Search (59 results, page 1 of 3)

  • × author_ss:"Egghe, L."
  1. Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.: Averaging and globalising quotients of informetric and scientometric data (1996) 0.03 
    0.030285552 = product of:
  0.09085666 = sum of:
    0.050336715 = weight(_text_:applications in 7659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050336715 = score(doc=7659,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.2918479 = fieldWeight in 7659, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7659)
    0.024596233 = weight(_text_:of in 7659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024596233 = score(doc=7659,freq=30.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.4014868 = fieldWeight in 7659, product of:
          5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
            30.0 = termFreq=30.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7659)
    0.015923709 = product of:
      0.031847417 = sum of:
        0.031847417 = weight(_text_:22 in 7659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031847417 = score(doc=7659,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 7659, 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=7659)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
    Abstract
    It is possible, using ISI's Journal Citation Report (JCR), to calculate average impact factors (AIF) for LCR's subject categories but it can be more useful to know the global Impact Factor (GIF) of a subject category and compare the 2 values. Reports results of a study to compare the relationships between AIFs and GIFs of subjects, based on the particular case of the average impact factor of a subfield versus the impact factor of this subfield as a whole, the difference being studied between an average of quotients, denoted as AQ, and a global average, obtained as a quotient of averages, and denoted as GQ. In the case of impact factors, AQ becomes the average impact factor of a field, and GQ becomes its global impact factor. Discusses a number of applications of this technique in the context of informetrics and scientometrics
    Source
    Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.3, S.165-170
  2. Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.: ¬A theoretical study of recall and precision using a topological approach to information retrieval (1998) 0.02 
    0.01719611 = product of:
  0.07738249 = sum of:
    0.011975031 = weight(_text_:of in 3267) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011975031 = score(doc=3267,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.19546966 = fieldWeight in 3267, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3267)
    0.06540746 = weight(_text_:systems in 3267) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06540746 = score(doc=3267,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.5432656 = fieldWeight in 3267, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3267)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    Abstract
    Topologies for information retrieval systems are generated by certain subsets, called retrievals. Shows how recall and precision can be expressed using only retrievals. Investigates different types of retrieval systems: both threshold systems and close match systems and both optimal and non optimal retrieval. Highlights the relation with the hypergeometric and some non-standard distributions
  3. Egghe, L.; Guns, R.: Applications of the generalized law of Benford to informetric data (2012) 0.02 
    0.015866594 = product of:
  0.071399674 = sum of:
    0.050336715 = weight(_text_:applications in 376) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050336715 = score(doc=376,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.2918479 = fieldWeight in 376, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=376)
    0.021062955 = weight(_text_:of in 376) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021062955 = score(doc=376,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.34381276 = fieldWeight in 376, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=376)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    Abstract
    In a previous work (Egghe, 2011), the first author showed that Benford's law (describing the logarithmic distribution of the numbers 1, 2, ... , 9 as first digits of data in decimal form) is related to the classical law of Zipf with exponent 1. The work of Campanario and Coslado (2011), however, shows that Benford's law does not always fit practical data in a statistical sense. In this article, we use a generalization of Benford's law related to the general law of Zipf with exponent ? > 0. Using data from Campanario and Coslado, we apply nonlinear least squares to determine the optimal ? and show that this generalized law of Benford fits the data better than the classical law of Benford.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.8, S.1662-1665
  4. Egghe, L.: Mathematical study of h-index sequences (2009) 0.01 
    0.0126480125 = product of:
  0.056916054 = sum of:
    0.041947264 = weight(_text_:applications in 4217) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041947264 = score(doc=4217,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.2432066 = fieldWeight in 4217, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4217)
    0.014968789 = weight(_text_:of in 4217) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014968789 = score(doc=4217,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.24433708 = fieldWeight in 4217, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4217)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    Abstract
    This paper studies mathematical properties of h-index sequences as developed by Liang [Liang, L. (2006). h-Index sequence and h-index matrix: Constructions and applications. Scientometrics, 69(1), 153-159]. For practical reasons, Liming studies such sequences where the time goes backwards while it is more logical to use the time going forward (real career periods). Both type of h-index sequences are studied here and their interrelations are revealed. We show cases where these sequences are convex, linear and concave. We also show that, when one of the sequences is convex then the other one is concave, showing that the reverse-time sequence, in general, cannot be used to derive similar properties of the (difficult to obtain) forward time sequence. We show that both sequences are the same if and only if the author produces the same number of papers per year. If the author produces an increasing number of papers per year, then Liang's h-sequences are above the "normal" ones. All these results are also valid for g- and R-sequences. The results are confirmed by the h-, g- and R-sequences (forward and reverse time) of the author.
