Search (235 results, page 1 of 12)

  • × type_ss:"el"
  1. Mitchell, J.S.: DDC 22 : an introduction (2003) 0.09 
    0.092656106 = product of:
  0.18531221 = sum of:
    0.18531221 = sum of:
      0.07607185 = weight(_text_:index in 1936) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07607185 = score(doc=1936,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2250935 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051511593 = queryNorm
          0.33795667 = fieldWeight in 1936, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1936)
      0.10924035 = weight(_text_:22 in 1936) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.10924035 = score(doc=1936,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.18038483 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051511593 = queryNorm
          0.6055961 = fieldWeight in 1936, product of:
            3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
              10.0 = termFreq=10.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1936)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Dewey Decimal Classification and Relative Index, Edition 22 (DDC 22) will be issued simultaneously in print and web versions in July 2003. The new edition is the first full print update to the Dewey Decimal Classification system in seven years-it includes several significant updates and many new numbers and topics. DDC 22 also features some fundamental structural changes that have been introduced with the goals of promoting classifier efficiency and improving the DDC for use in a variety of applications in the web environment. Most importantly, the content of the new edition has been shaped by the needs and recommendations of Dewey users around the world. The worldwide user community has an important role in shaping the future of the DDC.
    Object
    DDC-22
  2. Stumpf, G.: "Kerngeschäft" Sacherschließung in neuer Sicht : was gezielte intellektuelle Arbeit und maschinelle Verfahren gemeinsam bewirken können (2015) 0.08 
    0.078217804 = product of:
  0.15643561 = sum of:
    0.15643561 = sum of:
      0.10758185 = weight(_text_:index in 1703) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.10758185 = score(doc=1703,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.2250935 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051511593 = queryNorm
          0.4779429 = fieldWeight in 1703, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1703)
      0.04885377 = weight(_text_:22 in 1703) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04885377 = score(doc=1703,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18038483 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051511593 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1703, 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=1703)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Content
    Es handelt sich um den leicht überarbeiteten Text eines Vortrags bei der VDB-Fortbildungsveranstaltung "Wandel als Konstante: neue Aufgaben und Herausforderungen für sozialwissenschaftliche Bibliotheken" am 22./23. Januar 2015 in Berlin.
    Source
    https://opus.bibliothek.uni-augsburg.de/opus4/frontdoor/index/index/docId/3002
  3. Kleineberg, M.: Context analysis and context indexing : formal pragmatics in knowledge organization (2014) 0.07 
    0.06817839 = product of:
  0.13635679 = sum of:
    0.13635679 = product of:
      0.40907034 = sum of:
        0.40907034 = weight(_text_:3a in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.40907034 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.43671587 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051511593 = queryNorm
            0.93669677 = fieldWeight in 1826, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1826)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CDQQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdigbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fvolltexte%2Fdocuments%2F3131107&ei=HzFWVYvGMsiNsgGTyoFI&usg=AFQjCNE2FHUeR9oQTQlNC4TPedv4Mo3DaQ&sig2=Rlzpr7a3BLZZkqZCXXN_IA&bvm=bv.93564037,d.bGg&cad=rja
  4. Knoll, A.: Kompetenzprofil von Information Professionals in Unternehmen (2016) 0.07 
    0.06704383 = product of:
  0.13408767 = sum of:
    0.13408767 = sum of:
      0.092213005 = weight(_text_:index in 3069) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.092213005 = score(doc=3069,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.2250935 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051511593 = queryNorm
          0.40966535 = fieldWeight in 3069, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3069)
      0.04187466 = weight(_text_:22 in 3069) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04187466 = score(doc=3069,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18038483 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051511593 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3069, 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=3069)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Content
