-
Garfield, E.: Recollections of Irving H. Sher 1924-1996 : Polymath/information scientist extraordinaire (2001)
0.19
0.18699935 = product of:
0.280499 = sum of:
0.047443643 = weight(_text_:science in 6920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047443643 = score(doc=6920,freq=6.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.35285735 = fieldWeight in 6920, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6920)
0.23305537 = sum of:
0.1846452 = weight(_text_:index in 6920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.1846452 = score(doc=6920,freq=12.0), product of:
0.22304957 = queryWeight, product of:
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.82782143 = fieldWeight in 6920, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6920)
0.04841016 = weight(_text_:22 in 6920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04841016 = score(doc=6920,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17874686 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 6920, 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=6920)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Over a 35-year period, Irving H. Sher played a critical role in the development and implementation of the Science Citation Index and other ISI products. Trained as a biochemist, statistician, and linguist, Sher brought a unique combination of talents to ISI as Director of Quality Control and Director of Research and Development. His talents as a teacher and mentor evoked loyalty. He was a particularly inventive but self-taught programmer. In addition to the SCI, Social Sciences Citation Index, and Arts and Humanities Citation Index,
- Date
- 16.12.2001 14:01:22
- Object
- Science Citation Index
Social Sciences Citation Index
Arts and Humanities Citation Index
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 52(2001) no.14, S.1197-1202
-
#5594
0.17
0.17355238 = product of:
0.26032856 = sum of:
0.10956639 = weight(_text_:science in 5593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10956639 = score(doc=5593,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.8148891 = fieldWeight in 5593, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.21875 = fieldNorm(doc=5593)
0.15076217 = product of:
0.30152434 = sum of:
0.30152434 = weight(_text_:index in 5593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.30152434 = score(doc=5593,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22304957 = queryWeight, product of:
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
1.3518267 = fieldWeight in 5593, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.21875 = fieldNorm(doc=5593)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Object
- SCI => Science Citation Index
-
H-Index auch im Web of Science (2008)
0.16
0.16028516 = product of:
0.24042773 = sum of:
0.04066598 = weight(_text_:science in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04066598 = score(doc=590,freq=6.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.30244917 = fieldWeight in 590, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=590)
0.19976175 = sum of:
0.15826732 = weight(_text_:index in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.15826732 = score(doc=590,freq=12.0), product of:
0.22304957 = queryWeight, product of:
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.7095612 = fieldWeight in 590, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=590)
0.04149442 = weight(_text_:22 in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04149442 = score(doc=590,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17874686 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Content
- "Zur Kurzmitteilung "Latest enhancements in Scopus: ... h-Index incorporated in Scopus" in den letzten Online-Mitteilungen (Online-Mitteilungen 92, S.31) ist zu korrigieren, dass der h-Index sehr wohl bereits im Web of Science enthalten ist. Allerdings findet man/frau diese Information nicht in der "cited ref search", sondern neben der Trefferliste einer Quick Search, General Search oder einer Suche über den Author Finder in der rechten Navigationsleiste unter dem Titel "Citation Report". Der "Citation Report" bietet für die in der jeweiligen Trefferliste angezeigten Arbeiten: - Die Gesamtzahl der Zitierungen aller Arbeiten in der Trefferliste - Die mittlere Zitationshäufigkeit dieser Arbeiten - Die Anzahl der Zitierungen der einzelnen Arbeiten, aufgeschlüsselt nach Publikationsjahr der zitierenden Arbeiten - Die mittlere Zitationshäufigkeit dieser Arbeiten pro Jahr - Den h-Index (ein h-Index von x sagt aus, dass x Arbeiten der Trefferliste mehr als x-mal zitiert wurden; er ist gegenüber sehr hohen Zitierungen einzelner Arbeiten unempfindlicher als die mittlere Zitationshäufigkeit)."
- Date
- 6. 4.2008 19:04:22
- Object
- H-Index
Web of Science
-
Veenema, F.: To index or not to index (1996)
0.16
0.15723097 = product of:
0.23584646 = sum of:
0.031304684 = weight(_text_:science in 7247) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.031304684 = score(doc=7247,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.23282544 = fieldWeight in 7247, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7247)
0.20454177 = sum of:
0.14921588 = weight(_text_:index in 7247) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.14921588 = score(doc=7247,freq=6.0), product of:
0.22304957 = queryWeight, product of:
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.6689808 = fieldWeight in 7247, 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=7247)
0.055325896 = weight(_text_:22 in 7247) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055325896 = score(doc=7247,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17874686 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 7247, 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=7247)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Describes an experiment comparing the performance of automatic full-text indexing software for personal computers with the human intellectual assignment of indexing terms in each document in a collection. Considers the times required to index the document, to retrieve documents satisfying 5 typical foreseen information needs, and the recall and precision ratios of searching. The software used is QuickFinder facility in WordPerfect 6.1 for Windows
- Source
- Canadian journal of information and library science. 21(1996) no.2, S.1-22
-
Malin, M.V.: ¬The Science Citation Index : a new concept in indexing (1968)
0.14
0.1402515 = product of:
0.21037725 = sum of:
0.08854301 = weight(_text_:science in 5000) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08854301 = score(doc=5000,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.6585298 = fieldWeight in 5000, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5000)
0.12183424 = product of:
0.24366848 = sum of:
0.24366848 = weight(_text_:index in 5000) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.24366848 = score(doc=5000,freq=4.0), product of:
0.22304957 = queryWeight, product of:
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
1.092441 = fieldWeight in 5000, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5000)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Object
- Science Citation Index
-
Matsushita, A.: Science Citation Index on CD-ROM (1992)
0.14
0.1402515 = product of:
0.21037725 = sum of:
0.08854301 = weight(_text_:science in 5723) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08854301 = score(doc=5723,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.6585298 = fieldWeight in 5723, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5723)
0.12183424 = product of:
0.24366848 = sum of:
0.24366848 = weight(_text_:index in 5723) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.24366848 = score(doc=5723,freq=4.0), product of:
0.22304957 = queryWeight, product of:
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
1.092441 = fieldWeight in 5723, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5723)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Object
- Science Citation Index
-
Meho, L.I.; Rogers, Y.: Citation counting, citation ranking, and h-index of human-computer interaction researchers : a comparison of Scopus and Web of Science (2008)
0.14
0.14021073 = product of:
0.21031609 = sum of:
0.055339385 = weight(_text_:science in 2352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055339385 = score(doc=2352,freq=16.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.41158113 = fieldWeight in 2352, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2352)
0.15497671 = sum of:
0.12039803 = weight(_text_:index in 2352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.12039803 = score(doc=2352,freq=10.0), product of:
0.22304957 = queryWeight, product of:
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.5397815 = fieldWeight in 2352, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2352)
0.034578685 = weight(_text_:22 in 2352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.034578685 = score(doc=2352,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17874686 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2352, 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=2352)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- This study examines the differences between Scopus and Web of Science in the citation counting, citation ranking, and h-index of 22 top human-computer interaction (HCI) researchers from EQUATOR - a large British Interdisciplinary Research Collaboration project. Results indicate that Scopus provides significantly more coverage of HCI literature than Web of Science, primarily due to coverage of relevant ACM and IEEE peer-reviewed conference proceedings. No significant differences exist between the two databases if citations in journals only are compared. Although broader coverage of the literature does not significantly alter the relative citation ranking of individual researchers, Scopus helps distinguish between the researchers in a more nuanced fashion than Web of Science in both citation counting and h-index. Scopus also generates significantly different maps of citation networks of individual scholars than those generated by Web of Science. The study also presents a comparison of h-index scores based on Google Scholar with those based on the union of Scopus and Web of Science. The study concludes that Scopus can be used as a sole data source for citation-based research and evaluation in HCI, especially when citations in conference proceedings are sought, and that researchers should manually calculate h scores instead of relying on system calculations.
