0.04942106 = product of:
      0.09884212 = sum of:
        0.09884212 = weight(_text_:22 in 1080) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09884212 = score(doc=1080,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15966953 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045596033 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 1080, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1080)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Thermochimica acta. 110(1987), S.11-22
  13. Björneborn, L.; Ingwersen, P.: Toward a basic framework for Webometrics (2004) 0.01 
    0.012266726 = product of:
  0.049066905 = sum of:
    0.049066905 = product of:
      0.09813381 = sum of:
        0.09813381 = weight(_text_:terminology in 3088) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09813381 = score(doc=3088,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24053115 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.2752647 = idf(docFreq=614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045596033 = queryNorm
            0.40798795 = fieldWeight in 3088, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.2752647 = idf(docFreq=614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3088)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    In this article, we define webometrics within the framework of informetric studies and bibliometrics, as belonging to library and information science, and as associated with cybermetrics as a generic subfield. We develop a consistent and detailed link typology and terminology and make explicit the distinction among different Web node levels when using the proposed conceptual framework. As a consequence, we propose a novel diagram notation to fully appreciate and investigate link structures between Web nodes in webometric analyses. We warn against taking the analogy between citation analyses and link analyses too far.
  14. Neuhaus, C.; Marx, W.; Daniel, H.-W.: ¬The publication and citation impact profiles of Angewandte Chemie and the Journal of the American Chemical Society based on the sections of Chemical Abstracts : a case study on the limitations of the Journal Impact Factor (2009) 0.01 
    0.01184965 = product of:
  0.0473986 = sum of:
    0.0473986 = weight(_text_:headings in 2707) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0473986 = score(doc=2707,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22113821 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045596033 = queryNorm
        0.21433927 = fieldWeight in 2707, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2707)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    The Journal Impact Factor (JIF) published by Thomson Reuters is often used to evaluate the significance and performance of scientific journals. Besides methodological problems with the JIF, the critical issue is whether a single measure is sufficient for characterizing the impact of journals, particularly the impact of multidisciplinary and wide-scope journals that publish articles in a broad range of research fields. Taking Angewandte Chemie International Edition and the Journal of the American Chemical Society as examples, we examined the two journals' publication and impact profiles across the sections of Chemical Abstracts and compared the results with the JIF. The analysis was based primarily on Communications published in Angewandte Chemie International Edition and the Journal of the American Chemical Society during 2001 to 2005. The findings show that the information available in the Science Citation Index is a rather unreliable indication of the document type and is therefore inappropriate for comparative analysis. The findings further suggest that the composition of the journal in terms of contribution types, the length of the citation window, and the thematic focus of the journal in terms of the sections of Chemical Abstracts has a significant influence on the overall journal citation impact. Therefore, a single measure of journal citation impact such as the JIF is insufficient for characterizing the significance and performance of wide-scope journals. For the comparison of journals, more sophisticated methods such as publication and impact profiles across subject headings of bibliographic databases (e.g., the sections of Chemical Abstracts) are valuable.
