Search (22 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × theme_ss:"Citation indexing"
  • × theme_ss:"Informetrie"
  1. Chan, H.C.; Kim, H.-W.; Tan, W.C.: Information systems citation patterns from International Conference on Information Systems articles (2006) 0.05 
    0.049151126 = product of:
  0.09830225 = sum of:
    0.09830225 = sum of:
      0.056278326 = weight(_text_:2000 in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.056278326 = score(doc=201,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20949209 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051695216 = queryNorm
          0.26864177 = fieldWeight in 201, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=201)
      0.042023927 = weight(_text_:22 in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042023927 = score(doc=201,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18102784 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051695216 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 201, 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=201)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Research patterns could enhance understanding of the Information Systems (IS) field. Citation analysis is the methodology commonly used to determine such research patterns. In this study, the citation methodology is applied to one of the top-ranked Information Systems conferences - International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS). Information is extracted from papers in the proceedings of ICIS 2000 to 2002. A total of 145 base articles and 4,226 citations are used. Research patterns are obtained using total citations, citations per journal or conference, and overlapping citations. We then provide the citation ranking of journals and conferences. We also examine the difference between the citation ranking in this study and the ranking of IS journals and IS conferences in other studies. Based on the comparison, we confirm that IS research is a multidisciplinary research area. We also identify the most cited papers and authors in the IS research area, and the organizations most active in producing papers in the top-rated IS conference. We discuss the findings and implications of the study.
    Date
    3. 1.2007 17:22:03
  2. Cronin, B.: Semiotics and evaluative bibliometrics (2000) 0.04 
    0.037076604 = product of:
  0.07415321 = sum of:
    0.07415321 = product of:
      0.14830641 = sum of:
        0.14830641 = weight(_text_:2000 in 4542) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14830641 = score(doc=4542,freq=5.0), product of:
            0.20949209 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051695216 = queryNorm
            0.70793325 = fieldWeight in 4542, product of:
              2.236068 = tf(freq=5.0), with freq of:
                5.0 = termFreq=5.0
              4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4542)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Journal of documentation. 56(2000) no.4, S.440-453
    Year
    2000
  3. ¬The Web of knowledge : Festschrift in honor of Eugene Garfield (2000) 0.03 
    0.028719414 = product of:
  0.057438828 = sum of:
    0.057438828 = product of:
      0.114877656 = sum of:
        0.114877656 = weight(_text_:2000 in 461) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.114877656 = score(doc=461,freq=3.0), product of:
            0.20949209 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051695216 = queryNorm
            0.54836273 = fieldWeight in 461, product of:
              1.7320508 = tf(freq=3.0), with freq of:
                3.0 = termFreq=3.0
              4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=461)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Year
    2000
  4. Stock, W.G.: Eugene Garfield und die Folgen : der Weg der Fußnote bis in die Wissenschaftspolitik (2002) 0.03 
    0.028139163 = product of:
  0.056278326 = sum of:
    0.056278326 = product of:
      0.11255665 = sum of:
        0.11255665 = weight(_text_:2000 in 472) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11255665 = score(doc=472,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20949209 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051695216 = queryNorm
            0.53728354 = fieldWeight in 472, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=472)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Ein Besprechungsaufsatz zur Festschrift für E. Garfield: The Web of knowledge: Festschrift in honor of Eugene Garfield. Medford, NJ: Information Today 2000.
