-
Zhitomirsky-Geffet, M.; Bar-Ilan, J.: Towards maximal unification of semantically diverse ontologies for controversial domains (2014)
0.01
0.014085817 = product of:
0.028171634 = sum of:
0.028171634 = product of:
0.04225745 = sum of:
0.01623425 = weight(_text_:12 in 1634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01623425 = score(doc=1634,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.12223507 = fieldWeight in 1634, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1634)
0.026023198 = weight(_text_:22 in 1634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026023198 = score(doc=1634,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16815145 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1634, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1634)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Content
- Vgl.: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-12-2013-0148.
- Date
- 20. 1.2015 18:30:22
-
Bar-Ilan, J.: Information hub blogs (2005)
0.01
0.010822834 = product of:
0.021645669 = sum of:
0.021645669 = product of:
0.064937 = sum of:
0.064937 = weight(_text_:12 in 193) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.064937 = score(doc=193,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.48894027 = fieldWeight in 193, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=193)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 23. 4.2017 12:50:33
-
Bronstein, J.; Gazit, T.; Perez, O.; Bar-Ilan, J.; Aharony, N.; Amichai-Hamburger, Y.: ¬An examination of the factors contributing to participation in online social platforms (2016)
0.01
0.0054214997 = product of:
0.010842999 = sum of:
0.010842999 = product of:
0.032528996 = sum of:
0.032528996 = weight(_text_:22 in 3364) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032528996 = score(doc=3364,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16815145 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3364, 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=3364)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 20. 1.2015 18:30:22
-
Bar-Ilan, J.: Evaluating the stability of the search tools Hotbot and Snap : a case study (2000)
0.00
0.0047349897 = product of:
0.009469979 = sum of:
0.009469979 = product of:
0.028409937 = sum of:
0.028409937 = weight(_text_:12 in 1180) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028409937 = score(doc=1180,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.21391137 = fieldWeight in 1180, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1180)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22.10.2000 12:54:20
-
Bar-Ilan, J.: On the overlap, the precision and estimated recall of search engines : a case study of the query 'Erdös' (1998)
0.00
0.0047349897 = product of:
0.009469979 = sum of:
0.009469979 = product of:
0.028409937 = sum of:
0.028409937 = weight(_text_:12 in 3753) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028409937 = score(doc=3753,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.21391137 = fieldWeight in 3753, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3753)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 2. 3.1997 12:16:21
-
Zhitomirsky-Geffet, M.; Bar-Ilan, J.; Levene, M.: Testing the stability of "wisdom of crowds" judgments of search results over time and their similarity with the search engine rankings (2016)
0.00
0.0043372 = product of:
0.0086744 = sum of:
0.0086744 = product of:
0.026023198 = sum of:
0.026023198 = weight(_text_:22 in 3071) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026023198 = score(doc=3071,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16815145 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 3071, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3071)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 20. 1.2015 18:30:22
-
Bar-Ilan, J.; Peritz, B.C.: Informetric theories and methods for exploring the Internet : an analytical survey of recent research literature (2002)
0.00
0.0040585627 = product of:
0.008117125 = sum of:
0.008117125 = product of:
0.024351375 = sum of:
0.024351375 = weight(_text_:12 in 813) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024351375 = score(doc=813,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.1833526 = fieldWeight in 813, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=813)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 11. 2.2007 12:32:43
-
Bar-Ilan, J.: What do we know about links and linking? : a framework for studying links in academic environments (2005)
0.00
0.0040585627 = product of:
0.008117125 = sum of:
0.008117125 = product of:
0.024351375 = sum of:
0.024351375 = weight(_text_:12 in 1058) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024351375 = score(doc=1058,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.1833526 = fieldWeight in 1058, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1058)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 27.12.2007 12:00:52
-
Shema, H.; Bar-Ilan, J.; Thelwall, M.: Do blog citations correlate with a higher number of future citations? : Research blogs as a potential source for alternative metrics (2014)
0.00
0.0040585627 = product of:
0.008117125 = sum of:
0.008117125 = product of:
0.024351375 = sum of:
0.024351375 = weight(_text_:12 in 1258) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024351375 = score(doc=1258,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.1833526 = fieldWeight in 1258, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1258)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Journal-based citations are an important source of data for impact indices. However, the impact of journal articles extends beyond formal scholarly discourse. Measuring online scholarly impact calls for new indices, complementary to the older ones. This article examines a possible alternative metric source, blog posts aggregated at ResearchBlogging.org, which discuss peer-reviewed articles and provide full bibliographic references. Articles reviewed in these blogs therefore receive "blog citations." We hypothesized that articles receiving blog citations close to their publication time receive more journal citations later than the articles in the same journal published in the same year that did not receive such blog citations. Statistically significant evidence for articles published in 2009 and 2010 support this hypothesis for seven of 12 journals (58%) in 2009 and 13 of 19 journals (68%) in 2010. We suggest, based on these results, that blog citations can be used as an alternative metric source.
