-
Li, J.; Willett, P.: ArticleRank : a PageRank-based alternative to numbers of citations for analysing citation networks (2009)
0.05
0.045268476 = product of:
0.13580543 = sum of:
0.13580543 = weight(_text_:citation in 751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.13580543 = score(doc=751,freq=10.0), product of:
0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
0.04999695 = queryNorm
0.57925105 = fieldWeight in 751, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=751)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to suggest an alternative to the widely used Times Cited criterion for analysing citation networks. The approach involves taking account of the natures of the papers that cite a given paper, so as to differentiate between papers that attract the same number of citations. Design/methodology/approach - ArticleRank is an algorithm that has been derived from Google's PageRank algorithm to measure the influence of journal articles. ArticleRank is applied to two datasets - a citation network based on an early paper on webometrics, and a self-citation network based on the 19 most cited papers in the Journal of Documentation - using citation data taken from the Web of Knowledge database. Findings - ArticleRank values provide a different ranking of a set of papers from that provided by the corresponding Times Cited values, and overcomes the inability of the latter to differentiate between papers with the same numbers of citations. The difference in rankings between Times Cited and ArticleRank is greatest for the most heavily cited articles in a dataset. Originality/value - This is a novel application of the PageRank algorithm.
-
Clarke, S.J.; Willett, P.: Estimating the recall performance of Web search engines (1997)
0.01
0.014940838 = product of:
0.044822514 = sum of:
0.044822514 = product of:
0.08964503 = sum of:
0.08964503 = weight(_text_:reports in 760) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08964503 = score(doc=760,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
0.04999695 = queryNorm
0.39809695 = fieldWeight in 760, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=760)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Reports a comparison of the retrieval effectiveness of the AltaVista, Excite and Lycos Web search engines. Describes a method for comparing the recall of the 3 sets of searches, despite the fact that they are carried out on non identical sets of Web pages. It is thus possible, unlike previous comparative studies of Web search engines, to consider both recall and precision when evaluating the effectiveness of search engines
-
Ekmekcioglu, F.C.; Robertson, A.M.; Willett, P.: Effectiveness of query expansion in ranked-output document retrieval systems (1992)
0.01
0.014940838 = product of:
0.044822514 = sum of:
0.044822514 = product of:
0.08964503 = sum of:
0.08964503 = weight(_text_:reports in 5689) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08964503 = score(doc=5689,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
0.04999695 = queryNorm
0.39809695 = fieldWeight in 5689, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5689)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Reports an evaluation of 3 methods for the expansion of natural language queries in ranked output retrieval systems. The methods are based on term co-occurrence data, on Soundex codes, and on a string similarity measure. Searches for 110 queries in a data base of 26.280 titles and abstracts suggest that there is no significant difference in retrieval effectiveness between any of these methods and unexpanded searches
-
Ellis, D.; Furner-Hines, J.; Willett, P.: ¬The creation of hypertext links in full-text documents (1994)
0.01
0.0112056285 = product of:
0.033616886 = sum of:
0.033616886 = product of:
0.06723377 = sum of:
0.06723377 = weight(_text_:reports in 1084) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06723377 = score(doc=1084,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
0.04999695 = queryNorm
0.29857272 = fieldWeight in 1084, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1084)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- An important stage in the process of retrieval of objects from a hypertext database is the creation of a set of internodal links that are intended to represent the relationships existing between objetcs; an operation that is usually undertaken manually such as the allocation of subject index terms to documents. Reports results of a study in which several different sets of hypertext links were inserted, each by a different person, between the paragraphs of each of a number of full text documents. The similarity between the members of each pair of link sets was then evaluated. Results indicated that little similarity existed among the link sets, a finding comparable with those of studies of inter indexer consistency, which suggests that there is generally only a low level of agreemenet between the sets of index terms assigned to a document by indexers. Concludes with that part of the study designed to test the validity of making these kinds of assumptions in the context of hypertext link sets
-
Wakeling, S.; Spezi, V.; Fry, J.; Creaser, C.; Pinfield, S.; Willett, P.: Academic communities : the role of journals and open-access mega-journals in scholarly communication (2019)
0.01
0.009338023 = product of:
0.02801407 = sum of:
0.02801407 = product of:
0.05602814 = sum of:
0.05602814 = weight(_text_:reports in 4627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05602814 = score(doc=4627,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
0.04999695 = queryNorm
0.24881059 = fieldWeight in 4627, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4627)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide insights into publication practices from the perspective of academics working within four disciplinary communities: biosciences, astronomy/physics, education and history. The paper explores the ways in which these multiple overlapping communities intersect with the journal landscape and the implications for the adoption and use of new players in the scholarly communication system, particularly open-access mega-journals (OAMJs). OAMJs (e.g. PLOS ONE and Scientific Reports) are large, broad scope, open-access journals that base editorial decisions solely on the technical/scientific soundness of the article. Design/methodology/approach Focus groups with active researchers in these fields were held in five UK Higher Education Institutions across Great Britain, and were complemented by interviews with pro-vice-chancellors for research at each institution. Findings A strong finding to emerge from the data is the notion of researchers belonging to multiple overlapping communities, with some inherent tensions in meeting the requirements for these different audiences. Researcher perceptions of evaluation mechanisms were found to play a major role in attitudes towards OAMJs, and interviews with the pro-vice-chancellors for research indicate that there is a difference between researchers' perceptions and the values embedded in institutional frameworks. Originality/value This is the first purely qualitative study relating to researcher perspectives on OAMJs. The findings of the paper will be of interest to publishers, policy-makers, research managers and academics.
-
Wakeling, S.; Creaser, C.; Pinfield, S.; Fry, J.; Spezi, V.; Willett, P.; Paramita, M.: Motivations, understandings, and experiences of open-access mega-journal authors : results of a large-scale survey (2019)
0.01
0.009338023 = product of:
0.02801407 = sum of:
0.02801407 = product of:
0.05602814 = sum of:
0.05602814 = weight(_text_:reports in 5317) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05602814 = score(doc=5317,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
0.04999695 = queryNorm
0.24881059 = fieldWeight in 5317, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5317)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Open-access mega-journals (OAMJs) are characterized by their large scale, wide scope, open-access (OA) business model, and "soundness-only" peer review. The last of these controversially discounts the novelty, significance, and relevance of submitted articles and assesses only their "soundness." This article reports the results of an international survey of authors (n = 11,883), comparing the responses of OAMJ authors with those of other OA and subscription journals, and drawing comparisons between different OAMJs. Strikingly, OAMJ authors showed a low understanding of soundness-only peer review: two-thirds believed OAMJs took into account novelty, significance, and relevance, although there were marked geographical variations. Author satisfaction with OAMJs, however, was high, with more than 80% of OAMJ authors saying they would publish again in the same journal, although there were variations by title, and levels were slightly lower than subscription journals (over 90%). Their reasons for choosing to publish in OAMJs included a wide variety of factors, not significantly different from reasons given by authors of other journals, with the most important including the quality of the journal and quality of peer review. About half of OAMJ articles had been submitted elsewhere before submission to the OAMJ with some evidence of a "cascade" of articles between journals from the same publisher.
-
Artymiuk, P.J.; Spriggs, R.V.; Willett, P.: Graph theoretic methods for the analysis of structural relationships in biological macromolecules (2005)
0.01
0.0067738965 = product of:
0.02032169 = sum of:
0.02032169 = product of:
0.04064338 = sum of:
0.04064338 = weight(_text_:22 in 5258) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04064338 = score(doc=5258,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1750808 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04999695 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5258, 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=5258)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 14:40:10