  15. Tavakolizadeh-Ravari, M.: Analysis of the long term dynamics in thesaurus developments and its consequences (2017) 0.01 
    0.01184965 = product of:
  0.0473986 = sum of:
    0.0473986 = weight(_text_:headings in 3081) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0473986 = score(doc=3081,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22113821 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045596033 = queryNorm
        0.21433927 = fieldWeight in 3081, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3081)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Die Arbeit analysiert die dynamische Entwicklung und den Gebrauch von Thesaurusbegriffen. Zusätzlich konzentriert sie sich auf die Faktoren, die die Zahl von Indexbegriffen pro Dokument oder Zeitschrift beeinflussen. Als Untersuchungsobjekt dienten der MeSH und die entsprechende Datenbank "MEDLINE". Die wichtigsten Konsequenzen sind: 1. Der MeSH-Thesaurus hat sich durch drei unterschiedliche Phasen jeweils logarithmisch entwickelt. Solch einen Thesaurus sollte folgenden Gleichung folgen: "T = 3.076,6 Ln (d) - 22.695 + 0,0039d" (T = Begriffe, Ln = natürlicher Logarithmus und d = Dokumente). Um solch einen Thesaurus zu konstruieren, muss man demnach etwa 1.600 Dokumente von unterschiedlichen Themen des Bereiches des Thesaurus haben. Die dynamische Entwicklung von Thesauri wie MeSH erfordert die Einführung eines neuen Begriffs pro Indexierung von 256 neuen Dokumenten. 2. Die Verteilung der Thesaurusbegriffe erbrachte drei Kategorien: starke, normale und selten verwendete Headings. Die letzte Gruppe ist in einer Testphase, während in der ersten und zweiten Kategorie die neu hinzukommenden Deskriptoren zu einem Thesauruswachstum führen. 3. Es gibt ein logarithmisches Verhältnis zwischen der Zahl von Index-Begriffen pro Aufsatz und dessen Seitenzahl für die Artikeln zwischen einer und einundzwanzig Seiten. 4. Zeitschriftenaufsätze, die in MEDLINE mit Abstracts erscheinen erhalten fast zwei Deskriptoren mehr. 5. Die Findablity der nicht-englisch sprachigen Dokumente in MEDLINE ist geringer als die englische Dokumente. 6. Aufsätze der Zeitschriften mit einem Impact Factor 0 bis fünfzehn erhalten nicht mehr Indexbegriffe als die der anderen von MEDINE erfassten Zeitschriften. 7. In einem Indexierungssystem haben unterschiedliche Zeitschriften mehr oder weniger Gewicht in ihrem Findability. Die Verteilung der Indexbegriffe pro Seite hat gezeigt, dass es bei MEDLINE drei Kategorien der Publikationen gibt. Außerdem gibt es wenige stark bevorzugten Zeitschriften."
  16. Su, Y.; Han, L.-F.: ¬A new literature growth model : variable exponential growth law of literature (1998) 0.01 
    0.010920615 = product of:
  0.04368246 = sum of:
    0.04368246 = product of:
      0.08736492 = sum of:
        0.08736492 = weight(_text_:22 in 3690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08736492 = score(doc=3690,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15966953 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045596033 = queryNorm
            0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 3690, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3690)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    22. 5.1999 19:22:35
  17. Van der Veer Martens, B.: Do citation systems represent theories of truth? (2001) 0.01 
    0.010920615 = product of:
  0.04368246 = sum of:
    0.04368246 = product of:
      0.08736492 = sum of:
        0.08736492 = weight(_text_:22 in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08736492 = score(doc=3925,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15966953 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045596033 = queryNorm
            0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 3925, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3925)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    22. 7.2006 15:22:28
  18. Diodato, V.: Dictionary of bibliometrics (1994) 0.01 
    0.010810858 = product of:
  0.04324343 = sum of:
    0.04324343 = product of:
      0.08648686 = sum of:
        0.08648686 = weight(_text_:22 in 5666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08648686 = score(doc=5666,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15966953 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045596033 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 5666, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5666)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Journal of library and information science 22(1996) no.2, S.116-117 (L.C. Smith)
  19. Bookstein, A.: Informetric distributions : I. Unified overview (1990) 0.01 
    0.010810858 = product of:
  0.04324343 = sum of:
    0.04324343 = product of:
      0.08648686 = sum of:
        0.08648686 = weight(_text_:22 in 6902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08648686 = score(doc=6902,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15966953 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045596033 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6902, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6902)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    22. 7.2006 18:55:29
  20. Bookstein, A.: Informetric distributions : II. Resilience to ambiguity (1990) 0.01 
    0.010810858 = product of:
  0.04324343 = sum of:
    0.04324343 = product of:
      0.08648686 = sum of:
        0.08648686 = weight(_text_:22 in 4689) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08648686 = score(doc=4689,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15966953 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045596033 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4689, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4689)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    22. 7.2006 18:55:55

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 121
  • d 9
  • ro 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 128
  • el 2
  • m 2
  • s 1
  • x 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications