-
Quoniam, L.: Bibliometric law used for information retrieval (1998)
0.05
0.05314992 = product of:
0.07972488 = sum of:
0.051251903 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1162) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.051251903 = score(doc=1162,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15490976 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.051211275 = queryNorm
0.33085006 = fieldWeight in 1162, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1162)
0.028472973 = product of:
0.056945946 = sum of:
0.056945946 = weight(_text_:conference in 1162) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056945946 = score(doc=1162,freq=2.0), product of:
0.19418365 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7918143 = idf(docFreq=2710, maxDocs=44218)
0.051211275 = queryNorm
0.2932582 = fieldWeight in 1162, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.7918143 = idf(docFreq=2710, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1162)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Zipf's law was used to qualify all the key words of documents in a data set. This qualification was used to build a graphical representation of the resulting indicator in each document. The graphical resolution leads to a document dispatch in a 3 dimensional space. This graphical representation was used as an information retrieval tool without using any keyword. The presentation of a case study is available on the WWW. The graph is drawn in VRML allowing a dynamic picture which is linked to a database management system (FreeWAIS)
- Footnote
- Paper presented at the 6th conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, Jerusalem, 16-19 June 1997
-
Chan, H.C.; Kim, H.-W.; Tan, W.C.: Information systems citation patterns from International Conference on Information Systems articles (2006)
0.05
0.04641738 = product of:
0.13925214 = sum of:
0.13925214 = sum of:
0.09762162 = weight(_text_:conference in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09762162 = score(doc=201,freq=8.0), product of:
0.19418365 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7918143 = idf(docFreq=2710, maxDocs=44218)
0.051211275 = queryNorm
0.50272834 = fieldWeight in 201, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.7918143 = idf(docFreq=2710, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=201)
0.041630525 = weight(_text_:22 in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041630525 = score(doc=201,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17933317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051211275 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 201, 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=201)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Research patterns could enhance understanding of the Information Systems (IS) field. Citation analysis is the methodology commonly used to determine such research patterns. In this study, the citation methodology is applied to one of the top-ranked Information Systems conferences - International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS). Information is extracted from papers in the proceedings of ICIS 2000 to 2002. A total of 145 base articles and 4,226 citations are used. Research patterns are obtained using total citations, citations per journal or conference, and overlapping citations. We then provide the citation ranking of journals and conferences. We also examine the difference between the citation ranking in this study and the ranking of IS journals and IS conferences in other studies. Based on the comparison, we confirm that IS research is a multidisciplinary research area. We also identify the most cited papers and authors in the IS research area, and the organizations most active in producing papers in the top-rated IS conference. We discuss the findings and implications of the study.
- Date
- 3. 1.2007 17:22:03
-
Haustein, S.; Sugimoto, C.; Larivière, V.: Social media in scholarly communication : Guest editorial (2015)
0.04
0.04050156 = product of:
0.06075234 = sum of:
0.015531673 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3809) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015531673 = score(doc=3809,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15490976 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.051211275 = queryNorm
0.10026272 = fieldWeight in 3809, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3809)
0.045220666 = sum of:
0.024405405 = weight(_text_:conference in 3809) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024405405 = score(doc=3809,freq=2.0), product of:
0.19418365 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7918143 = idf(docFreq=2710, maxDocs=44218)
0.051211275 = queryNorm
0.12568209 = fieldWeight in 3809, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.7918143 = idf(docFreq=2710, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3809)
0.020815263 = weight(_text_:22 in 3809) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020815263 = score(doc=3809,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17933317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051211275 = queryNorm
0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 3809, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3809)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- This year marks 350 years since the inaugural publications of both the Journal des Sçavans and the Philosophical Transactions, first published in 1665 and considered the birth of the peer-reviewed journal article. This form of scholarly communication has not only remained the dominant model for disseminating new knowledge (particularly for science and medicine), but has also increased substantially in volume. Derek de Solla Price - the "father of scientometrics" (Merton and Garfield, 1986, p. vii) - was the first to document the exponential increase in scientific journals and showed that "scientists have always felt themselves to be awash in a sea of the scientific literature" (Price, 1963, p. 15), as, for example, expressed at the 1948 Royal Society's Scientific Information Conference: Not for the first time in history, but more acutely than ever before, there was a fear that scientists would be overwhelmed, that they would be no longer able to control the vast amounts of potentially relevant material that were pouring forth from the world's presses, that science itself was under threat (Bawden and Robinson, 2008, p. 183).
One of the solutions to help scientists filter the most relevant publications and, thus, to stay current on developments in their fields during the transition from "little science" to "big science", was the introduction of citation indexing as a Wellsian "World Brain" (Garfield, 1964) of scientific information: It is too much to expect a research worker to spend an inordinate amount of time searching for the bibliographic descendants of antecedent papers. It would not be excessive to demand that the thorough scholar check all papers that have cited or criticized such papers, if they could be located quickly. The citation index makes this check practicable (Garfield, 1955, p. 108). In retrospective, citation indexing can be perceived as a pre-social web version of crowdsourcing, as it is based on the concept that the community of citing authors outperforms indexers in highlighting cognitive links between papers, particularly on the level of specific ideas and concepts (Garfield, 1983). Over the last 50 years, citation analysis and more generally, bibliometric methods, have developed from information retrieval tools to research evaluation metrics, where they are presumed to make scientific funding more efficient and effective (Moed, 2006). However, the dominance of bibliometric indicators in research evaluation has also led to significant goal displacement (Merton, 1957) and the oversimplification of notions of "research productivity" and "scientific quality", creating adverse effects such as salami publishing, honorary authorships, citation cartels, and misuse of indicators (Binswanger, 2015; Cronin and Sugimoto, 2014; Frey and Osterloh, 2006; Haustein and Larivière, 2015; Weingart, 2005).
- Date
- 20. 1.2015 18:30:22
-
Ding, Y.: Applying weighted PageRank to author citation networks (2011)
0.04
0.04035003 = product of:
0.060525045 = sum of:
0.03624057 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03624057 = score(doc=4188,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15490976 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.051211275 = queryNorm
0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 4188, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4188)
0.024284473 = product of:
0.048568945 = sum of:
0.048568945 = weight(_text_:22 in 4188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048568945 = score(doc=4188,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17933317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051211275 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4188, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4188)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- This article aims to identify whether different weighted PageRank algorithms can be applied to author citation networks to measure the popularity and prestige of a scholar from a citation perspective. Information retrieval (IR) was selected as a test field and data from 1956-2008 were collected from Web of Science. Weighted PageRank with citation and publication as weighted vectors were calculated on author citation networks. The results indicate that both popularity rank and prestige rank were highly correlated with the weighted PageRank. Principal component analysis was conducted to detect relationships among these different measures. For capturing prize winners within the IR field, prestige rank outperformed all the other measures
- Date
- 22. 1.2011 13:02:21
-
Ohly, P.: Dimensions of globality : a bibliometric analysis (2016)
0.04
0.04019615 = product of:
0.120588444 = sum of:
0.120588444 = sum of:
0.065081075 = weight(_text_:conference in 4942) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.065081075 = score(doc=4942,freq=2.0), product of:
0.19418365 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7918143 = idf(docFreq=2710, maxDocs=44218)
0.051211275 = queryNorm
0.3351522 = fieldWeight in 4942, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.7918143 = idf(docFreq=2710, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4942)
0.05550737 = weight(_text_:22 in 4942) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05550737 = score(doc=4942,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17933317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051211275 = 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)
0.33333334 = 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
-
Tsay, M.-y.; Shu, Z.-y.: Journal bibliometric analysis : a case study on the Journal of Documentation (2011)
0.04
0.037964225 = product of:
0.056946337 = sum of:
0.036608502 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 294) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036608502 = score(doc=294,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15490976 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.051211275 = queryNorm
0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 294, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=294)
0.020337837 = product of:
0.040675674 = sum of:
0.040675674 = weight(_text_:conference in 294) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040675674 = score(doc=294,freq=2.0), product of:
0.19418365 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7918143 = idf(docFreq=2710, maxDocs=44218)
0.051211275 = queryNorm
0.20947012 = fieldWeight in 294, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.7918143 = idf(docFreq=2710, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=294)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Purpose - This study aims to explore the journal bibliometric characteristics of the Journal of Documentation (JOD) and the subject relationship with other disciplines by citation analysis. Design/methodology/approach - The citation data were drawn from references of each article of JOD during 1998 and 2008. Ulrich's Periodicals Directory, Library of Congress Subject Heading, retrieved from the WorldCat and LISA database were used to identify the main class, subclass and subject of cited journals and books. Findings - The results of this study revealed that journal articles are the most cited document, followed by books and book chapters, electronic resources, and conference proceedings, respectively. The three main classes of cited journals in JOD papers are library science, science, and social sciences. The three subclasses of non-LIS journals that were highly cited in JOD papers are Science, "Mathematics. Computer science", and "Industries. Land use. Labor". The three highly cited subjects of library and information science journals encompass searching, information work, and online information retrieval. The most cited main class of books in JOD papers is library and information science, followed by social sciences, science, "Philosophy. Psychology. Religion." The three highly cited subclasses of books in JOD papers are "Books (General). Writing. Paleography. Book industries and trade. Libraries. Bibliography," "Philology and linguistics," and Science, and the most cited subject of books is information storage and retrieval systems. Originality/value - Results for the present research found that information science, as represented by JOD, is a developing discipline with an expanding literature relating to multiple subject areas.
-
Wolfram, D.: Applied informetrics for information retrieval research (2003)
0.04
0.03586887 = product of:
0.1076066 = sum of:
0.1076066 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.1076066 = score(doc=4589,freq=6.0), product of:
0.15490976 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.051211275 = queryNorm
0.6946405 = fieldWeight in 4589, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4589)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- The author demonstrates how informetric analysis of information retrieval system content and use provides valuable insights that have applications for the modelling, design, and evaluation of information retrieval systems.
-
Glänzel, W.: Bibliometrics-aided retrieval - where information retrieval meets scientometrics (2015)
0.04
0.03586887 = product of:
0.1076066 = sum of:
0.1076066 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.1076066 = score(doc=1690,freq=6.0), product of:
0.15490976 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.051211275 = queryNorm
0.6946405 = fieldWeight in 1690, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1690)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Footnote
- Beitrag in einem Special Issue "Combining bibliometrics and information retrieval"
-
Zhang, Y.; Jansen, B.J.; Spink, A.: Identification of factors predicting clickthrough in Web searching using neural network analysis (2009)
0.03
0.03458574 = product of:
0.05187861 = sum of:
0.031063346 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.031063346 = score(doc=2742,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15490976 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.051211275 = queryNorm
0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 2742, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2742)
0.020815263 = product of:
0.041630525 = sum of:
0.041630525 = weight(_text_:22 in 2742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041630525 = score(doc=2742,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17933317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051211275 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2742, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2742)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- In this research, we aim to identify factors that significantly affect the clickthrough of Web searchers. Our underlying goal is determine more efficient methods to optimize the clickthrough rate. We devise a clickthrough metric for measuring customer satisfaction of search engine results using the number of links visited, number of queries a user submits, and rank of clicked links. We use a neural network to detect the significant influence of searching characteristics on future user clickthrough. Our results show that high occurrences of query reformulation, lengthy searching duration, longer query length, and the higher ranking of prior clicked links correlate positively with future clickthrough. We provide recommendations for leveraging these findings for improving the performance of search engine retrieval and result ranking, along with implications for search engine marketing.
- Date
- 22. 3.2009 17:49:11
-
Meho, L.I.; Rogers, Y.: Citation counting, citation ranking, and h-index of human-computer interaction researchers : a comparison of Scopus and Web of Science (2008)
0.03
0.030738732 = product of:
0.09221619 = sum of:
0.09221619 = sum of:
0.05752409 = weight(_text_:conference in 2352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05752409 = score(doc=2352,freq=4.0), product of:
0.19418365 = queryWeight, product of:
3.7918143 = idf(docFreq=2710, maxDocs=44218)
0.051211275 = queryNorm
0.2962355 = fieldWeight in 2352, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.7918143 = idf(docFreq=2710, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2352)
0.034692105 = weight(_text_:22 in 2352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.034692105 = score(doc=2352,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17933317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051211275 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2352, 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=2352)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- This study examines the differences between Scopus and Web of Science in the citation counting, citation ranking, and h-index of 22 top human-computer interaction (HCI) researchers from EQUATOR - a large British Interdisciplinary Research Collaboration project. Results indicate that Scopus provides significantly more coverage of HCI literature than Web of Science, primarily due to coverage of relevant ACM and IEEE peer-reviewed conference proceedings. No significant differences exist between the two databases if citations in journals only are compared. Although broader coverage of the literature does not significantly alter the relative citation ranking of individual researchers, Scopus helps distinguish between the researchers in a more nuanced fashion than Web of Science in both citation counting and h-index. Scopus also generates significantly different maps of citation networks of individual scholars than those generated by Web of Science. The study also presents a comparison of h-index scores based on Google Scholar with those based on the union of Scopus and Web of Science. The study concludes that Scopus can be used as a sole data source for citation-based research and evaluation in HCI, especially when citations in conference proceedings are sought, and that researchers should manually calculate h scores instead of relying on system calculations.
-
White, H. D.: Co-cited author retrieval and relevance theory : examples from the humanities (2015)
0.03
0.029286806 = product of:
0.08786041 = sum of:
0.08786041 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1687) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08786041 = score(doc=1687,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15490976 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.051211275 = queryNorm
0.5671716 = fieldWeight in 1687, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1687)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Footnote
- Beitrag in einem Special Issue "Combining bibliometrics and information retrieval"
-
Mayr, P.; Scharnhorst, A.: Scientometrics and information retrieval - weak-links revitalized (2015)
0.03
0.029286806 = product of:
0.08786041 = sum of:
0.08786041 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1688) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08786041 = score(doc=1688,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15490976 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.051211275 = queryNorm
0.5671716 = fieldWeight in 1688, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1688)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Footnote
- Editorial zu einem Special Issue "Combining bibliometrics and information retrieval"
-
Wolfram, D.: ¬The symbiotic relationship between information retrieval and informetrics (2015)
0.03
0.029286806 = product of:
0.08786041 = sum of:
0.08786041 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1689) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08786041 = score(doc=1689,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15490976 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.051211275 = queryNorm
0.5671716 = fieldWeight in 1689, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1689)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Footnote
- Beitrag in einem Special Issue "Combining bibliometrics and information retrieval"
-
Abbasi, M. K.; Frommholz, I.: Cluster-based polyrepresentation as science modelling approach for information retrieval (2015)
0.03
0.029286806 = product of:
0.08786041 = sum of:
0.08786041 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1691) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08786041 = score(doc=1691,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15490976 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.051211275 = queryNorm
0.5671716 = fieldWeight in 1691, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1691)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Footnote
- Beitrag in einem Special Issue "Combining bibliometrics and information retrieval"
-
Della Mea, V.; Demartini, G.; Di Gaspero, L.; Mizzaro, S.: Measuring retrieval effectiveness with Average Distance Measure (ADM) (2006)
0.03
0.027012128 = product of:
0.08103638 = sum of:
0.08103638 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 774) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08103638 = score(doc=774,freq=10.0), product of:
0.15490976 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.051211275 = queryNorm
0.5231199 = fieldWeight in 774, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=774)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Most common effectiveness measures for information retrieval systems are based on the assumptions of binary relevance (either a document is relevant to a given query or it is not) and binary retrieval (either a document is retrieved or it is not). In this paper, we describe an information retrieval effectiveness measure named ADM (Average Distance Measure) that questions these assumptions. We compare ADM with other measures, discuss it from a conceptual point of view, and report some experimental results. Both conceptual analysis and experimental evidence demonstrate ADM adequacy in measuring the effectiveness of information retrieval systems.
-
Zitt, M.: Meso-level retrieval : IR-bibliometrics interplay and hybrid citation-words methods in scientific fields delineation (2015)
0.02
0.02440567 = product of:
0.073217005 = sum of:
0.073217005 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.073217005 = score(doc=1692,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15490976 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.051211275 = queryNorm
0.47264296 = fieldWeight in 1692, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1692)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Footnote
- Beitrag in einem Special Issue "Combining bibliometrics and information retrieval"
-
Mutschke, P.; Mayr, P.: Science models for search : a study on combining scholarly information retrieval and scientometrics (2015)
0.02
0.02440567 = product of:
0.073217005 = sum of:
0.073217005 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1695) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.073217005 = score(doc=1695,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15490976 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.051211275 = queryNorm
0.47264296 = fieldWeight in 1695, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1695)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Footnote
- Beitrag in einem Special Issue "Combining bibliometrics and information retrieval"
-
Karlsson, A.; Hammarfelt, B.; Steinhauer, H.J.; Falkman, G.; Olson, N.; Nelhans, G.; Nolin, J.: Modeling uncertainty in bibliometrics and information retrieval : an information fusion approach (2015)
0.02
0.02440567 = product of:
0.073217005 = sum of:
0.073217005 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1696) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.073217005 = score(doc=1696,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15490976 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.051211275 = queryNorm
0.47264296 = fieldWeight in 1696, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1696)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Footnote
- Beitrag in einem Special Issue "Combining bibliometrics and information retrieval"
-
Henzler, R.G.: Informetrische Auswertungen bei der Online-Retrieval-Praxis (1982)
0.02
0.024160381 = product of:
0.07248114 = sum of:
0.07248114 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3054) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07248114 = score(doc=3054,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15490976 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.051211275 = queryNorm
0.46789268 = fieldWeight in 3054, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3054)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
-
Ding, Y.: Visualization of intellectual structure in information retrieval : author cocitation analysis (1998)
0.02
0.024160381 = product of:
0.07248114 = sum of:
0.07248114 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07248114 = score(doc=2792,freq=8.0), product of:
0.15490976 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.051211275 = queryNorm
0.46789268 = fieldWeight in 2792, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2792)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Reports results of a cocitation analysis study from the international retrieval research field from 1987 to 1997. Data was taken from Social SciSearch, via Dialog, and the top 40 authors were submitted to author cocitation analysis to yield the intellectual structure of information retrieval. The resulting multidimensional scaling map revealed: identifiable author groups for information retrieval; location of these groups with respect to each other; extend of centrality and peripherality of authors within groups, proximities of authors within groups and across group boundaries; and the meaning of the axes of the map. Factor analysis was used to reveal the extent of the authors' research areas and statistical routines included: ALSCAL; clustering analysis and factor analysis