    Vgl.: https://yis.univie.ac.at/index.php/yis/article/view/1324/1234. Diesem Beitrag liegt folgende Abschlussarbeit zugrunde: Lamparter, Anna: Kompetenzprofil für Information Professionals in Unternehmen. Masterarbeit (M.A.), Hochschule Hannover, 2015. Volltext: https://serwiss.bib.hs-hannover.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/528 Vgl. auch: (geb. Lamparter): Kompetenzprofil von Information Professionals in Unternehmen. In:
    Date
    28. 7.2016 16:22:54
  5. Tay, A.: ¬The next generation discovery citation indexes : a review of the landscape in 2020 (2020) 0.06 
    0.06246281 = product of:
  0.12492562 = sum of:
    0.12492562 = sum of:
      0.07607185 = weight(_text_:index in 40) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07607185 = score(doc=40,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2250935 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051511593 = queryNorm
          0.33795667 = fieldWeight in 40, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=40)
      0.04885377 = weight(_text_:22 in 40) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04885377 = score(doc=40,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18038483 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051511593 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 40, 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=40)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Conclusion There is a reason why Google Scholar and Web of Science/Scopus are kings of the hills in their various arenas. They have strong brand recogniton, a head start in development and a mass of eyeballs and users that leads to an almost virtious cycle of improvement. Competing against such well established competitors is not easy even when one has deep pockets (Microsoft) or a killer idea (scite). It will be interesting to see how the landscape will look like in 2030. Stay tuned for part II where I review each particular index.
    Date
    17.11.2020 12:22:59
  6. Krattenthaler, C.: Was der h-Index wirklich aussagt (2021) 0.06 
    0.05750492 = product of:
  0.11500984 = sum of:
    0.11500984 = product of:
      0.23001967 = sum of:
        0.23001967 = weight(_text_:index in 407) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.23001967 = score(doc=407,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.2250935 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051511593 = queryNorm
            1.021885 = fieldWeight in 407, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=407)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Diese Note legt dar, dass der sogenannte h-Index (Hirschs bibliometrischer Index) im Wesentlichen dieselbe Information wiedergibt wie die Gesamtanzahl von Zitationen von Publikationen einer Autorin oder eines Autors, also ein nutzloser bibliometrischer Index ist. Dies basiert auf einem faszinierenden Satz der Wahrscheinlichkeitstheorie, der hier ebenfalls erläutert wird.
    Content
    Vgl.: DOI: 10.1515/dmvm-2021-0050. Auch abgedruckt u.d.T.: 'Der h-Index - "ein nutzloser bibliometrischer Index"' in Open Password Nr. 1007 vom 06.12.2021 unter: https://www.password-online.de/?mailpoet_router&endpoint=view_in_browser&action=view&data=WzM3NCwiZDI3MzMzOTEwMzUzIiwwLDAsMzQ4LDFd.
    Object
    h-index
  7. Popper, K.R.: Three worlds : the Tanner lecture on human values. Deliverd at the University of Michigan, April 7, 1978 (1978) 0.05 
    0.054542713 = product of:
  0.109085426 = sum of:
    0.109085426 = product of:
      0.32725626 = sum of:
        0.32725626 = weight(_text_:3a in 230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.32725626 = score(doc=230,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.43671587 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051511593 = queryNorm
            0.7493574 = fieldWeight in 230, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=230)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    https%3A%2F%2Ftannerlectures.utah.edu%2F_documents%2Fa-to-z%2Fp%2Fpopper80.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3f4QRTEH-OEBmoYr2J_c7H
  8. Schreiber, M.: Restricting the h-index to a citation time window : a case study of a timed Hirsch index (2014) 0.05 
    0.048600525 = product of:
  0.09720105 = sum of:
    0.09720105 = product of:
      0.1944021 = sum of:
        0.1944021 = weight(_text_:index in 1563) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1944021 = score(doc=1563,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.2250935 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051511593 = queryNorm
            0.86365044 = fieldWeight in 1563, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, 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.