  5. Rousseau, R.; Egghe, L.; Guns, R.: Becoming metric-wise : a bibliometric guide for researchers (2018) 0.01 
    0.012202359 = product of:
  0.054910615 = sum of:
    0.041947264 = weight(_text_:applications in 5226) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041947264 = score(doc=5226,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.2432066 = fieldWeight in 5226, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5226)
    0.012963352 = weight(_text_:of in 5226) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012963352 = score(doc=5226,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.21160212 = fieldWeight in 5226, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5226)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    Abstract
    Aims to inform researchers about metrics so that they become aware of the evaluative techniques being applied to their scientific output. Understanding these concepts will help them during their funding initiatives, and in hiring and tenure. The book not only describes what indicators do (or are designed to do, which is not always the same thing), but also gives precise mathematical formulae so that indicators can be properly understood and evaluated. Metrics have become a critical issue in science, with widespread international discussion taking place on the subject across scientific journals and organizations. As researchers should know the publication-citation context, the mathematical formulae of indicators being used by evaluating committees and their consequences, and how such indicators might be misused, this book provides an ideal tome on the topic. Provides researchers with a detailed understanding of bibliometric indicators and their applications. Empowers researchers looking to understand the indicators relevant to their work and careers. Presents an informed and rounded picture of bibliometrics, including the strengths and shortcomings of particular indicators. Supplies the mathematics behind bibliometric indicators so they can be properly understood. Written by authors with longstanding expertise who are considered global leaders in the field of bibliometrics
  6. Egghe, L.: ¬The power of power laws and an interpretation of Lotkaian informetric systems as self-similar fractals (2005) 0.01 
    0.010324167 = product of:
  0.04645875 = sum of:
    0.017552461 = weight(_text_:of in 3466) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017552461 = score(doc=3466,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.28651062 = fieldWeight in 3466, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3466)
    0.02890629 = weight(_text_:systems in 3466) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02890629 = score(doc=3466,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.24009174 = fieldWeight in 3466, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3466)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    Abstract
    Power laws as defined in 1926 by A. Lotka are increasing in importance because they have been found valid in varied social networks including the Internet. In this article some unique properties of power laws are proven. They are shown to characterize functions with the scalefree property (also called seif-similarity property) as weIl as functions with the product property. Power laws have other desirable properties that are not shared by exponential laws, as we indicate in this paper. Specifically, Naranan (1970) proves the validity of Lotka's law based on the exponential growth of articles in journals and of the number of journals. His argument is reproduced here and a discrete-time argument is also given, yielding the same law as that of Lotka. This argument makes it possible to interpret the information production process as a seif-similar fractal and show the relation between Lotka's exponent and the (seif-similar) fractal dimension of the system. Lotkaian informetric systems are seif-similar fractals, a fact revealed by Mandelbrot (1977) in relation to nature, but is also true for random texts, which exemplify a very special type of informetric system.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 56(2005) no.7, S.669-675
  7. Egghe, L.: ¬The measures precision, recall, fallout and miss as a function of the number of retrieved documents and their mutual interrelations (2008) 0.01 
    0.009246422 = product of:
  0.0416089 = sum of:
    0.021169065 = weight(_text_:of in 2067) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021169065 = score(doc=2067,freq=32.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.34554482 = fieldWeight in 2067, product of:
          5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
            32.0 = termFreq=32.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2067)
    0.020439833 = weight(_text_:systems in 2067) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020439833 = score(doc=2067,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.1697705 = fieldWeight in 2067, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2067)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    Abstract
    In this paper, for the first time, we present global curves for the measures precision, recall, fallout and miss in function of the number of retrieved documents. Different curves apply for different retrieved systems, for which we give exact definitions in terms of a retrieval density function: perverse retrieval, perfect retrieval, random retrieval, normal retrieval, hereby extending results of Buckland and Gey and of Egghe in the following sense: mathematically more advanced methods yield a better insight into these curves, more types of retrieval are considered and, very importantly, the theory is developed for the "complete" set of measures: precision, recall, fallout and miss. Next we study the interrelationships between precision, recall, fallout and miss in these different types of retrieval, hereby again extending results of Buckland and Gey (incl. a correction) and of Egghe. In the case of normal retrieval we prove that precision in function of recall and recall in function of miss is a concavely decreasing relationship while recall in function of fallout is a concavely increasing relationship. We also show, by producing examples, that the relationships between fallout and precision, miss and precision and miss and fallout are not always convex or concave.
