Search (25 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × author_ss:"Leydesdorff, L."
  1. Leydesdorff, L.; Johnson, M.W.; Ivanova, I.: Toward a calculus of redundancy : signification, codification, and anticipation in cultural evolution (2018) 0.03
    0.025734145 = product of:
      0.07720243 = sum of:
        0.063979276 = sum of:
          0.037292898 = weight(_text_:theory in 4463) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.037292898 = score(doc=4463,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16234003 = queryWeight, product of:
                4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03903913 = queryNorm
              0.2297209 = fieldWeight in 4463, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4463)
          0.02668638 = weight(_text_:29 in 4463) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.02668638 = score(doc=4463,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.13732746 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03903913 = queryNorm
              0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 4463, 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=4463)
        0.013223159 = product of:
          0.026446318 = sum of:
            0.026446318 = weight(_text_:22 in 4463) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.026446318 = score(doc=4463,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1367084 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4463, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4463)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Abstract
    This article considers the relationships among meaning generation, selection, and the dynamics of discourse from a variety of perspectives ranging from information theory and biology to sociology. Following Husserl's idea of a horizon of meanings in intersubjective communication, we propose a way in which, using Shannon's equations, the generation and selection of meanings from a horizon of possibilities can be considered probabilistically. The information-theoretical dynamics we articulate considers a process of meaning generation within cultural evolution: information is imbued with meaning, and through this process, the number of options for the selection of meaning in discourse proliferates. The redundancy of possible meanings contributes to a codification of expectations within the discourse. Unlike hardwired DNA, the codes of nonbiological systems can coevolve with the variations. Spanning horizons of meaning, the codes structure the communications as selection environments that shape discourses. Discursive knowledge can be considered as meta-coded communication that enables us to translate among differently coded communications. The dynamics of discursive knowledge production can thus infuse the historical dynamics with a cultural evolution by adding options, that is, by increasing redundancy. A calculus of redundancy is presented as an indicator whereby these dynamics of discourse and meaning may be explored empirically.
    Date
    29. 9.2018 11:22:09
  2. Leydesdorff, L.; Ivanova, I.A.: Mutual redundancies in interhuman communication systems : steps toward a calculus of processing meaning (2014) 0.02
    0.016878696 = product of:
      0.10127217 = sum of:
        0.10127217 = sum of:
          0.074585795 = weight(_text_:theory in 1211) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.074585795 = score(doc=1211,freq=8.0), product of:
              0.16234003 = queryWeight, product of:
                4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03903913 = queryNorm
              0.4594418 = fieldWeight in 1211, product of:
                2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                  8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1211)
          0.02668638 = weight(_text_:29 in 1211) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.02668638 = score(doc=1211,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.13732746 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03903913 = queryNorm
              0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 1211, 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=1211)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    The study of interhuman communication requires a more complex framework than Claude E. Shannon's (1948) mathematical theory of communication because "information" is defined in the latter case as meaningless uncertainty. Assuming that meaning cannot be communicated, we extend Shannon's theory by defining mutual redundancy as a positional counterpart of the relational communication of information. Mutual redundancy indicates the surplus of meanings that can be provided to the exchanges in reflexive communications. The information is redundant because it is based on "pure sets" (i.e., without subtraction of mutual information in the overlaps). We show that in the three-dimensional case (e.g., of a triple helix of university-industry-government relations), mutual redundancy is equal to mutual information (Rxyz = Txyz); but when the dimensionality is even, the sign is different. We generalize to the measurement in N dimensions and proceed to the interpretation. Using Niklas Luhmann's (1984-1995) social systems theory and/or Anthony Giddens's (1979, 1984) structuration theory, mutual redundancy can be provided with an interpretation in the sociological case: Different meaning-processing structures code and decode with other algorithms. A surplus of ("absent") options can then be generated that add to the redundancy. Luhmann's "functional (sub)systems" of expectations or Giddens's "rule-resource sets" are positioned mutually, but coupled operationally in events or "instantiated" in actions. Shannon-type information is generated by the mediation, but the "structures" are (re-)positioned toward one another as sets of (potentially counterfactual) expectations. The structural differences among the coding and decoding algorithms provide a source of additional options in reflexive and anticipatory communications.
    Date
    29. 1.2014 16:44:54
  3. Leydesdorff, L.; Vaughan, L.: Co-occurrence matrices and their applications in information science : extending ACA to the Web environment (2006) 0.01
    0.014431859 = product of:
      0.043295577 = sum of:
        0.018646449 = product of:
          0.037292898 = sum of:
            0.037292898 = weight(_text_:theory in 6113) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.037292898 = score(doc=6113,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16234003 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.2297209 = fieldWeight in 6113, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6113)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.024649128 = product of:
          0.049298257 = sum of:
            0.049298257 = weight(_text_:methods in 6113) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.049298257 = score(doc=6113,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.15695344 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.31409478 = fieldWeight in 6113, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6113)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Abstract
    Co-occurrence matrices, such as cocitation, coword, and colink matrices, have been used widely in the information sciences. However, confusion and controversy have hindered the proper statistical analysis of these data. The underlying problem, in our opinion, involved understanding the nature of various types of matrices. This article discusses the difference between a symmetrical cocitation matrix and an asymmetrical citation matrix as well as the appropriate statistical techniques that can be applied to each of these matrices, respectively. Similarity measures (such as the Pearson correlation coefficient or the cosine) should not be applied to the symmetrical cocitation matrix but can be applied to the asymmetrical citation matrix to derive the proximity matrix. The argument is illustrated with examples. The study then extends the application of co-occurrence matrices to the Web environment, in which the nature of the available data and thus data collection methods are different from those of traditional databases such as the Science Citation Index. A set of data collected with the Google Scholar search engine is analyzed by using both the traditional methods of multivariate analysis and the new visualization software Pajek, which is based on social network analysis and graph theory.
  4. Leydesdorff, L.: ¬The construction and globalization of the knowledge base in inter-human communication systems (2003) 0.01
    0.012747843 = product of:
      0.03824353 = sum of:
        0.022375738 = product of:
          0.044751476 = sum of:
            0.044751476 = weight(_text_:theory in 1621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.044751476 = score(doc=1621,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16234003 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.27566507 = fieldWeight in 1621, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1621)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.01586779 = product of:
          0.03173558 = sum of:
            0.03173558 = weight(_text_:22 in 1621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03173558 = score(doc=1621,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1367084 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1621, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1621)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Abstract
    The relationship between the "knowledge base" and the "globalization" of communication systems is discussed from the perspective of communication theory. I argue that inter-human communication takes place at two levels. At the first level information is exchanged and provided with meaning and at the second level meaning can reflexively be communicated. Human language can be considered as the evolutionary achievement which enables us to use these two channels of communication simultaneously. Providing meaning with hindsight is a recursive operation: a meaning that makes a difference can be considered as knowledge. If the production of knowledge is socially organized, the perspective of hindsight can further be codified. This adds globalization to the historically stabilized patterns of communications. Globalization can be expected to transform the communications in an evolutionary mode. However, the self-organization of a knowledge-based society remains an expectation with the status of a hypothesis.
    Date
    22. 5.2003 19:48:04
  5. Lucio-Arias, D.; Leydesdorff, L.: Main-path analysis and path-dependent transitions in HistCite(TM)-based historiograms (2008) 0.01
    0.0120253395 = product of:
      0.036076017 = sum of:
        0.018646449 = product of:
          0.037292898 = sum of:
            0.037292898 = weight(_text_:theory in 2373) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.037292898 = score(doc=2373,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16234003 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.2297209 = fieldWeight in 2373, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2373)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.017429566 = product of:
          0.034859132 = sum of:
            0.034859132 = weight(_text_:methods in 2373) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.034859132 = score(doc=2373,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15695344 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.22209854 = fieldWeight in 2373, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2373)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Abstract
    With the program HistCite(TM) it is possible to generate and visualize the most relevant papers in a set of documents retrieved from the Science Citation Index. Historical reconstructions of scientific developments can be represented chronologically as developments in networks of citation relations extracted from scientific literature. This study aims to go beyond the historical reconstruction of scientific knowledge, enriching the output of HistCiteTM with algorithms from social-network analysis and information theory. Using main-path analysis, it is possible to highlight the structural backbone in the development of a scientific field. The expected information value of the message can be used to indicate whether change in the distribution (of citations) has occurred to such an extent that a path-dependency is generated. This provides us with a measure of evolutionary change between subsequent documents. The forgetting and rewriting of historically prior events at the research front can thus be indicated. These three methods - HistCite, main path and path dependent transitions - are applied to a set of documents related to fullerenes and the fullerene-like structures known as nanotubes.
  6. Leydesdorff, L.: ¬The communication of meaning and the structuration of expectations : Giddens' "structuration theory" and Luhmann's "self-organization" (2010) 0.01
    0.0074585797 = product of:
      0.044751476 = sum of:
        0.044751476 = product of:
          0.08950295 = sum of:
            0.08950295 = weight(_text_:theory in 4004) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08950295 = score(doc=4004,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.16234003 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.55133015 = fieldWeight in 4004, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4004)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    The communication of meaning as distinct from (Shannon-type) information is central to Luhmann's social systems theory and Giddens' structuration theory of action. These theories share an emphasis on reflexivity, but focus on meaning along a divide between interhuman communication and intentful action as two different systems of reference. Recombining these two theories into a theory about the structuration of expectations, interactions, organization, and self-organization of intentional communications can be simulated based on algorithms from the computation of anticipatory systems. The self-organizing and organizing layers remain rooted in the double contingency of the human encounter, which provides the variation. Organization and self-organization of communication are reflexive upon and therefore reconstructive of each other. Using mutual information in three dimensions, the imprint of meaning processing in the modeling system on the historical organization of uncertainty in the modeled system can be measured. This is shown empirically in the case of intellectual organization as "structurating" structure in the textual domain of scientific articles.
  7. Leydesdorff, L.; Ahrweiler, P.: In search of a network theory of innovations : relations, positions, and perspectives (2014) 0.01
    0.0053827665 = product of:
      0.032296598 = sum of:
        0.032296598 = product of:
          0.064593196 = sum of:
            0.064593196 = weight(_text_:theory in 1531) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.064593196 = score(doc=1531,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.16234003 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.39788827 = fieldWeight in 1531, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1531)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    As a complement to Nelson and Winter's (1977) article titled "In Search of a Useful Theory of Innovation," a sociological perspective on innovation networks can be elaborated using Luhmann's social systems theory, on the one hand, and Latour's "sociology of translations," on the other. Because of a common focus on communication, these perspectives can be combined as a set of methodologies. Latour's sociology of translations specifies a mechanism for generating variation in relations ("associations"), whereas Luhmann's systems perspective enables the specification of (functionally different) selection environments such as markets, professional organizations, and political control. Selection environments can be considered as mechanisms of social coordination that can self-organize-beyond the control of human agency-into regimes in terms of interacting codes of communication. Unlike relatively globalized regimes, technological trajectories are organized locally in "landscapes." A resulting "duality of structure" (Giddens, 1979) between the historical organization of trajectories and evolutionary self-organization at the regime level can be expected to drive innovation cycles. Reflexive translations add a third layer of perspectives to (a) the relational analysis of observable links that shape trajectories and (b) the positional analysis of networks in terms of latent dimensions. These three operations can be studied in a single framework, but using different methodologies. Latour's first-order associations can then be analytically distinguished from second-order translations in terms of requiring other communicative competencies. The resulting operations remain infrareflexively nested, and can therefore be used for innovative reconstructions of previously constructed boundaries.