    Object
    h-index
  9. Calculating the h-index : Web of Science, Scopus or Google Scholar? (2011) 0.05 
    0.04705726 = product of:
  0.09411452 = sum of:
    0.09411452 = product of:
      0.18822904 = sum of:
        0.18822904 = weight(_text_:index in 854) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18822904 = score(doc=854,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.2250935 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051511593 = queryNorm
            0.836226 = fieldWeight in 854, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=854)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Gegenüberstellung der Berechnung des h-Index in den drei Tools mit Beispiel Stephen Hawking (WoS: 59, Scopus: 19, Google Scholar: 76)
    Object
    h-index
  10. Danowski, P.: Authority files and Web 2.0 : Wikipedia and the PND. An Example (2007) 0.04 
    0.044616293 = product of:
  0.08923259 = sum of:
    0.08923259 = sum of:
      0.054337036 = weight(_text_:index in 1291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.054337036 = score(doc=1291,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2250935 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051511593 = queryNorm
          0.24139762 = fieldWeight in 1291, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1291)
      0.03489555 = weight(_text_:22 in 1291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03489555 = score(doc=1291,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18038483 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051511593 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1291, 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=1291)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    More and more users index everything on their own in the web 2.0. There are services for links, videos, pictures, books, encyclopaedic articles and scientific articles. All these services are library independent. But must that really be? Can't libraries help with their experience and tools to make user indexing better? On the experience of a project from German language Wikipedia together with the German person authority files (Personen Namen Datei - PND) located at German National Library (Deutsche Nationalbibliothek) I would like to show what is possible. How users can and will use the authority files, if we let them. We will take a look how the project worked and what we can learn for future projects. Conclusions - Authority files can have a role in the web 2.0 - there must be an open interface/ service for retrieval - everything that is indexed on the net with authority files can be easy integrated in a federated search - O'Reilly: You have to found ways that your data get more important that more it will be used
    Content
    Vortrag anlässlich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".
  11. Maislin, S.: Tutorial on index tagging (???) 0.04 
    0.043469626 = product of:
  0.08693925 = sum of:
    0.08693925 = product of:
      0.1738785 = sum of:
        0.1738785 = weight(_text_:index in 3134) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1738785 = score(doc=3134,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2250935 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051511593 = queryNorm
            0.7724724 = fieldWeight in 3134, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3134)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
  12. Panzer, M.: Designing identifiers for the DDC (2007) 0.04 
    0.03970976 = product of:
  0.07941952 = sum of:
    0.07941952 = sum of:
      0.03260222 = weight(_text_:index in 1752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03260222 = score(doc=1752,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2250935 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051511593 = queryNorm
          0.14483857 = fieldWeight in 1752, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1752)
      0.0468173 = weight(_text_:22 in 1752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0468173 = score(doc=1752,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.18038483 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051511593 = queryNorm
          0.2595412 = fieldWeight in 1752, product of:
            3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
              10.0 = termFreq=10.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1752)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Content
    "Although the Dewey Decimal Classification is currently available on the web to subscribers as WebDewey and Abridged WebDewey in the OCLC Connexion service and in an XML version to licensees, OCLC does not provide any "web services" based on the DDC. By web services, we mean presentation of the DDC to other machines (not humans) for uses such as searching, browsing, classifying, mapping, harvesting, and alerting. In order to build web-accessible services based on the DDC, several elements have to be considered. One of these elements is the design of an appropriate Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) structure for Dewey. The design goals of mapping the entity model of the DDC into an identifier space can be summarized as follows: * Common locator for Dewey concepts and associated resources for use in web services and web applications * Use-case-driven, but not directly related to and outlasting a specific use case (persistency) * Retraceable path to a concept rather than an abstract identification, reusing a means of identification that is already present in the DDC and available in existing metadata. We have been