- Object
- Web of Science
h-index
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.11, S.1711-1726
-
Townsel-Winston, M.: What's new in public services? (1992)
0.14
0.13897656 = product of:
0.20846483 = sum of:
0.031304684 = weight(_text_:science in 5550) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.031304684 = score(doc=5550,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.23282544 = fieldWeight in 5550, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5550)
0.17716014 = sum of:
0.12183424 = weight(_text_:index in 5550) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.12183424 = score(doc=5550,freq=4.0), product of:
0.22304957 = queryWeight, product of:
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.5462205 = fieldWeight in 5550, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5550)
0.055325896 = weight(_text_:22 in 5550) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055325896 = score(doc=5550,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17874686 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5550, 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=5550)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- OCLC has added 5 new databases to the FirstSearch catalogue and EPIC service: ContentsFirst, ArticleFirst, Social Sciences Index, General Science Index and Event-Line. DiscLit is available in a British literature version. DiscLit: British Authors is a CD-ROM tool for high school and college literature students. Announces winners of the OCLC on the Front Line Award and Database Magazine's Product of the year as Jane Bambrick and the Online Journal of Current Clinical Trials
- Source
- OCLC micro. 8(1992) no.6, S.21-22
-
Winterhager, M.: Towards bibliometric objects : a relational view to ISI's Science Citation Index (1992)
0.13
0.13432817 = product of:
0.20149225 = sum of:
0.09488729 = weight(_text_:science in 8855) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09488729 = score(doc=8855,freq=6.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.7057147 = fieldWeight in 8855, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=8855)
0.106604956 = product of:
0.21320991 = sum of:
0.21320991 = weight(_text_:index in 8855) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.21320991 = score(doc=8855,freq=4.0), product of:
0.22304957 = queryWeight, product of:
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.9558858 = fieldWeight in 8855, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=8855)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Object
- Science Citation Index
- Source
- Science and technology in a policy context. Ed.: A.F.J. van Raan u.a
-
Leydesdorff, L.: Can networks of journal-journal citations be used as indicators of change in the social sciences? (2003)
0.13
0.12938154 = product of:
0.1940723 = sum of:
0.04066598 = weight(_text_:science in 4460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04066598 = score(doc=4460,freq=6.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.30244917 = fieldWeight in 4460, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4460)
0.15340632 = sum of:
0.1119119 = weight(_text_:index in 4460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.1119119 = score(doc=4460,freq=6.0), product of:
0.22304957 = queryWeight, product of:
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.50173557 = fieldWeight in 4460, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4460)
0.04149442 = weight(_text_:22 in 4460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04149442 = score(doc=4460,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17874686 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Aggregated journal-journal citations can be used for mapping the intellectual organization of the sciences in terms of specialties because the latter can be considered as interreading communities. Can the journal-journal citations also be used as early indicators of change by comparing the files for two subsequent years? Probabilistic entropy measures enable us to analyze changes in large datasets at different levels of aggregation and in considerable detail. Compares Journal Citation Reports of the Social Science Citation Index for 1999 with similar data for 1998 and analyzes the differences using these measures. Compares the various indicators with similar developments in the Science Citation Index. Specialty formation seems a more important mechanism in the development of the social sciences than in the natural and life sciences, but the developments in the social sciences are volatile. The use of aggregate statistics based on the Science Citation Index is ill-advised in the case of the social sciences because of structural differences in the underlying dynamics.
- Date
- 6.11.2005 19:02:22
-
Garfield, E.: ¬The Permuterm Subject Index : an autobiographic review (1976)
0.12
0.12296241 = product of:
0.18444361 = sum of:
0.06260937 = weight(_text_:science in 3299) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06260937 = score(doc=3299,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.4656509 = fieldWeight in 3299, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3299)
0.12183424 = product of:
0.24366848 = sum of:
0.24366848 = weight(_text_:index in 3299) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.24366848 = score(doc=3299,freq=4.0), product of:
0.22304957 = queryWeight, product of:
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
1.092441 = fieldWeight in 3299, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3299)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Object
- Permuterm Subject Index
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 27(1976), S.88-291
-
Broscheid, M.: ¬Der Science Citation Index : Untersuchung und Vergleich der Erscheinungsformen "Print-Medium", "CD-ROM" und "Online" (1992)
0.12
0.12272006 = product of:
0.1840801 = sum of:
0.07747514 = weight(_text_:science in 4050) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07747514 = score(doc=4050,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.5762136 = fieldWeight in 4050, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4050)
0.106604956 = product of:
0.21320991 = sum of:
0.21320991 = weight(_text_:index in 4050) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.21320991 = score(doc=4050,freq=4.0), product of:
0.22304957 = queryWeight, product of:
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.9558858 = fieldWeight in 4050, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4050)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Object
- Science Citation Index
-
Mukherjee, B.: Do open-access journals in library and information science have any scholarly impact? : a bibliometric study of selected open-access journals using Google Scholar (2009)
0.12
0.117436185 = product of:
0.17615427 = sum of:
0.033888314 = weight(_text_:science in 2745) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033888314 = score(doc=2745,freq=6.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.25204095 = fieldWeight in 2745, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2745)
0.14226596 = sum of:
0.10768727 = weight(_text_:index in 2745) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10768727 = score(doc=2745,freq=8.0), product of:
0.22304957 = queryWeight, product of:
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.48279524 = fieldWeight in 2745, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2745)
0.034578685 = weight(_text_:22 in 2745) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.034578685 = score(doc=2745,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17874686 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2745, 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=2745)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Using 17 fully open-access journals published uninterruptedly during 2000 to 2004 in the field of library and information science, the present study investigates the impact of these open-access journals in terms of quantity of articles published, subject distribution of the articles, synchronous and diachronous impact factor, immediacy index, and journals' and authors' self-citation. The results indicate that during this 5-year publication period, there are as many as 1,636 articles published by these journals. At the same time, the articles have received a total of 8,591 Web citations during a 7-year citation period. Eight of 17 journals have received more than 100 citations. First Monday received the highest number of citations; however, the average number of citations per article was the highest in D-Lib Magazine. The value of the synchronous impact factor varies from 0.6989 to 1.0014 during 2002 to 2005, and the diachronous impact factor varies from 1.472 to 2.487 during 2000 to 2004. The range of the immediacy index varies between 0.0714 and 1.395. D-Lib Magazine has an immediacy index value above 0.5 in all the years whereas the immediacy index value varies from year to year for the other journals. When the citations of sample articles were analyzed according to source, it was found that 40.32% of the citations came from full-text articles, followed by 33.35% from journal articles. The percentage of journals' self-citation was only 6.04%.
- Date
- 22. 3.2009 17:54:59
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.3, S.581-594
-
Wan, X.; Liu, F.: Are all literature citations equally important? : automatic citation strength estimation and its applications (2014)
0.12
0.11569073 = product of:
0.17353609 = sum of:
0.04066598 = weight(_text_:science in 1350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04066598 = score(doc=1350,freq=6.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.30244917 = fieldWeight in 1350, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1350)
0.13287011 = sum of:
0.09137568 = weight(_text_:index in 1350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09137568 = score(doc=1350,freq=4.0), product of:
0.22304957 = queryWeight, product of:
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.40966535 = fieldWeight in 1350, 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=1350)
0.04149442 = weight(_text_:22 in 1350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04149442 = score(doc=1350,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17874686 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1350, 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=1350)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Literature citation analysis plays a very important role in bibliometrics and scientometrics, such as the Science Citation Index (SCI) impact factor, h-index. Existing citation analysis methods assume that all citations in a paper are equally important, and they simply count the number of citations. Here we argue that the citations in a paper are not equally important and some citations are more important than the others. We use a strength value to assess the importance of each citation and propose to use the regression method with a few useful features for automatically estimating the strength value of each citation. Evaluation results on a manually labeled data set in the computer science field show that the estimated values can achieve good correlation with human-labeled values. We further apply the estimated citation strength values for evaluating paper influence and author influence, and the preliminary evaluation results demonstrate the usefulness of the citation strength values.
- Date
- 22. 8.2014 17:12:35
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.9, S.1929-1938
-
Diodato, V.: Duplicate entries versus see cross references in back-of-the book indexes (1994)
0.12
0.11518693 = product of:
0.1727804 = sum of:
0.031304684 = weight(_text_:science in 1427) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.031304684 = score(doc=1427,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.23282544 = fieldWeight in 1427, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1427)
0.1414757 = sum of:
0.08614981 = weight(_text_:index in 1427) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08614981 = score(doc=1427,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22304957 = queryWeight, product of:
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.3862362 = fieldWeight in 1427, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1427)
0.055325896 = weight(_text_:22 in 1427) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055325896 = score(doc=1427,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17874686 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1427, 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=1427)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Considers whether, when there is a choice, a back-of-book indexer should use a duplicate entry or a see reference. Guidelines suggest that it is preferable to use the duplicate entry if it would not add to the length or complexity of the index. Studies 1.100 see references in 202 back-of-book indexes and concludes that 22% of the see references should have been replaced by duplicate entries. Failure to select a duplicate entry instead of a see reference occurs most frequently in science and techology books and in indexes with no subheadings
-
Tonta, Y.: Scholarly communication and the use of networked information sources (1996)
0.11
0.11071583 = product of:
0.16607374 = sum of:
0.03320363 = weight(_text_:science in 6389) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03320363 = score(doc=6389,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.24694869 = fieldWeight in 6389, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6389)
0.13287011 = sum of:
0.09137568 = weight(_text_:index in 6389) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09137568 = score(doc=6389,freq=4.0), product of:
0.22304957 = queryWeight, product of:
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.40966535 = fieldWeight in 6389, 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=6389)
0.04149442 = weight(_text_:22 in 6389) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04149442 = score(doc=6389,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17874686 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 6389, 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=6389)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Examines the use of networked information sources in scholarly communication. Networked information sources are defined broadly to cover: documents and images stored on electronic network hosts; data files; newsgroups; listservs; online information services and electronic periodicals. Reports results of a survey to determine how heavily, if at all, networked information sources are cited in scholarly printed periodicals published in 1993 and 1994. 27 printed periodicals, representing a wide range of subjects and the most influential periodicals in their fields, were identified through the Science Citation Index and Social Science Citation Index Journal Citation Reports. 97 articles were selected for further review and references, footnotes and bibliographies were checked for references to networked information sources. Only 2 articles were found to contain such references. Concludes that, although networked information sources facilitate scholars' work to a great extent during the research process, scholars have yet to incorporate such sources in the bibliographies of their published articles
- Source
- IFLA journal. 22(1996) no.3, S.240-245
-
Zhang, C.-T.: Relationship of the h-index, g-index, and e-index (2010)
0.11
0.109531924 = product of:
0.16429788 = sum of:
0.023478512 = weight(_text_:science in 3418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023478512 = score(doc=3418,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.17461908 = fieldWeight in 3418, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3418)
0.14081937 = product of:
0.28163874 = sum of:
0.28163874 = weight(_text_:index in 3418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.28163874 = score(doc=3418,freq=38.0), product of:
0.22304957 = queryWeight, product of:
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
1.2626734 = fieldWeight in 3418, product of:
6.164414 = tf(freq=38.0), with freq of:
38.0 = termFreq=38.0
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3418)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Of h-type indices available now, the g-index is an important one in that it not only keeps some advantages of the h-index but also counts citations from highly cited articles. However, the g-index has a drawback that one has to add fictitious articles with zero citation to calculate this index in some important cases. Based on an alternative definition without introducing fictitious articles, an analytical method has been proposed to calculate the g-index based approximately on the h-index and the e-index. If citations for a scientist are ranked by a power law, it is shown that the g-index can be calculated accurately by the h-index, the e-index, and the power parameter. The relationship of the h-, g-, and e-indices presented here shows that the g-index contains the citation information from the h-index, the e-index, and some papers beyond the h-core.
- Object
- h-index
g-index
e-index
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.3, S.625-628
-
ISI offers intranet access to its citation index databases (1997)
0.11
0.10868444 = product of:
0.16302666 = sum of:
0.055339385 = weight(_text_:science in 554) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055339385 = score(doc=554,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.41158113 = fieldWeight in 554, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=554)
0.10768727 = product of:
0.21537454 = sum of:
0.21537454 = weight(_text_:index in 554) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.21537454 = score(doc=554,freq=8.0), product of:
0.22304957 = queryWeight, product of:
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.9655905 = fieldWeight in 554, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=554)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Announces the availability of the Web of Science, a proprietary Web browser providing intranet access to the Citation Index databases from ISI. The new browser interface will allow researcher to browse indexed information and perform further research. Describes search options
- Object
- Science citation index
Social sciences citation index
-
Dubin, D.: Dimensions and discriminability (1998)
0.11
0.10835254 = product of:
0.16252881 = sum of:
0.03873757 = weight(_text_:science in 2338) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03873757 = score(doc=2338,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.2881068 = fieldWeight in 2338, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2338)
0.12379125 = sum of:
0.075381085 = weight(_text_:index in 2338) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.075381085 = score(doc=2338,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22304957 = queryWeight, product of:
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.33795667 = fieldWeight in 2338, 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=2338)
0.04841016 = weight(_text_:22 in 2338) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04841016 = score(doc=2338,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17874686 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2338, 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=2338)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- Visualization interfaces can improve subject access by highlighting the inclusion of document representation components in similarity and discrimination relationships. Within a set of retrieved documents, what kinds of groupings can index terms and subject headings make explicit? The role of controlled vocabulary in classifying search output is examined
- Date
- 22. 9.1997 19:16:05
- Imprint
- Urbana-Champaign, IL : Illinois University at Urbana-Champaign, Graduate School of Library and Information Science
- Source
- Visualizing subject access for 21st century information resources: Papers presented at the 1997 Clinic on Library Applications of Data Processing, 2-4 Mar 1997, Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Ed.: P.A. Cochrane et al
-
Tay, A.: ¬The next generation discovery citation indexes : a review of the landscape in 2020 (2020)
0.11
0.10835254 = product of:
0.16252881 = sum of:
0.03873757 = weight(_text_:science in 40) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03873757 = score(doc=40,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = queryNorm
0.2881068 = fieldWeight in 40, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=40)
0.12379125 = sum of:
0.075381085 = weight(_text_:index in 40) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.075381085 = score(doc=40,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22304957 = queryWeight, product of:
4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = 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)
0.04841016 = weight(_text_:22 in 40) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04841016 = score(doc=40,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17874686 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05104385 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- 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
- Object
- Web of Science