  5. Nicolaisen, J.: Citation analysis (2007) 0.03 
    0.028015953 = product of:
  0.056031905 = sum of:
    0.056031905 = product of:
      0.11206381 = sum of:
        0.11206381 = weight(_text_:22 in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11206381 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18102784 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051695216 = 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
  6. Van der Veer Martens, B.: Do citation systems represent theories of truth? (2001) 0.02 
    0.024762837 = product of:
  0.049525674 = sum of:
    0.049525674 = product of:
      0.09905135 = sum of:
        0.09905135 = weight(_text_:22 in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09905135 = score(doc=3925,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18102784 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051695216 = 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
  7. Meho, L.I.; Sonnenwald, D.H.: Citation ranking versus peer evaluation of senior faculty research performance : a case study of Kurdish scholarship (2000) 0.02 
    0.02224596 = product of:
  0.04449192 = sum of:
    0.04449192 = product of:
      0.08898384 = sum of:
        0.08898384 = weight(_text_:2000 in 4382) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08898384 = score(doc=4382,freq=5.0), product of:
            0.20949209 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051695216 = queryNorm
            0.42475992 = fieldWeight in 4382, product of:
              2.236068 = tf(freq=5.0), with freq of:
                5.0 = termFreq=5.0
              4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4382)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 51(2000) no.2, S.123-138
    Year
    2000
  8. Steele, T.W.; Stier, J.C.: ¬The impact of interdisciplinary research in the environmental sciences : a forestry case study (2000) 0.02 
    0.02224596 = product of:
  0.04449192 = sum of:
    0.04449192 = product of:
      0.08898384 = sum of:
        0.08898384 = weight(_text_:2000 in 4592) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08898384 = score(doc=4592,freq=5.0), product of:
            0.20949209 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051695216 = queryNorm
            0.42475992 = fieldWeight in 4592, product of:
              2.236068 = tf(freq=5.0), with freq of:
                5.0 = termFreq=5.0
              4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4592)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 51(2000) no.5, S.476-484
    Year
    2000
  9. Brooks, T.A.: How good are the best papers of JASIS? (2000) 0.02 
    0.02224596 = product of:
  0.04449192 = sum of:
    0.04449192 = product of:
      0.08898384 = sum of:
        0.08898384 = weight(_text_:2000 in 4593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08898384 = score(doc=4593,freq=5.0), product of:
            0.20949209 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051695216 = queryNorm
            0.42475992 = fieldWeight in 4593, product of:
              2.236068 = tf(freq=5.0), with freq of:
                5.0 = termFreq=5.0
              4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4593)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 51(2000) no.5, S.485-486
    Year
    2000
  10. Jacobs, N.; Woodfield, J.; Morris, A.: Using local citation data to relate the use of journal articles by academic researchers to the coverage of full-text document access systems (2000) 0.02 
    0.02224596 = product of:
  0.04449192 = sum of:
    0.04449192 = product of:
      0.08898384 = sum of:
        0.08898384 = weight(_text_:2000 in 4541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08898384 = score(doc=4541,freq=5.0), product of:
            0.20949209 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051695216 = queryNorm
            0.42475992 = fieldWeight in 4541, product of:
              2.236068 = tf(freq=5.0), with freq of:
                5.0 = termFreq=5.0
              4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4541)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Journal of documentation. 56(2000) no.5, S.563-581
    Year
    2000
  11. Case, D.O.; Higgins, G.M.: How can we investigate citation behavior? : A study of reasons for citing literature in communication (2000) 0.02 
    0.018538302 = product of:
  0.037076604 = sum of:
    0.037076604 = product of:
      0.07415321 = sum of:
        0.07415321 = weight(_text_:2000 in 4775) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07415321 = score(doc=4775,freq=5.0), product of:
            0.20949209 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051695216 = queryNorm
            0.35396662 = fieldWeight in 4775, product of:
              2.236068 = tf(freq=5.0), with freq of:
                5.0 = termFreq=5.0
              4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4775)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 51(2000) no.7, S.635-645
    Year
    2000
  12. Marx, W.; Bornmann, L.; Cardona, M.: Reference standards and reference multipliers for the comparison of the citation impact of papers published in different time periods (2010) 0.02 
    0.016581161 = product of:
  0.033162322 = sum of:
    0.033162322 = product of:
      0.066324644 = sum of:
        0.066324644 = weight(_text_:2000 in 3998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.066324644 = score(doc=3998,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.20949209 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051695216 = queryNorm
            0.31659737 = fieldWeight in 3998, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3998)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    In this study, reference standards and reference multipliers are suggested as a means to compare the citation impact of earlier research publications in physics (from the period of "Little Science" in the early 20th century) with that of contemporary papers (from the period of "Big Science," beginning around 1960). For the development of time-specific reference standards, the authors determined (a) the mean citation rates of papers in selected physics journals as well as (b) the mean citation rates of all papers in physics published in 1900 (Little Science) and in 2000 (Big Science); this was accomplished by relying on the processes of field-specific standardization in bibliometry. For the sake of developing reference multipliers with which the citation impact of earlier papers can be adjusted to the citation impact of contemporary papers, they combined the reference standards calculated for 1900 and 2000 into their ratio. The use of reference multipliers is demonstrated by means of two examples involving the time adjusted h index values for Max Planck and Albert Einstein.
  13. Larivière, V.; Gingras, Y.; Archambault, E.: ¬The decline in the concentration of citations, 1900-2007 (2009) 0.01 
    0.014857704 = product of:
  0.029715408 = sum of:
    0.029715408 = product of:
      0.059430815 = sum of:
        0.059430815 = weight(_text_:22 in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.059430815 = score(doc=2763,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18102784 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051695216 = queryNorm
            0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 2763, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2763)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    22. 3.2009 19:22:35
  14. Davis, P.M.; Cohen, S.A.: ¬The effect of the Web on undergraduate citation behavior 1996-1999 (2001) 0.01 
    0.014069581 = product of:
  0.028139163 = sum of:
    0.028139163 = product of:
      0.056278326 = sum of:
        0.056278326 = weight(_text_:2000 in 5768) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056278326 = score(doc=5768,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20949209 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051695216 = queryNorm
            0.26864177 = fieldWeight in 5768, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5768)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    A citation analysis of undergraduate term papers in microeconomics revealed a significant decrease in the frequency of scholarly resources cited between 1996 and 1999. Book citations decreased from 30% to 19%, newspaper citations increased from 7% to 19%, and Web citations increased from 9% to 21%. Web citations checked in 2000 revealed that only 18% of URLs cited in 1996 led to the correct Internet document. For 1999 bibliographies, only 55% of URLs led to the correct document. The authors recommend (1) setting stricter guidelines for acceptable citations in course assignments; (2) creating and maintaining scholarly portals for authoritative Web sites with a commitment to long-term access; and (3) continuing to instruct students how to critically evaluate resources
  15. Abt, H.A.; Garfield, E.: Is the relationship between numbers of references and paper lengths the same for all sciences? (2002) 0.01 
    0.014069581 = product of:
  0.028139163 = sum of:
    0.028139163 = product of:
      0.056278326 = sum of:
        0.056278326 = weight(_text_:2000 in 5223) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056278326 = score(doc=5223,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20949209 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051695216 = queryNorm
            0.26864177 = fieldWeight in 5223, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5223)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    It has been shown in the physical sciences that a paper's length is related to its number of references in a linear manner. Abt and Garfield here look at the life and social sciences with the thought that if the relation holds the citation counts will provide a measure of relative importance across these disciplines. In the life sciences 200 research papers from 1999-2000 were scanned in each of 10 journals to produce counts of 1000 word normalized pages. In the social sciences an average of 70 research papers in nine journals were scanned for the two-year period. Papers of average length in the various sciences have the same average number of references within plus or minus 17%. A look at the 30 to 60 papers over the two years in 18 review journals indicates twice the references of research papers of the same length.
  16. Stock, W.G.: Forschung im internationalen Vergleich - Wissenschaftsindikatoren auf Zitationsbasis : ISI Essential Science Indicators (2002) 0.01 
    0.011724652 = product of:
  0.023449304 = sum of:
    0.023449304 = product of:
      0.046898607 = sum of:
        0.046898607 = weight(_text_:2000 in 474) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046898607 = score(doc=474,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20949209 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051695216 = queryNorm
            0.22386816 = fieldWeight in 474, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=474)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Bewertung wissenschaftlicher Forschungsergebnisse aus einer elektronischen Datenbank heraus? Rangordnungen der wichtigsten Institutionen, Wissenschaftler, Zeitschriften und sogar Länder in Fachdisziplinen nach Einfluss? Markierung "heißer", hochaktueller Artikel? Auflisten der hochzitierten Forschungsfronten in den einzelnen Wissenschaftsdisziplinen? Und das alles auf Knopfdruck und nicht mittels umständlicher szientometrischer Verfahren? Geht so etwas überhaupt? Es geht. Mit den "Essential Science Indicators" (ESI) legt das ISl ein webbasiertes Informationssystem zur Wissenschaftsevaluation vor, das einzigartige Ergebnisse präsentiert und in der Tat ausgesprochen einfach zu bedienen ist. Aber es geht, verglichen mit ausgeklügelten Methoden der empirischen Wissenschaftsforschung, nicht alles. Wo liegen die Grenzen des Systems? Wir werden die Arbeitsweise der ESI, seine Datenbasis, die eingesetzten informetrischen Algorithmen - und deren methodischen Probleme, die Suchoberfläche sowie die Ergebnisdarstellung skizzieren. Als Beispiel dienen uns Aspekte deutscher Forschung. Etwa: In welcher Disziplin haben Deutschlands Forscher den größten internationalen Einfluss? Welches deutsche Institut der Neurowissenschaften kann aufglobaler Ebene mitmischen? Oder: Welcher in Deutschland tätige Wissenschaftler führt eine disziplinspezifische Rangordnung an?Letztlich: Wer braucht die "Essential Science Indicators"? - Wir testeten die Essential Science Indicators Mitte Februar 2002 anhand der Version vom 1. Januar 2002, die das Zehn-Jahres-Intervall 1991 bis 2000 sowie die ersten zehn Monate aus 2001 berücksichtigt.
  17. Vaughan, L.; Shaw , D.: Bibliographic and Web citations : what Is the difference? (2003) 0.01 
    0.011724652 = product of:
  0.023449304 = sum of:
    0.023449304 = product of:
      0.046898607 = sum of:
        0.046898607 = weight(_text_:2000 in 5176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046898607 = score(doc=5176,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20949209 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051695216 = queryNorm
            0.22386816 = fieldWeight in 5176, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, 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.
  18. Johnson, B.; Oppenheim, C.: How socially connected are citers to those that they cite? (2007) 0.01 
    0.011724652 = product of:
  0.023449304 = sum of:
    0.023449304 = product of:
      0.046898607 = sum of:
        0.046898607 = weight(_text_:2000 in 839) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046898607 = score(doc=839,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20949209 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051695216 = queryNorm
            0.22386816 = fieldWeight in 839, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.0524464 = idf(docFreq=2088, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=839)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to report an investigation into the social and citation networks of three information scientists: David Nicholas, Peter Williams and Paul Huntington. Design/methodology/approach - Similarities between citation patterns and social closeness were identified and discussed. A total of 16 individuals in the citation network were identified and investigated using citation analysis, and a matrix formed of citations made between those in the network. Social connections between the 16 in the citation network were then investigated by means of a questionnaire, the results of which were merged into a separate matrix. These matrices were converted into visual social networks, using multidimensional scaling. A new deviance measure was devised for drawing comparisons between social and citation closeness in individual cases. Findings - Nicholas, Williams and Huntington were found to have cited 527 authors in the period 2000-2003, the 16 most cited becoming the subjects of further citation and social investigation. This comparison, along with the examination of visual representations indicates a positive correlation between social closeness and citation counts. Possible explanations for this correlation are discussed, and implications considered. Despite this correlation, the information scientists were found to cite widely outside their immediate social connections. Originality/value - Social network analysis has not been often used in combination with citation analysis to explore inter-relationships in research teams.
  19. H-Index auch im Web of Science (2008) 0.01 
    0.010505982 = product of:
  0.021011963 = sum of:
    0.021011963 = product of:
      0.042023927 = sum of:
        0.042023927 = weight(_text_:22 in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042023927 = score(doc=590,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18102784 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051695216 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    6. 4.2008 19:04:22
  20. Mingers, J.; Burrell, Q.L.: Modeling citation behavior in Management Science journals (2006) 0.01 
    0.010505982 = product of:
  0.021011963 = sum of:
    0.021011963 = product of:
      0.042023927 = sum of:
        0.042023927 = weight(_text_:22 in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042023927 = score(doc=994,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18102784 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051695216 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 994, 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=994)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    26.12.2007 19:22:05

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 18
  • d 4

Types

  • a 21
  • el 1
  • m 1
  • s 1
  • More… Less…

Themes