working closely with our colleagues in the OCLC Office of Research (especially Andy Houghton as well as Eric Childress, Diane Vizine-Goetz, and Stu Weibel) on a preliminary identifier syntax. The basic identifier format we are currently exploring is: http://dewey.info/{aspect}/{object}/{locale}/{type}/{version}/{resource} where * {aspect} is the aspect associated with an {object}-the current value set of aspect contains "concept", "scheme", and "index"; additional ones are under exploration * {object} is a type of {aspect} * {locale} identifies a Dewey translation * {type} identifies a Dewey edition type and contains, at a minimum, the values "edn" for the full edition or "abr" for the abridged edition * {version} identifies a Dewey edition version * {resource} identifies a resource associated with an {object} in the context of {locale}, {type}, and {version}
    Some examples of identifiers for concepts follow: <http://dewey.info/concept/338.4/en/edn/22/> This identifier is used to retrieve or identify the 338.4 concept in the English-language version of Edition 22. <http://dewey.info/concept/338.4/de/edn/22/> This identifier is used to retrieve or identify the 338.4 concept in the German-language version of Edition 22. <http://dewey.info/concept/333.7-333.9/> This identifier is used to retrieve or identify the 333.7-333.9 concept across all editions and language versions. <http://dewey.info/concept/333.7-333.9/about.skos> This identifier is used to retrieve a SKOS representation of the 333.7-333.9 concept (using the "resource" element). There are several open issues at this preliminary stage of development: Use cases: URIs need to represent the range of statements or questions that could be submitted to a Dewey web service. Therefore, it seems that some general questions have to be answered first: What information does an agent have when coming to a Dewey web service? What kind of questions will such an agent ask? Placement of the {locale} component: It is still an open question if the {locale} component should be placed after the {version} component instead (<http://dewey.info/concept/338.4/edn/22/en>) to emphasize that the most important instantiation of a Dewey class is its edition, not its language version. From a services point of view, however, it could make more sense to keep the current arrangement, because users are more likely to come to the service with a present understanding of the language version they are seeking without knowing the specifics of a certain edition in which they are trying to find topics. Identification of other Dewey entities: The goal is to create a locator that does not answer all, but a lot of questions that could be asked about the DDC. Which entities are missing but should be surfaced for services or user agents? How will those services or agents interact with them? Should some entities be rendered in a different way as presented? For example, (how) should the DDC Summaries be retrievable? Would it be necessary to make the DDC Manual accessible through this identifier structure?"
  13. Goble, A.: ¬The international film index on CD-ROM (1996) 0.04 
    0.038035925 = product of:
  0.07607185 = sum of:
    0.07607185 = product of:
      0.1521437 = sum of:
        0.1521437 = weight(_text_:index in 1204) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1521437 = score(doc=1204,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2250935 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051511593 = queryNorm
            0.67591333 = fieldWeight in 1204, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1204)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
  14. Remler, A.: Lässt sich wissenschaftliche Leistung messen? : Wer zitiert wird, liegt vorne - in den USA berechnet man Forschungsleistung nach einem Zitat-Index (2000) 0.04 
    0.038035925 = product of:
  0.07607185 = sum of:
    0.07607185 = product of:
      0.1521437 = sum of:
        0.1521437 = weight(_text_:index in 5392) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1521437 = score(doc=5392,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2250935 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051511593 = queryNorm
            0.67591333 = fieldWeight in 5392, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5392)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
  15. Harzing, A.-W.: Comparing the Google Scholar h-index with the ISI Journal Impact Factor (2008) 0.04 
    0.038035925 = product of:
  0.07607185 = sum of:
    0.07607185 = product of:
      0.1521437 = sum of:
        0.1521437 = weight(_text_:index in 855) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1521437 = score(doc=855,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.2250935 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051511593 = queryNorm
            0.67591333 = fieldWeight in 855, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=855)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Publication in academic journals is a key criterion for appointment, tenure and promotion in universities. Many universities weigh publications according to the quality or impact of the journal. Traditionally, journal quality has been assessed through the ISI Journal Impact Factor (JIF). This paper proposes an alternative metric - Hirsch's h-index - and data source - Google Scholar - to assess journal impact. Using a systematic comparison between the Google Scholar h-index and the ISI JIF for a sample of 838 journals in Economics & Business, we argue that the former provides a more accurate and comprehensive measure of journal impact.
    Object
    h-index
  16. Kim, T.C.-w.K.; Zumstein, P.: Semiautomatische Katalogisierung und Normdatenverknüpfung mit Zotero im Index Theologicus (2016) 0.04 
    0.037645806 = product of:
  0.07529161 = sum of:
    0.07529161 = product of:
      0.15058322 = sum of:
        0.15058322 = weight(_text_:index in 3064) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15058322 = score(doc=3064,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.2250935 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051511593 = queryNorm
            0.6689808 = fieldWeight in 3064, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3064)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Im Folgenden soll aufgezeigt werden, wie derzeit das Literaturverwaltungsprogramm Zotero innerhalb des Index Theologicus genutzt wird, um unselbstständige Literatur in einem bibliothekarischen Katalogisierungssystem zu erfassen. Die modulare und flexible Architektur der Open Source Software erlaubt es, die bereits kollaborativ zusammengetragene Programmierarbeit zur Datenextraktion mitzunutzen. Das vorgestellte semiautomatische Verfahren bringt auch bei der Verknüpfung von Normdaten erhebliche Vorteile für die Medienbearbeitung.
    Object
    Index Theologicus
  17. Bladow, N.; Dorey, C.; Frederickson, L.; Grover, P.; Knudtson, Y.; Krishnamurthy, S.; Lazarou, V.: What's the Buzz about? : An empirical examination of Search on Yahoo! (2005) 0.04 
    0.036450393 = product of:
  0.07290079 = sum of:
    0.07290079 = product of:
      0.14580157 = sum of:
        0.14580157 = weight(_text_:index in 3072) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14580157 = score(doc=3072,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.2250935 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051511593 = queryNorm
            0.64773786 = fieldWeight in 3072, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3072)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    We present an analysis of the Yahoo Buzz Index over a period of 45 weeks. Our key findings are that: (1) It is most common for a search term to show up on the index for one week, followed by two weeks, three weeks, etc. Only two terms persist for all 45 weeks studied - Britney Spears and Jennifer Lopez. Search term longevity follows a power-law distribution or a winner-take-all structure; (2) Most search terms focus on entertainment. Search terms related to serious topics are found less often. The Buzz Index does not necessarily follow the "news cycle"; and, (3) We provide two ways to determine "star power" of various search terms - one that emphasizes staying power on the Index and another that emphasizes rank. In general, the methods lead to dramatically different results. Britney Spears performs well in both methods. We conclude that the data available on the Index is symptomatic of a celebrity-crazed, entertainment-centered culture.
  18. Reiner, U.: Automatische DDC-Klassifizierung bibliografischer Titeldatensätze der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie (2009) 0.04 
    0.035693035 = product of:
  0.07138607 = sum of:
    0.07138607 = sum of:
      0.043469626 = weight(_text_:index in 3284) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.043469626 = score(doc=3284,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2250935 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051511593 = queryNorm
          0.1931181 = fieldWeight in 3284, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3284)
      0.02791644 = weight(_text_:22 in 3284) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02791644 = score(doc=3284,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18038483 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051511593 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 3284, 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=3284)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    22. 1.2010 14:41:24
    Footnote
    Vortrag gehalten am 03.06.2009 auf dem 98. Bibliothekartag 2009 in Erfurt; erscheint in: Dialog mit Biliotheken. Vgl. auch: http://www.gbv.de/vgm/info/biblio/01VZG/06Publikationen/2009/index.
