-
Pichappan, P.; Sangaranachiyar, S.: Ageing approach to scientific eponyms (1996)
0.08
0.07899537 = product of:
0.15799074 = sum of:
0.15799074 = sum of:
0.102415584 = weight(_text_:report in 80) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.102415584 = score(doc=80,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24374367 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
0.05127382 = queryNorm
0.4201774 = fieldWeight in 80, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=80)
0.05557516 = weight(_text_:22 in 80) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05557516 = score(doc=80,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17955218 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05127382 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 80, 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=80)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Footnote
- Report presented at the 16th National Indian Association of Special Libraries and Information Centres Seminar Special Interest Group Meeting on Informatrics in Bombay, 19-22 Dec 94
-
H-Index auch im Web of Science (2008)
0.08
0.075154744 = product of:
0.15030949 = sum of:
0.15030949 = sum of:
0.108628124 = weight(_text_:report in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.108628124 = score(doc=590,freq=4.0), product of:
0.24374367 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
0.05127382 = queryNorm
0.44566542 = fieldWeight in 590, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=590)
0.041681368 = weight(_text_:22 in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041681368 = score(doc=590,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17955218 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05127382 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 590, 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=590)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Content
- "Zur Kurzmitteilung "Latest enhancements in Scopus: ... h-Index incorporated in Scopus" in den letzten Online-Mitteilungen (Online-Mitteilungen 92, S.31) ist zu korrigieren, dass der h-Index sehr wohl bereits im Web of Science enthalten ist. Allerdings findet man/frau diese Information nicht in der "cited ref search", sondern neben der Trefferliste einer Quick Search, General Search oder einer Suche über den Author Finder in der rechten Navigationsleiste unter dem Titel "Citation Report". Der "Citation Report" bietet für die in der jeweiligen Trefferliste angezeigten Arbeiten: - Die Gesamtzahl der Zitierungen aller Arbeiten in der Trefferliste - Die mittlere Zitationshäufigkeit dieser Arbeiten - Die Anzahl der Zitierungen der einzelnen Arbeiten, aufgeschlüsselt nach Publikationsjahr der zitierenden Arbeiten - Die mittlere Zitationshäufigkeit dieser Arbeiten pro Jahr - Den h-Index (ein h-Index von x sagt aus, dass x Arbeiten der Trefferliste mehr als x-mal zitiert wurden; er ist gegenüber sehr hohen Zitierungen einzelner Arbeiten unempfindlicher als die mittlere Zitationshäufigkeit)."
- Date
- 6. 4.2008 19:04:22
-
Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.: Averaging and globalising quotients of informetric and scientometric data (1996)
0.06
0.059246525 = product of:
0.11849305 = sum of:
0.11849305 = sum of:
0.076811686 = weight(_text_:report in 7659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.076811686 = score(doc=7659,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24374367 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
0.05127382 = queryNorm
0.31513304 = fieldWeight in 7659, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7659)
0.041681368 = weight(_text_:22 in 7659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041681368 = score(doc=7659,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17955218 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05127382 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 7659, 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=7659)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- It is possible, using ISI's Journal Citation Report (JCR), to calculate average impact factors (AIF) for LCR's subject categories but it can be more useful to know the global Impact Factor (GIF) of a subject category and compare the 2 values. Reports results of a study to compare the relationships between AIFs and GIFs of subjects, based on the particular case of the average impact factor of a subfield versus the impact factor of this subfield as a whole, the difference being studied between an average of quotients, denoted as AQ, and a global average, obtained as a quotient of averages, and denoted as GQ. In the case of impact factors, AQ becomes the average impact factor of a field, and GQ becomes its global impact factor. Discusses a number of applications of this technique in the context of informetrics and scientometrics
- Source
- Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.3, S.165-170
-
Hjerppe, R.: ¬An outline of bibliometrics and citation analysis (1980)
0.05
0.051207792 = product of:
0.102415584 = sum of:
0.102415584 = product of:
0.20483117 = sum of:
0.20483117 = weight(_text_:report in 1115) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.20483117 = score(doc=1115,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24374367 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
0.05127382 = queryNorm
0.8403548 = fieldWeight in 1115, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1115)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Series
- Report TRITA-LAB-6014
-
Heneberg, P.: Supposedly uncited articles of Nobel laureates and Fields medalists can be prevalently attributed to the errors of omission and commission (2013)
0.05
0.049372107 = product of:
0.09874421 = sum of:
0.09874421 = sum of:
0.06400974 = weight(_text_:report in 660) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06400974 = score(doc=660,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24374367 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
0.05127382 = queryNorm
0.26261088 = fieldWeight in 660, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=660)
0.034734476 = weight(_text_:22 in 660) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.034734476 = score(doc=660,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17955218 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05127382 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 660, 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=660)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Several independent authors reported a high share of uncited publications, which include those produced by top scientists. This share was repeatedly reported to exceed 10% of the total papers produced, without any explanation of this phenomenon and the lack of difference in uncitedness between average and successful researchers. In this report, we analyze the uncitedness among two independent groups of highly visible scientists (mathematicians represented by Fields medalists, and researchers in physiology or medicine represented by Nobel Prize laureates in the respective field). Analysis of both groups led to the identical conclusion: over 90% of the uncited database records of highly visible scientists can be explained by the inclusion of editorial materials progress reports presented at international meetings (meeting abstracts), discussion items (letters to the editor, discussion), personalia (biographic items), and by errors of omission and commission of the Web of Science (WoS) database and of the citing documents. Only a marginal amount of original articles and reviews were found to be uncited (0.9 and 0.3%, respectively), which is in strong contrast with the previously reported data, which never addressed the document types among the uncited records.