-
Bar-Ilan, J.: Web links and search engine ranking : the case of Google and the query "Jew" (2006)
0.00
0.0033821356 = product of:
0.0067642713 = sum of:
0.0067642713 = product of:
0.020292813 = sum of:
0.020292813 = weight(_text_:12 in 6104) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020292813 = score(doc=6104,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.15279384 = fieldWeight in 6104, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6104)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.12, S.1581-1589
-
Bar-Ilan, J.; Keenoy, K.; Yaari, E.; Levene, M.: User rankings of search engine results (2007)
0.00
0.0033821356 = product of:
0.0067642713 = sum of:
0.0067642713 = product of:
0.020292813 = sum of:
0.020292813 = weight(_text_:12 in 470) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020292813 = score(doc=470,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.15279384 = fieldWeight in 470, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=470)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- In this study, we investigate the similarities and differences between rankings of search results by users and search engines. Sixty-seven students took part in a 3-week-long experiment, during which they were asked to identify and rank the top 10 documents from the set of URLs that were retrieved by three major search engines (Google, MSN Search, and Yahoo!) for 12 selected queries. The URLs and accompanying snippets were displayed in random order, without disclosing which search engine(s) retrieved any specific URL for the query. We computed the similarity of the rankings of the users and search engines using four nonparametric correlation measures in [0,1] that complement each other. The findings show that the similarities between the users' choices and the rankings of the search engines are low. We examined the effects of the presentation order of the results, and of the thinking styles of the participants. Presentation order influences the rankings, but overall the results indicate that there is no "average user," and even if the users have the same basic knowledge of a topic, they evaluate information in their own context, which is influenced by cognitive, affective, and physical factors. This is the first large-scale experiment in which users were asked to rank the results of identical queries. The analysis of the experimental results demonstrates the potential for personalized search.
-
Bar-Ilan, J.; Keenoy, K.; Levene, M.; Yaari, E.: Presentation bias is significant in determining user preference for search results : a user study (2009)
0.00
0.0033821356 = product of:
0.0067642713 = sum of:
0.0067642713 = product of:
0.020292813 = sum of:
0.020292813 = weight(_text_:12 in 2703) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020292813 = score(doc=2703,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.15279384 = fieldWeight in 2703, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2703)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- We describe the results of an experiment designed to study user preferences for different orderings of search results from three major search engines. In the experiment, 65 users were asked to choose the best ordering from two different orderings of the same set of search results: Each pair consisted of the search engine's original top-10 ordering and a synthetic ordering created from the same top-10 results retrieved by the search engine. This process was repeated for 12 queries and nine different synthetic orderings. The results show that there is a slight overall preference for the search engines' original orderings, but the preference is rarely significant. Users' choice of the best result from each of the different orderings indicates that placement on the page (i.e., whether the result appears near the top) is the most important factor used in determining the quality of the result, not the actual content displayed in the top-10 snippets. In addition to the placement bias, we detected a small bias due to the reputation of the sites appearing in the search results.
-
Bar-Ilan, J.; Zhitomirsky-Geffet, M.; Miller, Y.; Shoham, S.: ¬The effects of background information and social interaction on image tagging (2010)
0.00
0.0033821356 = product of:
0.0067642713 = sum of:
0.0067642713 = product of:
0.020292813 = sum of:
0.020292813 = weight(_text_:12 in 3453) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020292813 = score(doc=3453,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.15279384 = fieldWeight in 3453, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3453)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- In this article, we describe the results of an experiment designed to understand the effects of background information and social interaction on image tagging. The participants in the experiment were asked to tag 12 preselected images of Jewish cultural heritage. The users were partitioned into three groups: the first group saw only the images with no additional information whatsoever, the second group saw the images plus a short, descriptive title, and the third group saw the images, the titles, and the URL of the page in which the image appeared. In the first stage of the experiment, each user tagged the images without seeing the tags provided by the other users. In the second stage, the users saw the tags assigned by others and were encouraged to interact. Results show that after the social interaction phase, the tag sets converged and the popular tags became even more popular. Although in all cases the total number of assigned tags increased after the social interaction phase, the number of distinct tags decreased in most cases. When viewing the image only, in some cases the users were not able to correctly identify what they saw in some of the pictures, but they overcame the initial difficulties after interaction. We conclude from this experiment that social interaction may lead to convergence in tagging and that the wisdom of the crowds helps overcome the difficulties due to the lack of information.
-
Bar-Ilan, J.; Levene, M.; Mat-Hassan, M.: Methods for evaluating dynamic changes in search engine rankings : a case study (2006)
0.00
0.0027057086 = product of:
0.005411417 = sum of:
0.005411417 = product of:
0.01623425 = sum of:
0.01623425 = weight(_text_:12 in 616) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01623425 = score(doc=616,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.048018172 = queryNorm
0.12223507 = fieldWeight in 616, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=616)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 13. 1.2007 19:12:00