  19. Shala, E.: ¬Die Autonomie des Menschen und der Maschine : gegenwärtige Definitionen von Autonomie zwischen philosophischem Hintergrund und technologischer Umsetzbarkeit (2014) 0.03 
    0.034089196 = product of:
  0.06817839 = sum of:
    0.06817839 = product of:
      0.20453517 = sum of:
        0.20453517 = weight(_text_:3a in 4388) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.20453517 = score(doc=4388,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.43671587 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051511593 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 4388, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4388)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Footnote
    Vgl. unter: https://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwizweHljdbcAhVS16QKHXcFD9QQFjABegQICRAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Fpublication%2F271200105_Die_Autonomie_des_Menschen_und_der_Maschine_-_gegenwartige_Definitionen_von_Autonomie_zwischen_philosophischem_Hintergrund_und_technologischer_Umsetzbarkeit_Redigierte_Version_der_Magisterarbeit_Karls&usg=AOvVaw06orrdJmFF2xbCCp_hL26q.
  20. Dietz, K.: en.wikipedia.org > 6 Mio. Artikel (2020) 0.03 
    0.034089196 = product of:
  0.06817839 = sum of:
    0.06817839 = product of:
      0.20453517 = sum of:
        0.20453517 = weight(_text_:3a in 5669) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.20453517 = score(doc=5669,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.43671587 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051511593 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 5669, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5669)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Content
    "Die Englischsprachige Wikipedia verfügt jetzt über mehr als 6 Millionen Artikel. An zweiter Stelle kommt die deutschsprachige Wikipedia mit 2.3 Millionen Artikeln, an dritter Stelle steht die französischsprachige Wikipedia mit 2.1 Millionen Artikeln (via Researchbuzz: Firehose <https://rbfirehose.com/2020/01/24/techcrunch-wikipedia-now-has-more-than-6-million-articles-in-english/> und Techcrunch <https://techcrunch.com/2020/01/23/wikipedia-english-six-million-articles/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Techcrunch+%28TechCrunch%29&guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly9yYmZpcmVob3NlLmNvbS8yMDIwLzAxLzI0L3RlY2hjcnVuY2gtd2lraXBlZGlhLW5vdy1oYXMtbW9yZS10aGFuLTYtbWlsbGlvbi1hcnRpY2xlcy1pbi1lbmdsaXNoLw&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAK0zHfjdDZ_spFZBF_z-zDjtL5iWvuKDumFTzm4HvQzkUfE2pLXQzGS6FGB_y-VISdMEsUSvkNsg2U_NWQ4lwWSvOo3jvXo1I3GtgHpP8exukVxYAnn5mJspqX50VHIWFADHhs5AerkRn3hMRtf_R3F1qmEbo8EROZXp328HMC-o>). 250120 via digithek ch = #fineBlog s.a.: Angesichts der Veröffentlichung des 6-millionsten Artikels vergangene Woche in der englischsprachigen Wikipedia hat die Community-Zeitungsseite "Wikipedia Signpost" ein Moratorium bei der Veröffentlichung von Unternehmensartikeln gefordert. Das sei kein Vorwurf gegen die Wikimedia Foundation, aber die derzeitigen Maßnahmen, um die Enzyklopädie gegen missbräuchliches undeklariertes Paid Editing zu schützen, funktionierten ganz klar nicht. *"Da die ehrenamtlichen Autoren derzeit von Werbung in Gestalt von Wikipedia-Artikeln überwältigt werden, und da die WMF nicht in der Lage zu sein scheint, dem irgendetwas entgegenzusetzen, wäre der einzige gangbare Weg für die Autoren, fürs erste die Neuanlage von Artikeln über Unternehmen zu untersagen"*, schreibt der Benutzer Smallbones in seinem Editorial <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2020-01-27/From_the_editor> zur heutigen Ausgabe."

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 120
  • d 107
  • el 2
  • a 1
  • f 1
  • nl 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 103
  • i 15
  • m 5
  • r 4
  • s 4
  • b 3
  • x 3
  • n 1
  • p 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects