Search (18 results, page 1 of 1)

0.07246815 = product of:
  0.1449363 = sum of:
    0.1449363 = sum of:
      0.11029717 = weight(_text_:2011 in 4186) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.11029717 = score(doc=4186,freq=5.0), product of:
          0.25410342 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.9694557 = idf(docFreq=834, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051133048 = queryNorm
          0.4340641 = fieldWeight in 4186, product of:
            2.236068 = tf(freq=5.0), with freq of:
              5.0 = termFreq=5.0
            4.9694557 = idf(docFreq=834, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4186)
      0.034639113 = weight(_text_:22 in 4186) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034639113 = score(doc=4186,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17905922 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051133048 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4186, 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=4186)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 1.2011 12:51:07

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.2, S.217-229

Year

2011

0.0626383 = product of:
  0.1252766 = sum of:
    0.1252766 = sum of:
      0.083709665 = weight(_text_:2011 in 4681) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.083709665 = score(doc=4681,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.25410342 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.9694557 = idf(docFreq=834, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051133048 = queryNorm
          0.32943147 = fieldWeight in 4681, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.9694557 = idf(docFreq=834, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4681)
      0.04156693 = weight(_text_:22 in 4681) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04156693 = score(doc=4681,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17905922 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051133048 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4681, 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=4681)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

A recent publication in Nature reports that public R&D funding is only weakly correlated with the citation impact of a nation's articles as measured by the field-weighted citation index (FWCI; defined by Scopus). On the basis of the supplementary data, we up-scaled the design using Web of Science data for the decade 2003-2013 and OECD funding data for the corresponding decade assuming a 2-year delay (2001-2011). Using negative binomial regression analysis, we found very small coefficients, but the effects of international collaboration are positive and statistically significant, whereas the effects of government funding are negative, an order of magnitude smaller, and statistically nonsignificant (in two of three analyses). In other words, international collaboration improves the impact of research articles, whereas more government funding tends to have a small adverse effect when comparing OECD countries.

Date

8. 1.2019 18:22:45

0.03860401 = product of:
  0.07720802 = sum of:
    0.07720802 = product of:
      0.15441604 = sum of:
        0.15441604 = weight(_text_:2011 in 4466) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15441604 = score(doc=4466,freq=5.0), product of:
            0.25410342 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.9694557 = idf(docFreq=834, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133048 = queryNorm
            0.60768974 = fieldWeight in 4466, product of:
              2.236068 = tf(freq=5.0), with freq of:
                5.0 = termFreq=5.0
              4.9694557 = idf(docFreq=834, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4466)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.6, S.1146-1155

Year

2011

0.03308915 = product of:
  0.0661783 = sum of:
    0.0661783 = product of:
      0.1323566 = sum of:
        0.1323566 = weight(_text_:2011 in 4445) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1323566 = score(doc=4445,freq=5.0), product of:
            0.25410342 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.9694557 = idf(docFreq=834, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133048 = queryNorm
            0.5208769 = fieldWeight in 4445, product of:
              2.236068 = tf(freq=5.0), with freq of:
                5.0 = termFreq=5.0
              4.9694557 = idf(docFreq=834, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4445)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.5, S.846-860

Year

2011

0.03308915 = product of:
  0.0661783 = sum of:
    0.0661783 = product of:
      0.1323566 = sum of:
        0.1323566 = weight(_text_:2011 in 4485) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1323566 = score(doc=4485,freq=5.0), product of:
            0.25410342 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.9694557 = idf(docFreq=834, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133048 = queryNorm
            0.5208769 = fieldWeight in 4485, product of:
              2.236068 = tf(freq=5.0), with freq of:
                5.0 = termFreq=5.0
              4.9694557 = idf(docFreq=834, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4485)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.7, S.1370-1381

Year

2011

0.03308915 = product of:
  0.0661783 = sum of:
    0.0661783 = product of:
      0.1323566 = sum of:
        0.1323566 = weight(_text_:2011 in 4767) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1323566 = score(doc=4767,freq=5.0), product of:
            0.25410342 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.9694557 = idf(docFreq=834, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133048 = queryNorm
            0.5208769 = fieldWeight in 4767, product of:
              2.236068 = tf(freq=5.0), with freq of:
                5.0 = termFreq=5.0
              4.9694557 = idf(docFreq=834, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4767)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.10, S.1954-1962

Year

2011

0.027574293 = product of:
  0.055148587 = sum of:
    0.055148587 = product of:
      0.11029717 = sum of:
        0.11029717 = weight(_text_:2011 in 4919) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11029717 = score(doc=4919,freq=5.0), product of:
            0.25410342 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.9694557 = idf(docFreq=834, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133048 = queryNorm
            0.4340641 = fieldWeight in 4919, product of:
              2.236068 = tf(freq=5.0), with freq of:
                5.0 = termFreq=5.0
              4.9694557 = idf(docFreq=834, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4919)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.11, S.2133-2146

Year

2011

0.027574293 = product of:
  0.055148587 = sum of:
    0.055148587 = product of:
      0.11029717 = sum of:
        0.11029717 = weight(_text_:2011 in 4941) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11029717 = score(doc=4941,freq=5.0), product of:
            0.25410342 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.9694557 = idf(docFreq=834, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133048 = queryNorm
            0.4340641 = fieldWeight in 4941, product of:
              2.236068 = tf(freq=5.0), with freq of:
                5.0 = termFreq=5.0
              4.9694557 = idf(docFreq=834, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4941)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.12, S.2414-2426

Year

2011

0.024663197 = product of:
  0.049326394 = sum of:
    0.049326394 = product of:
      0.09865279 = sum of:
        0.09865279 = weight(_text_:2011 in 3328) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09865279 = score(doc=3328,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.25410342 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.9694557 = idf(docFreq=834, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133048 = queryNorm
            0.38823873 = fieldWeight in 3328, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.9694557 = idf(docFreq=834, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3328)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Using 3 years of the Journal Citation Reports (2011, 2012, and 2013), indicators of transitions in 2012 (between 2011 and 2013) were studied using methodologies based on entropy statistics. Changes can be indicated at the level of journals using the margin totals of entropy production along the row or column vectors, but also at the level of links among journals by importing the transition matrices into network analysis and visualization programs (and using community-finding algorithms). Seventy-four journals were flagged in terms of discontinuous changes in their citations, but 3,114 journals were involved in "hot" links. Most of these links are embedded in a main component; 78 clusters (containing 172 journals) were flagged as potential "hot spots" emerging at the network level. An additional finding was that PLoS ONE introduced a new communication dynamic into the database. The limitations of the methodology were elaborated using an example. The results of the study indicate where developments in the citation dynamics can be considered as significantly unexpected. This can be used as heuristic information, but what a "hot spot" in terms of the entropy statistics of aggregated citation relations means substantively can be expected to vary from case to case.

0.020927416 = product of:
  0.041854832 = sum of:
    0.041854832 = product of:
      0.083709665 = sum of:
        0.083709665 = weight(_text_:2011 in 1047) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.083709665 = score(doc=1047,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25410342 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.9694557 = idf(docFreq=834, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133048 = queryNorm
            0.32943147 = fieldWeight in 1047, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.9694557 = idf(docFreq=834, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1047)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Based on the complete set of firm data for Sweden (N = 1,187,421; November 2011), we analyze the mutual information among the geographical, technological, and organizational distributions in terms of synergies at regional and national levels. Using this measure, the interaction among three dimensions can become negative and thus indicate a net export of uncertainty by a system or, in other words, synergy in how knowledge functions are distributed over the carriers. Aggregation at the regional level (NUTS3) of the data organized at the municipal level (NUTS5) shows that 48.5% of the regional synergy is provided by the 3 metropolitan regions of Stockholm, Gothenburg, and Malmö/Lund. Sweden can be considered a centralized and hierarchically organized system. Our results accord with other statistics, but this triple helix indicator measures synergy more specifically and quantitatively. The analysis also provides us with validation for using this measure in previous studies of more regionalized systems of innovation (such as Hungary and Norway).

0.017439514 = product of:
  0.03487903 = sum of:
    0.03487903 = product of:
      0.06975806 = sum of:
        0.06975806 = weight(_text_:2011 in 1131) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06975806 = score(doc=1131,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25410342 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.9694557 = idf(docFreq=834, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133048 = queryNorm
            0.27452624 = fieldWeight in 1131, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.9694557 = idf(docFreq=834, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1131)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Using the option Analyze Results with the Web of Science, one can directly generate overlays onto global journal maps of science. The maps are based on the 10,000+ journals contained in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) of the Science and Social Sciences Citation Indices (2011). The disciplinary diversity of the retrieval is measured in terms of Rao-Stirling's "quadratic entropy" (Izsák & Papp, 1995). Since this indicator of interdisciplinarity is normalized between 0 and 1, interdisciplinarity can be compared among document sets and across years, cited or citing. The colors used for the overlays are based on Blondel, Guillaume, Lambiotte, and Lefebvre's (2008) community-finding algorithms operating on the relations among journals included in the JCR. The results can be exported from VOSViewer with different options such as proportional labels, heat maps, or cluster density maps. The maps can also be web-started or animated (e.g., using PowerPoint). The "citing" dimension of the aggregated journal-journal citation matrix was found to provide a more comprehensive description than the matrix based on the cited archive. The relations between local and global maps and their different functions in studying the sciences in terms of journal literatures are further discussed: Local and global maps are based on different assumptions and can be expected to serve different purposes for the explanation.

0.017439514 = product of:
  0.03487903 = sum of:
    0.03487903 = product of:
      0.06975806 = sum of:
        0.06975806 = weight(_text_:2011 in 1505) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06975806 = score(doc=1505,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25410342 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.9694557 = idf(docFreq=834, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133048 = queryNorm
            0.27452624 = fieldWeight in 1505, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.9694557 = idf(docFreq=834, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1505)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

International coauthorship relations have increasingly shaped another dynamic in the natural and life sciences during recent decades. However, much less is known about such internationalization in the social sciences. In this study, we analyze international and domestic coauthorship relations of all citable items in the DVD version of the Social Sciences Citation Index 2011 (SSCI). Network statistics indicate 4 groups of nations: (a) an Asian-Pacific one to which all Anglo-Saxon nations (including the United Kingdom and Ireland) are attributed, (b) a continental European one including also the Latin-American countries, (c) the Scandinavian nations, and (d) a community of African nations. Within the EU-28, 11 of the EU-15 states have dominant positions. In many respects, the network parameters are not so different from the Science Citation Index. In addition to these descriptive statistics, we address the question of the relative weights of the international versus domestic networks. An information-theoretical test is proposed at the level of organizational addresses within each nation; the results are mixed, but the international dimension is more important than the national one in the aggregated sets (as in the Science Citation Index). In some countries (e.g., France), however, the national distribution is leading more than the international one. Decomposition of the United States in terms of states shows a similarly mixed result; more U.S. states are domestically oriented in the SSCI and more internationally in the SCI. The international networks have grown during the last decades in addition to the national ones but not by replacing them.

0.017439514 = product of:
  0.03487903 = sum of:
    0.03487903 = product of:
      0.06975806 = sum of:
        0.06975806 = weight(_text_:2011 in 1857) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06975806 = score(doc=1857,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25410342 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.9694557 = idf(docFreq=834, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133048 = queryNorm
            0.27452624 = fieldWeight in 1857, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.9694557 = idf(docFreq=834, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1857)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

We measure synergy for the Russian national, provincial, and regional innovation systems as reduction of uncertainty using mutual information among the 3 distributions of firm sizes, technological knowledge bases of firms, and geographical locations. Half a million units of data at firm level in 2011 were obtained from the OrbisT database of Bureau Van Dijk. The firm level data were aggregated at the levels of 8 Federal Districts, the regional level of 83 Federal Subjects, and the single level of the Russian Federation. Not surprisingly, the knowledge base of the economy is concentrated in the Moscow region (22.8%) and Saint Petersburg (4.0%). Except in Moscow itself, high-tech manufacturing does not add synergy to any other unit at any of the various levels of geographical granularity; instead it disturbs regional coordination. Knowledge-intensive services (KIS; including laboratories) contribute to the synergy in all Federal Districts (except the North-Caucasian Federal District), but only in 30 of the 83 Federal Subjects. The synergy in KIS is concentrated in centers of administration. The knowledge-intensive services (which are often state affiliated) provide backbone to an emerging knowledge-based economy at the level of Federal Districts, but the economy is otherwise not knowledge based (except for the Moscow region).

0.010391733 = product of:
  0.020783465 = sum of:
    0.020783465 = product of:
      0.04156693 = sum of:
        0.04156693 = weight(_text_:22 in 1621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04156693 = score(doc=1621,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17905922 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133048 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1621, 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=1621)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 5.2003 19:48:04

0.010391733 = product of:
  0.020783465 = sum of:
    0.020783465 = product of:
      0.04156693 = sum of:
        0.04156693 = weight(_text_:22 in 4460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04156693 = score(doc=4460,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17905922 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133048 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4460, 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=4460)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

6.11.2005 19:02:22

0.010391733 = product of:
  0.020783465 = sum of:
    0.020783465 = product of:
      0.04156693 = sum of:
        0.04156693 = weight(_text_:22 in 2761) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04156693 = score(doc=2761,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17905922 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133048 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2761, 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=2761)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 3.2009 19:07:20

0.008659778 = product of:
  0.017319556 = sum of:
    0.017319556 = product of:
      0.034639113 = sum of:
        0.034639113 = weight(_text_:22 in 3089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034639113 = score(doc=3089,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17905922 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133048 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3089, 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=3089)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

24. 8.2016 17:53:22

0.008659778 = product of:
  0.017319556 = sum of:
    0.017319556 = product of:
      0.034639113 = sum of:
        0.034639113 = weight(_text_:22 in 4463) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034639113 = score(doc=4463,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17905922 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133048 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4463, 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=4463)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

29. 9.2018 11:22:09