  8. Leydesdorff, L.: ¬A sociological theory of communication : the self-organization of the knowledge-based society (2001) 0.01
    0.005274012 = product of:
      0.031644072 = sum of:
        0.031644072 = product of:
          0.063288145 = sum of:
            0.063288145 = weight(_text_:theory in 184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.063288145 = score(doc=184,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.16234003 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.3898493 = fieldWeight in 184, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=184)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Footnote
    Rez. in: JASIST 53(2002) no.1, S.61-62 (E.G. Ackermann): "This brief summary cannot do justice to the intellectual depth, philosophical richness of the theoretical models, and their implications presented by Leydesdorff in his book. Next to this, the caveats presented earlier in this review are relatively minor. For all that, this book is not an "easy" read, nor is it for the theoretically or philosophically faint of heart. The content is certainly accessible to those with the interest and the stamina to see it through to the end, and would repay those who reread it with further insight and understanding. This book is recommended especially for the reader who is looking for a well-developed, general sociological theory of communication with a strong philosophical basis upon which to build a postmodern, deconstructionist research methodology"
  9. 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) 0.00
    0.004929826 = product of:
      0.029578956 = sum of:
        0.029578956 = product of:
          0.05915791 = sum of:
            0.05915791 = weight(_text_:methods in 2840) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05915791 = score(doc=2840,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.15695344 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.37691376 = fieldWeight in 2840, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2840)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    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.
  10. Leydesdorff, L.: Similarity measures, author cocitation Analysis, and information theory (2005) 0.00
    0.0043508383 = product of:
      0.026105028 = sum of:
        0.026105028 = product of:
          0.052210055 = sum of:
            0.052210055 = weight(_text_:theory in 3471) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.052210055 = score(doc=3471,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16234003 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.32160926 = fieldWeight in 3471, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3471)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
  11. Leydesdorff, L.: ¬The university-industry knowledge relationship : analyzing patents and the science base of technologies (2004) 0.00
    0.0034859132 = product of:
      0.020915478 = sum of:
        0.020915478 = product of:
          0.041830957 = sum of:
            0.041830957 = weight(_text_:methods in 2887) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.041830957 = score(doc=2887,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15695344 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.26651827 = fieldWeight in 2887, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2887)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    Via the Internet, information scientists can obtain costfree access to large databases in the "hidden" or "deep Web." These databases are often structured far more than the Internet domains themselves. The patent database of the U.S. Patent and Trade Office is used in this study to examine the science base of patents in terms of the literature references in these patents. Universitybased patents at the global level are compared with results when using the national economy of the Netherlands as a system of reference. Methods for accessing the online databases and for the visualization of the results are specified. The conclusion is that "biotechnology" has historically generated a model for theorizing about university-industry relations that cannot easily be generalized to other sectors and disciplines.
  12. Leydesdorff, L.; Bihui, J.: Mapping the Chinese Science Citation Database in terms of aggregated journal-journal citation relations (2005) 0.00
    0.0034859132 = product of:
      0.020915478 = sum of:
        0.020915478 = product of:
          0.041830957 = sum of:
            0.041830957 = weight(_text_:methods in 4813) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.041830957 = score(doc=4813,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15695344 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.26651827 = fieldWeight in 4813, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4813)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    Methods developed for mapping the journal structure contained in aggregated journal-journal citations in the Science Citation Index (SCI; Thomson ISI, 2002) are applied to the Chinese Science Citation Database of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. This database covered 991 journals in 2001, of which only 37 originally had English titles; only 31 of which were covered by the SCI. Using factor-analytical and graph-analytical techniques, the authors show that the journal relations are dually structured. The main structure is the intellectual organization of the journals in journal groups (as in the international SCI), but the university-based journals provide an institutional layer that orients this structure towards practical ends (e.g., agriculture). This mechanism of integration is further distinguished from the role of general science journals. The Chinese Science Citation Database thus exhibits the characteristics of "Mode 2" or transdisciplinary science in the production of scientific knowledge more than its Western counterpart does. The contexts of application lead to correlation among the components.
  13. Leydesdorff, L.; Rafols, I.: Local emergence and global diffusion of research technologies : an exploration of patterns of network formation (2011) 0.00
    0.0034859132 = product of:
      0.020915478 = sum of:
        0.020915478 = product of:
          0.041830957 = sum of:
            0.041830957 = weight(_text_:methods in 4445) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.041830957 = score(doc=4445,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15695344 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.26651827 = fieldWeight in 4445, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4445)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    Grasping the fruits of "emerging technologies" is an objective of many government priority programs in a knowledge-based and globalizing economy. We use the publication records (in the Science Citation Index) of two emerging technologies to study the mechanisms of diffusion in the case of two innovation trajectories: small interference RNA (siRNA) and nanocrystalline solar cells (NCSC). Methods for analyzing and visualizing geographical and cognitive diffusion are specified as indicators of different dynamics. Geographical diffusion is illustrated with overlays to Google Maps; cognitive diffusion is mapped using an overlay to a map based on the ISI subject categories. The evolving geographical networks show both preferential attachment and small-world characteristics. The strength of preferential attachment decreases over time while the network evolves into an oligopolistic control structure with small-world characteristics. The transition from disciplinary-oriented ("Mode 1") to transfer-oriented ("Mode 2") research is suggested as the crucial difference in explaining the different rates of diffusion between siRNA and NCSC.
  14. Bornmann, L.; Leydesdorff, L.: Which cities produce more excellent papers than can be expected? : a new mapping approach, using Google Maps, based on statistical significance testing (2011) 0.00
    0.0034859132 = product of:
      0.020915478 = sum of:
        0.020915478 = product of:
          0.041830957 = sum of:
            0.041830957 = weight(_text_:methods in 4767) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.041830957 = score(doc=4767,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15695344 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.26651827 = fieldWeight in 4767, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4767)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    The methods presented in this paper allow for a statistical analysis revealing centers of excellence around the world using programs that are freely available. Based on Web of Science data (a fee-based database), field-specific excellence can be identified in cities where highly cited papers were published more frequently than can be expected. Compared to the mapping approaches published hitherto, our approach is more analytically oriented by allowing the assessment of an observed number of excellent papers for a city against the expected number. Top performers in output are cities in which authors are located who publish a statistically significant higher number of highly cited papers than can be expected for these cities. As sample data for physics, chemistry, and psychology show, these cities do not necessarily have a high output of highly cited papers.
  15. Leydesdorff, L.; Radicchi, F.; Bornmann, L.; Castellano, C.; Nooy, W. de: Field-normalized impact factors (IFs) : a comparison of rescaling and fractionally counted IFs (2013) 0.00
    0.0034859132 = product of:
      0.020915478 = sum of:
        0.020915478 = product of:
          0.041830957 = sum of:
            0.041830957 = weight(_text_:methods in 1108) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.041830957 = score(doc=1108,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15695344 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.26651827 = fieldWeight in 1108, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.0204134 = idf(docFreq=2156, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1108)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    Two methods for comparing impact factors and citation rates across fields of science are tested against each other using citations to the 3,705 journals in the Science Citation Index 2010 (CD-Rom version of SCI) and the 13 field categories used for the Science and Engineering Indicators of the U.S. National Science Board. We compare (a) normalization by counting citations in proportion to the length of the reference list (1/N of references) with (b) rescaling by dividing citation scores by the arithmetic mean of the citation rate of the cluster. Rescaling is analytical and therefore independent of the quality of the attribution to the sets, whereas fractional counting provides an empirical strategy for normalization among sets (by evaluating the between-group variance). By the fairness test of Radicchi and Castellano (), rescaling outperforms fractional counting of citations for reasons that we consider.
  16. Lucio-Arias, D.; Leydesdorff, L.: ¬An indicator of research front activity : measuring intellectual organization as uncertainty reduction in document sets (2009) 0.00
    0.00314502 = product of:
      0.018870119 = sum of:
        0.018870119 = product of:
          0.037740238 = sum of:
            0.037740238 = weight(_text_:29 in 3297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.037740238 = score(doc=3297,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.13732746 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.2748193 = fieldWeight in 3297, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3297)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Date
    2. 2.2010 19:29:29
  17. Leydesdorff, L.; Zhou, P.: Co-word analysis using the Chinese character set (2008) 0.00
    0.003113411 = product of:
      0.018680464 = sum of:
        0.018680464 = product of:
          0.03736093 = sum of:
            0.03736093 = weight(_text_:29 in 1970) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03736093 = score(doc=1970,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13732746 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 1970, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1970)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Date
    12. 7.2008 18:46:29
  18. Leydesdorff, L.; Wagner, C.S.; Porto-Gomez, I.; Comins, J.A.; Phillips, F.: Synergy in the knowledge base of U.S. innovation systems at national, state, and regional levels : the contributions of high-tech manufacturing and knowledge-intensive services (2019) 0.00
    0.0031077415 = product of:
      0.018646449 = sum of:
        0.018646449 = product of:
          0.037292898 = sum of:
            0.037292898 = weight(_text_:theory in 5390) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.037292898 = score(doc=5390,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16234003 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.2297209 = fieldWeight in 5390, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5390)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    Using information theory, we measure innovation systemness as synergy among size-classes, ZIP Codes, and technological classes (NACE-codes) for 8.5 million American companies. The synergy at the national level is decomposed at the level of states, Core-Based Statistical Areas (CBSA), and Combined Statistical Areas (CSA). We zoom in to the state of California and in more detail to Silicon Valley. Our results do not support the assumption of a national system of innovations in the U.S.A. Innovation systems appear to operate at the level of the states; the CBSA are too small, so that systemness spills across their borders. Decomposition of the sample in terms of high-tech manufacturing (HTM), medium-high-tech manufacturing (MHTM), knowledge-intensive services (KIS), and high-tech services (HTKIS) does not change this pattern, but refines it. The East Coast-New Jersey, Boston, and New York-and California are the major players, with Texas a third one in the case of HTKIS. Chicago and industrial centers in the Midwest also contribute synergy. Within California, Los Angeles contributes synergy in the sectors of manufacturing, the San Francisco area in KIS. KIS in Silicon Valley and the Bay Area-a CSA composed of seven CBSA-spill over to other regions and even globally.
  19. Leydesdorff, L.; Ivanova, I.: ¬The measurement of "interdisciplinarity" and "synergy" in scientific and extra-scientific collaborations (2021) 0.00
    0.0031077415 = product of:
      0.018646449 = sum of:
        0.018646449 = product of:
          0.037292898 = sum of:
            0.037292898 = weight(_text_:theory in 208) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.037292898 = score(doc=208,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16234003 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.2297209 = fieldWeight in 208, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=208)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    Problem solving often requires crossing boundaries, such as those between disciplines. When policy-makers call for "interdisciplinarity," however, they often mean "synergy." Synergy is generated when the whole offers more possibilities than the sum of its parts. An increase in the number of options above the sum of the options in subsets can be measured as redundancy; that is, the number of not-yet-realized options. The number of options available to an innovation system for realization can be as decisive for the system's survival as the historically already-realized innovations. Unlike "interdisciplinarity," "synergy" can also be generated in sectorial or geographical collaborations. The measurement of "synergy," however, requires a methodology different from the measurement of "interdisciplinarity." In this study, we discuss recent advances in the operationalization and measurement of "interdisciplinarity," and propose a methodology for measuring "synergy" based on information theory. The sharing of meanings attributed to information from different perspectives can increase redundancy. Increasing redundancy reduces the relative uncertainty, for example, in niches. The operationalization of the two concepts-"interdisciplinarity" and "synergy"-as different and partly overlapping indicators allows for distinguishing between the effects and the effectiveness of science-policy interventions in research priorities.
  20. Leydesdorff, L.: Can networks of journal-journal citations be used as indicators of change in the social sciences? (2003) 0.00
    0.0026446318 = product of:
      0.01586779 = sum of:
        0.01586779 = product of:
          0.03173558 = sum of:
            0.03173558 = weight(_text_:22 in 4460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03173558 = score(doc=4460,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1367084 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03903913 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4460, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4460)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Date
    6.11.2005 19:02:22