Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Retrievalalgorithmen"
  • × theme_ss:"Informetrie"
  1. Wiggers, G.; Verberne, S.; Loon, W. van; Zwenne, G.-J.: Bibliometric-enhanced legal information retrieval : combining usage and citations as flavors of impact relevance (2023) 0.06
    0.064520895 = product of:
      0.12904179 = sum of:
        0.07377557 = weight(_text_:search in 1022) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07377557 = score(doc=1022,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.4293381 = fieldWeight in 1022, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1022)
        0.05526622 = product of:
          0.11053244 = sum of:
            0.11053244 = weight(_text_:engine in 1022) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.11053244 = score(doc=1022,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = queryNorm
                0.41792953 = fieldWeight in 1022, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1022)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Bibliometric-enhanced information retrieval uses bibliometrics (e.g., citations) to improve ranking algorithms. Using a data-driven approach, this article describes the development of a bibliometric-enhanced ranking algorithm for legal information retrieval, and the evaluation thereof. We statistically analyze the correlation between usage of documents and citations over time, using data from a commercial legal search engine. We then propose a bibliometric boost function that combines usage of documents with citation counts. The core of this function is an impact variable based on usage and citations that increases in influence as citations and usage counts become more reliable over time. We evaluate our ranking function by comparing search sessions before and after the introduction of the new ranking in the search engine. Using a cost model applied to 129,571 sessions before and 143,864 sessions after the intervention, we show that our bibliometric-enhanced ranking algorithm reduces the time of a search session of legal professionals by 2 to 3% on average for use cases other than known-item retrieval or updating behavior. Given the high hourly tariff of legal professionals and the limited time they can spend on research, this is expected to lead to increased efficiency, especially for users with extremely long search sessions.
  2. Bar-Ilan, J.; Levene, M.: ¬The hw-rank : an h-index variant for ranking web pages (2015) 0.01
    0.014544163 = product of:
      0.05817665 = sum of:
        0.05817665 = weight(_text_:web in 1694) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05817665 = score(doc=1694,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.36057037 = fieldWeight in 1694, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1694)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
  3. Jacso, P.: Testing the calculation of a realistic h-index in Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science for F. W. Lancaster (2008) 0.01
    0.012595614 = product of:
      0.050382458 = sum of:
        0.050382458 = weight(_text_:web in 5586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.050382458 = score(doc=5586,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.3122631 = fieldWeight in 5586, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5586)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    This paper focuses on the practical limitations in the content and software of the databases that are used to calculate the h-index for assessing the publishing productivity and impact of researchers. To celebrate F. W. Lancaster's biological age of seventy-five, and "scientific age" of forty-five, this paper discusses the related features of Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science (WoS), and demonstrates in the latter how a much more realistic and fair h-index can be computed for F. W. Lancaster than the one produced automatically. Browsing and searching the cited reference index of the 1945-2007 edition of WoS, which in my estimate has over a hundred million "orphan references" that have no counterpart master records to be attached to, and "stray references" that cite papers which do have master records but cannot be identified by the matching algorithm because of errors of omission and commission in the references of the citing works, can bring up hundreds of additional cited references given to works of an accomplished author but are ignored in the automatic process of calculating the h-index. The partially manual process doubled the h-index value for F. W. Lancaster from 13 to 26, which is a much more realistic value for an information scientist and professor of his stature.
    Object
    Web of Science
  4. Li, J.; Willett, P.: ArticleRank : a PageRank-based alternative to numbers of citations for analysing citation networks (2009) 0.01
    0.0072720814 = product of:
      0.029088326 = sum of:
        0.029088326 = weight(_text_:web in 751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029088326 = score(doc=751,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 751, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=751)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    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.
  5. Bornmann, L.; Mutz, R.: From P100 to P100' : a new citation-rank approach (2014) 0.01
    0.0066983635 = product of:
      0.026793454 = sum of:
        0.026793454 = product of:
          0.053586908 = sum of:
            0.053586908 = weight(_text_:22 in 1431) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.053586908 = score(doc=1431,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17312855 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1431, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1431)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    22. 8.2014 17:05:18