  8. Egghe, L.; Guns, R.; Rousseau, R.; Leuven, K.U.: Erratum (2012) 0.01 
    0.008249789 = product of:
  0.03712405 = sum of:
    0.010584532 = weight(_text_:of in 4992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010584532 = score(doc=4992,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.17277241 = fieldWeight in 4992, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4992)
    0.026539518 = product of:
      0.053079035 = sum of:
        0.053079035 = weight(_text_:22 in 4992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.053079035 = score(doc=4992,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4992, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4992)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    Date
    14. 2.2012 12:53:22
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.2, S.429
  9. Egghe, L.: ¬A universal method of information retrieval evaluation : the "missing" link M and the universal IR surface (2004) 0.01 
    0.0075302785 = product of:
  0.033886254 = sum of:
    0.017962547 = weight(_text_:of in 2558) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017962547 = score(doc=2558,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.2932045 = fieldWeight in 2558, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2558)
    0.015923709 = product of:
      0.031847417 = sum of:
        0.031847417 = weight(_text_:22 in 2558) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031847417 = score(doc=2558,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2558, 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=2558)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    Abstract
    The paper shows that the present evaluation methods in information retrieval (basically recall R and precision P and in some cases fallout F ) lack universal comparability in the sense that their values depend on the generality of the IR problem. A solution is given by using all "parts" of the database, including the non-relevant documents and also the not-retrieved documents. It turns out that the solution is given by introducing the measure M being the fraction of the not-retrieved documents that are relevant (hence the "miss" measure). We prove that - independent of the IR problem or of the IR action - the quadruple (P,R,F,M) belongs to a universal IR surface, being the same for all IR-activities. This universality is then exploited by defining a new measure for evaluation in IR allowing for unbiased comparisons of all IR results. We also show that only using one, two or even three measures from the set {P,R,F,M} necessary leads to evaluation measures that are non-universal and hence not capable of comparing different IR situations.
    Date
    14. 8.2004 19:17:22
  10. Egghe, L.: On the law of Zipf-Mandelbrot for multi-word phrases (1999) 0.00 
    0.0028225419 = product of:
  0.025402876 = sum of:
    0.025402876 = weight(_text_:of in 3058) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025402876 = score(doc=3058,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.41465375 = fieldWeight in 3058, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3058)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Abstract
    This article studies the probabilities of the occurence of multi-word (m-word) phrases (m=2,3,...) in relation to the probabilities of occurence of the single words. It is well known that, in the latter case, the lae of Zipf is valid (i.e., a power law). We prove that in the case of m-word phrases (m>=2), this is not the case. We present 2 independent proof of this
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 50(1999) no.3, S.233-241
  11. Egghe, L.: Mathematical theories of citation (1998) 0.00 
    0.0028225419 = product of:
  0.025402876 = sum of:
    0.025402876 = weight(_text_:of in 5125) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025402876 = score(doc=5125,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.41465375 = fieldWeight in 5125, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5125)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Abstract
    Focuses on possible mathematical theories of citation and on the intrinsic problems related to it. Sheds light on aspects of mathematical complexity as encountered in, for example, fractal theory and Mandelbrot's law. Also discusses dynamical aspects of citation theory as reflected in evolutions of journal rankings, centres of gravity or of the set of source journals. Makes some comments in this connection on growth and obsolescence
    Footnote
    Contribution to a thematic issue devoted to 'Theories of citation?'
