Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

0.008170041 = product of:
  0.024510123 = sum of:
    0.024510123 = product of:
      0.049020246 = sum of:
        0.049020246 = weight(_text_:2002 in 4479) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049020246 = score(doc=4479,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20701107 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.28654 = idf(docFreq=1652, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048293278 = queryNorm
            0.2368001 = fieldWeight in 4479, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.28654 = idf(docFreq=1652, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4479)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

In order to examine the phenomena of eponymy and Obliteration by Incorporation at both the aggregate and individual subject level, the literature relating to the game-theoretic concept of the Nash Equilibrium was studied over the period 1950-2008. Almost 5,300 bibliographic database records for publications explicitly citing at least one of two papers by John Nash and/or using the phrase "Nash Equilibrium/Nash Equilibria" were retrieved from the Web of Science and various subject-related databases. Breadth of influence is demonstrated by the wide variety of subject areas in which Nash Equilibrium-related publications occur, including in the natural and social sciences, humanities, law, and medicine. Fifty percent of all items have been published since 2002, suggesting that Nash's papers have experienced "delayed recognition." A degree of Obliteration by Incorporation is observed in that implicit citations (use of the phrase without citation) increased over the time period studied, although the proportion of all citations that are implicit has remained relatively stable during the most recent decade with an annual rate of between 60% and 70%; subject areas vary in their level of obliteration.

0.008170041 = product of:
  0.024510123 = sum of:
    0.024510123 = product of:
      0.049020246 = sum of:
        0.049020246 = weight(_text_:2002 in 485) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049020246 = score(doc=485,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20701107 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.28654 = idf(docFreq=1652, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048293278 = queryNorm
            0.2368001 = fieldWeight in 485, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.28654 = idf(docFreq=1652, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=485)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Empirical studies of obliteration by incorporation (OBI) may be conducted at the level of the database record or the fulltext citation-in-context. To assess the difference between the two approaches, 1,040 articles with a variant of the phrase "evolutionarily stable strategies" (ESS) were identified by searching the Web of Science (Thomson Reuters, Philadelphia, PA) and discipline-level databases. The majority (72%) of all articles were published in life sciences journals. The ESS concept is associated with a small set of canonical publications by John Maynard Smith; OBI represents a decoupling of the use of the phrase and a citation to a John Maynard Smith publication. Across all articles at the record level, OBI is measured by the number of articles with the phrase in the database record but which lack a reference to a source article (implicit citations). At the citation-in-context level, articles that coupled a non-Maynard Smith citation with the ESS phrase (indirect citations) were counted along with those that cited relevant Maynard Smith publications (explicit citations) and OBI counted only based on those articles that lacked any citation coupled with the ESS text phrase. The degree of OBI observed depended on the level of analysis. Record-level OBI trended upward, peaking in 2002 (62%), with a secondary drop and rebound to 53% (2008). Citation-in-context OBI percentages were lower with no clear pattern. Several issues relating to the design of empirical OBI studies are discussed.

0.0054525603 = product of:
  0.01635768 = sum of:
    0.01635768 = product of:
      0.03271536 = sum of:
        0.03271536 = weight(_text_:22 in 2260) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03271536 = score(doc=2260,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16911483 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048293278 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2260, 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=2260)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

15.10.2015 19:22:55