- Date
- 22. 3.2013 19:21:46
-
Wang, S.; Ma, Y.; Mao, J.; Bai, Y.; Liang, Z.; Li, G.: Quantifying scientific breakthroughs by a novel disruption indicator based on knowledge entities : On the rise of scrape-and-report scholarship in online reviews research (2023)
0.05
0.049372107 = product of:
0.09874421 = sum of:
0.09874421 = sum of:
0.06400974 = weight(_text_:report in 882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06400974 = score(doc=882,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24374367 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
0.05127382 = queryNorm
0.26261088 = fieldWeight in 882, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=882)
0.034734476 = weight(_text_:22 in 882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.034734476 = score(doc=882,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17955218 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05127382 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 882, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=882)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 1.2023 18:37:33
-
Glänzel, W.; Moed, H.F.: Journal impact measures in bibliometric research (2002)
0.04
0.044806816 = product of:
0.08961363 = sum of:
0.08961363 = product of:
0.17922726 = sum of:
0.17922726 = weight(_text_:report in 2904) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.17922726 = score(doc=2904,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24374367 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
0.05127382 = queryNorm
0.73531044 = fieldWeight in 2904, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2904)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- State-of-the-art report
-
Nicholls, P.T.: Empirical validation of Lotka's law (1986)
0.03
0.02778758 = product of:
0.05557516 = sum of:
0.05557516 = product of:
0.11115032 = sum of:
0.11115032 = weight(_text_:22 in 5509) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11115032 = score(doc=5509,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17955218 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05127382 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Information processing and management. 22(1986), S.417-419
-
Nicolaisen, J.: Citation analysis (2007)
0.03
0.02778758 = product of:
0.05557516 = sum of:
0.05557516 = product of:
0.11115032 = sum of:
0.11115032 = weight(_text_:22 in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11115032 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17955218 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05127382 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 13. 7.2008 19:53:22
-
Fiala, J.: Information flood : fiction and reality (1987)
0.03
0.02778758 = product of:
0.05557516 = sum of:
0.05557516 = product of:
0.11115032 = sum of:
0.11115032 = weight(_text_:22 in 1080) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11115032 = score(doc=1080,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17955218 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05127382 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Thermochimica acta. 110(1987), S.11-22
-
Lindsay, R.K.; Gordon, M.D.: Literature-based discovery by lexical statistics (1999)
0.03
0.025603896 = product of:
0.051207792 = sum of:
0.051207792 = product of:
0.102415584 = sum of:
0.102415584 = weight(_text_:report in 3544) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.102415584 = score(doc=3544,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24374367 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
0.05127382 = queryNorm
0.4201774 = fieldWeight in 3544, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3544)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- We report experiments that use lexical statistics, such as word frequency counts, to discover hidden connections in the medical literature. Hidden connections are those that are unlikely to be found by examination of bibliographic citations or the use of standard indexing methods and yet establish a relationship between topics that might profitably by explored by scientific research. Our experiments were conducted with the MEDLINE medical literature database and follow and extend the work of Swanson
-
Schreiber, M.: Restricting the h-index to a citation time window : a case study of a timed Hirsch index (2014)
0.03
0.025603896 = product of:
0.051207792 = sum of:
0.051207792 = product of:
0.102415584 = sum of:
0.102415584 = weight(_text_:report in 1563) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.102415584 = score(doc=1563,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24374367 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
0.05127382 = queryNorm
0.4201774 = fieldWeight in 1563, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1563)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The h-index has been shown to increase in many cases mostly because of citations to rather old publications. This inertia can be circumvented by restricting the evaluation to a citation time window. Here I report results of an empirical study analyzing the evolution of the thus defined timed h-index in dependence on the length of the citation time window.
-
Su, Y.; Han, L.-F.: ¬A new literature growth model : variable exponential growth law of literature (1998)
0.02
0.024560982 = product of:
0.049121965 = sum of:
0.049121965 = product of:
0.09824393 = sum of:
0.09824393 = weight(_text_:22 in 3690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09824393 = score(doc=3690,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17955218 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05127382 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 5.1999 19:22:35
-
Van der Veer Martens, B.: Do citation systems represent theories of truth? (2001)
0.02
0.024560982 = product of:
0.049121965 = sum of:
0.049121965 = product of:
0.09824393 = sum of:
0.09824393 = weight(_text_:22 in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09824393 = score(doc=3925,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17955218 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05127382 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 15:22:28
-
Diodato, V.: Dictionary of bibliometrics (1994)
0.02
0.024314132 = product of:
0.048628263 = sum of:
0.048628263 = product of:
0.09725653 = sum of:
0.09725653 = weight(_text_:22 in 5666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09725653 = score(doc=5666,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17955218 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05127382 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Footnote
- Rez. in: Journal of library and information science 22(1996) no.2, S.116-117 (L.C. Smith)
-
Bookstein, A.: Informetric distributions : I. Unified overview (1990)
0.02
0.024314132 = product of:
0.048628263 = sum of:
0.048628263 = product of:
0.09725653 = sum of:
0.09725653 = weight(_text_:22 in 6902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09725653 = score(doc=6902,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17955218 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05127382 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 18:55:29
-
Bookstein, A.: Informetric distributions : II. Resilience to ambiguity (1990)
0.02
0.024314132 = product of:
0.048628263 = sum of:
0.048628263 = product of:
0.09725653 = sum of:
0.09725653 = weight(_text_:22 in 4689) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09725653 = score(doc=4689,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17955218 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05127382 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 18:55:55
-
Vaughan, L.; Shaw , D.: Bibliographic and Web citations : what Is the difference? (2003)
0.02
0.022630861 = product of:
0.045261722 = sum of:
0.045261722 = product of:
0.090523444 = sum of:
0.090523444 = weight(_text_:report in 5176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.090523444 = score(doc=5176,freq=4.0), product of:
0.24374367 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
0.05127382 = queryNorm
0.37138787 = fieldWeight in 5176, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5176)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Vaughn, and Shaw look at the relationship between traditional citation and Web citation (not hyperlinks but rather textual mentions of published papers). Using English language research journals in ISI's 2000 Journal Citation Report - Information and Library Science category - 1209 full length papers published in 1997 in 46 journals were identified. Each was searched in Social Science Citation Index and on the Web using Google phrase search by entering the title in quotation marks, and followed for distinction where necessary with sub-titles, author's names, and journal title words. After removing obvious false drops, the number of web sites was recorded for comparison with the SSCI counts. A second sample from 1992 was also collected for examination. There were a total of 16,371 web citations to the selected papers. The top and bottom ranked four journals were then examined and every third citation to every third paper was selected and classified as to source type, domain, and country of origin. Web counts are much higher than ISI citation counts. Of the 46 journals from 1997, 26 demonstrated a significant correlation between Web and traditional citation counts, and 11 of the 15 in the 1992 sample also showed significant correlation. Journal impact factor in 1998 and 1999 correlated significantly with average Web citations per journal in the 1997 data, but at a low level. Thirty percent of web citations come from other papers posted on the web, and 30percent from listings of web based bibliographic services, while twelve percent come from class reading lists. High web citation journals often have web accessible tables of content.
- Object
- Journal Citation Report
-
Cothey, V.: Web-crawling reliability (2004)
0.02
0.022403408 = product of:
0.044806816 = sum of:
0.044806816 = product of:
0.08961363 = sum of:
0.08961363 = weight(_text_:report in 3089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08961363 = score(doc=3089,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24374367 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
0.05127382 = queryNorm
0.36765522 = fieldWeight in 3089, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3089)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- In this article, I investigate the reliability, in the social science sense, of collecting informetric data about the World Wide Web by Web crawling. The investigation includes a critical examination of the practice of Web crawling and contrasts the results of content crawling with the results of link crawling. It is shown that Web crawling by search engines is intentionally biased and selective. I also report the results of a [arge-scale experimental simulation of Web crawling that illustrates the effects of different crawling policies an data collection. It is concluded that the reliability of Web crawling as a data collection technique is improved by fuller reporting of relevant crawling policies.
-
Mayr, P.; Tosques, F.: Webometrische Analysen mit Hilfe der Google Web APIs (2005)
0.02
0.022403408 = product of:
0.044806816 = sum of:
0.044806816 = product of:
0.08961363 = sum of:
0.08961363 = weight(_text_:report in 3189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08961363 = score(doc=3189,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24374367 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
0.05127382 = queryNorm
0.36765522 = fieldWeight in 3189, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.7537646 = idf(docFreq=1035, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3189)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Der Report stellt die Möglichkeiten und Einschränkungen der Google Web APIs (Google API) dar. Die Implementierung der Google API anhand einzelner informationswissenschaftlicher Untersuchungen aus der Webometrie ergibt, dass die Google API mit Einschränkungen für internetbezogene Untersuchungen eingesetzt werden können. Vergleiche der Trefferergebnisse über die beiden Google-Schnittstellen Google API und die Standard Weboberfläche Google.com (Google Web) zeigen Unterschiede bezüglich der Reichweite, der Zusammensetzung und Verfügbarkeit. Die Untersuchung basiert auf einfachen und erweiterten Suchanfragen in den Sprachen Deutsch und Englisch. Die analysierten Treffermengen der Google API bestätigen tendenziell frühere Internet-Studien.