  12. Egghe, L.: ¬A model for the size-frequency function of coauthor pairs (2008) 0.00 
    0.0027329149 = product of:
  0.024596233 = sum of:
    0.024596233 = weight(_text_:of in 2366) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024596233 = score(doc=2366,freq=30.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.4014868 = fieldWeight in 2366, product of:
          5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
            30.0 = termFreq=30.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2366)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Abstract
    Lotka's law was formulated to describe the number of authors with a certain number of publications. Empirical results (Morris & Goldstein, 2007) indicate that Lotka's law is also valid if one counts the number of publications of coauthor pairs. This article gives a simple model proving this to be true, with the same Lotka exponent, if the number of coauthored papers is proportional to the number of papers of the individual coauthors. Under the assumption that this number of coauthored papers is more than proportional to the number of papers of the individual authors (to be explained in the article), we can prove that the size-frequency function of coauthor pairs is Lotkaian with an exponent that is higher than that of the Lotka function of individual authors, a fact that is confirmed in experimental results.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.13, S.2133-2137
  13. Egghe, L.: Dynamic h-index : the Hirsch index in function of time (2007) 0.00 
    0.002661118 = product of:
  0.023950063 = sum of:
    0.023950063 = weight(_text_:of in 147) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023950063 = score(doc=147,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.39093933 = fieldWeight in 147, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=147)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Abstract
    When there are a group of articles and the present time is fixed we can determine the unique number h being the number of articles that received h or more citations while the other articles received a number of citations which is not larger than h. In this article, the time dependence of the h-index is determined. This is important to describe the expected career evolution of a scientist's work or of a journal's production in a fixed year.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.3, S.452-454
  14. Egghe, L.: Zipfian and Lotkaian continuous concentration theory (2005) 0.00 
    0.0026402464 = product of:
  0.023762217 = sum of:
    0.023762217 = weight(_text_:of in 3678) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023762217 = score(doc=3678,freq=28.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.38787308 = fieldWeight in 3678, product of:
          5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
            28.0 = termFreq=28.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3678)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Abstract
    In this article concentration (i.e., inequality) aspects of the functions of Zipf and of Lotka are studied. Since both functions are power laws (i.e., they are mathematically the same) it suffices to develop one concentration theory for power laws and apply it twice for the different interpretations of the laws of Zipf and Lotka. After a brief repetition of the functional relationships between Zipf's law and Lotka's law, we prove that Price's law of concentration is equivalent with Zipf's law. A major part of this article is devoted to the development of continuous concentration theory, based an Lorenz curves. The Lorenz curve for power functions is calculated and, based an this, some important concentration measures such as the ones of Gini, Theil, and the variation coefficient. Using Lorenz curves, it is shown that the concentration of a power law increases with its exponent and this result is interpreted in terms of the functions of Zipf and Lotka.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 56(2005) no.9, S.935-945
  15. Egghe, L.: Sampling and concentration values of incomplete bibliographies (2002) 0.00 
    0.0026033178 = product of:
  0.023429861 = sum of:
    0.023429861 = weight(_text_:of in 450) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023429861 = score(doc=450,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.38244802 = fieldWeight in 450, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=450)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Abstract
    This article studies concentration aspects of bibliographies. More, in particular, we study the impact of incompleteness of such a bibliography on its concentration values (i.e., its degree of inequality of production of its sources). Incompleteness is modeled by sampling in the complete bibliography. The model is general enough to comprise truncation of a bibliography as well as a systematic sample on sources or items. In all cases we prove that the sampled bibliography (or incomplete one) has a higher concentration value than the complete one. These models, hence, shed some light on the measurement of production inequality in incomplete bibliographies.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 53(2002) no.4, S.271-281
  16. Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.; Rousseau, S.: TOP-curves (2007) 0.00 
    0.002469724 = product of:
  0.022227516 = sum of:
    0.022227516 = weight(_text_:of in 50) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022227516 = score(doc=50,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.36282203 = fieldWeight in 50, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=50)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Abstract
    Several characteristics of classical Lorenz curves make them unsuitable for the study of a group of topperformers. TOP-curves, defined as a kind of mirror image of TIP-curves used in poverty studies, are shown to possess the properties necessary for adequate empirical ranking of various data arrays, based on the properties of the highest performers (i.e., the core). TOP-curves and essential TOP-curves, also introduced in this article, simultaneously represent the incidence, intensity, and inequality among the top. It is shown that TOPdominance partial order, introduced in this article, is stronger than Lorenz dominance order. In this way, this article contributes to the study of cores, a central issue in applied informetrics.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.6, S.777-785
  17. Egghe, L.: Theory of the topical coverage of multiple databases (2013) 0.00 
    0.002469724 = product of:
  0.022227516 = sum of:
    0.022227516 = weight(_text_:of in 526) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022227516 = score(doc=526,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.36282203 = fieldWeight in 526, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=526)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Abstract
    We present a model that describes which fraction of the literature on a certain topic we will find when we use n (n = 1, 2, .) databases. It is a generalization of the theory of discovering usability problems. We prove that, in all practical cases, this fraction is a concave function of n, the number of used databases, thereby explaining some graphs that exist in the literature. We also study limiting features of this fraction for n very high and we characterize the case that we find all literature on a certain topic for n high enough.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.1, S.126-131
  18. Egghe, L.: Special features of the author - publication relationship and a new explanation of Lotka's law based on convolution theory (1994) 0.00 
    0.0024443932 = product of:
  0.021999538 = sum of:
    0.021999538 = weight(_text_:of in 5068) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021999538 = score(doc=5068,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.3591007 = fieldWeight in 5068, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5068)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 45(1994) no.6, S.422-427
  19. Egghe, L.; Ravichandra Rao, I.K.: ¬The influence of the broadness of a query of a topic on its h-index : models and examples of the h-index of n-grams (2008) 0.00 
    0.002424508 = product of:
  0.021820573 = sum of:
    0.021820573 = weight(_text_:of in 2009) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021820573 = score(doc=2009,freq=34.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.35617945 = fieldWeight in 2009, product of:
          5.8309517 = tf(freq=34.0), with freq of:
            34.0 = termFreq=34.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2009)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Abstract
    The article studies the influence of the query formulation of a topic on its h-index. In order to generate pure random sets of documents, we used N-grams (N variable) to measure this influence: strings of zeros, truncated at the end. The used databases are WoS and Scopus. The formula h=T**1/alpha, proved in Egghe and Rousseau (2006) where T is the number of retrieved documents and is Lotka's exponent, is confirmed being a concavely increasing function of T. We also give a formula for the relation between h and N the length of the N-gram: h=D10**(-N/alpha) where D is a constant, a convexly decreasing function, which is found in our experiments. Nonlinear regression on h=T**1/alpha gives an estimation of , which can then be used to estimate the h-index of the entire database (Web of Science [WoS] and Scopus): h=S**1/alpha, , where S is the total number of documents in the database.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.10, S.1688-1693
  20. Egghe, L.; Ravichandra Rao, I.K.: Study of different h-indices for groups of authors (2008) 0.00 
    0.0023403284 = product of:
  0.021062955 = sum of:
    0.021062955 = weight(_text_:of in 1878) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021062955 = score(doc=1878,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.34381276 = fieldWeight in 1878, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1878)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Abstract
    In this article, for any group of authors, we define three different h-indices. First, there is the successive h-index h2 based on the ranked list of authors and their h-indices h1 as defined by Schubert (2007). Next, there is the h-index hP based on the ranked list of authors and their number of publications. Finally, there is the h-index hC based on the ranked list of authors and their number of citations. We present formulae for these three indices in Lotkaian informetrics from which it also follows that h2 < hp < hc. We give a concrete example of a group of 167 authors on the topic optical flow estimation. Besides these three h-indices, we also calculate the two-by-two Spearman rank correlation coefficient and prove that these rankings are significantly related.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.8, S.1276-1281

Authors

Years

Types

  • a 58
  • m 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications