Search (1174 results, page 1 of 59)

0.24611545 = product of:
  0.73834634 = sum of:
    0.24611545 = weight(_text_:2f in 2188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.24611545 = score(doc=2188,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.32843533 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.7493574 = fieldWeight in 2188, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2188)
    0.24611545 = weight(_text_:2f in 2188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.24611545 = score(doc=2188,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.32843533 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.7493574 = fieldWeight in 2188, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2188)
    0.24611545 = weight(_text_:2f in 2188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.24611545 = score(doc=2188,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.32843533 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.7493574 = fieldWeight in 2188, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2188)
  0.33333334 = coord(3/9)

Content

Vgl. unter: https://www.leibniz-science20.de%2Fforschung%2Fprojekte%2Faltmetrics-in-verschiedenen-wissenschaftsdisziplinen%2F&ei=2jTgVaaXGcK4Udj1qdgB&usg=AFQjCNFOPdONj4RKBDf9YDJOLuz3lkGYlg&sig2=5YI3KWIGxBmk5_kv0P_8iQ.

0.06121807 = product of:
  0.13774066 = sum of:
    0.067301154 = weight(_text_:line in 5767) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.067301154 = score(doc=5767,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21724595 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.30979243 = fieldWeight in 5767, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5767)
    0.009326885 = weight(_text_:information in 5767) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009326885 = score(doc=5767,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06800663 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 5767, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5767)
    0.01958201 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5767) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01958201 = score(doc=5767,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1171842 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 5767, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5767)
    0.04153061 = weight(_text_:techniques in 5767) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04153061 = score(doc=5767,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17065717 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.405231 = idf(docFreq=1467, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.24335694 = fieldWeight in 5767, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.405231 = idf(docFreq=1467, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5767)
  0.44444445 = coord(4/9)

Abstract

We explore the intellectual subject structure and research themes in software engineering through the identification and analysis of a core journal literature. We examine this literature via two expert perspectives: that of the author, who identified significant work by citing it (journal cocitation analysis), and that of the professional indexer, who tags published work with subject terms to facilitate retrieval from a bibliographic database (subject profile analysis). The data sources are SCISEARCH (the on-line version of Science Citation Index), and INSPEC (a database covering software engineering, computer science, and information systems). We use data visualization tools (cluster analysis, multidimensional scaling, and PFNets) to show the "intellectual maps" of software engineering. Cocitation and subject profile analyses demonstrate that software engineering is a distinct interdisciplinary field, valuing practical and applied aspects, and spanning a subject continuum from "programming-in-the-smalI" to "programming-in-the-large." This continuum mirrors the software development life cycle by taking the operating system or major application from initial programming through project management, implementation, and maintenance. Object orientation is an integral but distinct subject area in software engineering. Key differences are the importance of management and programming: (1) cocitation analysis emphasizes project management and systems development; (2) programming techniques/languages are more influential in subject profiles; (3) cocitation profiles place object-oriented journals separately and centrally while the subject profile analysis locates these journals with the programming/languages group

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 52(2001) no.4, S.297-308

0.049143516 = product of:
  0.11057291 = sum of:
    0.0117976805 = weight(_text_:information in 2213) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0117976805 = score(doc=2213,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06800663 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.1734784 = fieldWeight in 2213, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2213)
    0.015665608 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2213) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015665608 = score(doc=2213,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1171842 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.13368362 = fieldWeight in 2213, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2213)
    0.046986517 = weight(_text_:techniques in 2213) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.046986517 = score(doc=2213,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.17065717 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.405231 = idf(docFreq=1467, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.27532694 = fieldWeight in 2213, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.405231 = idf(docFreq=1467, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2213)
    0.036123104 = product of:
      0.07224621 = sum of:
        0.07224621 = weight(_text_:theories in 2213) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07224621 = score(doc=2213,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.21161452 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.4624767 = idf(docFreq=509, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038739666 = queryNorm
            0.3414048 = fieldWeight in 2213, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.4624767 = idf(docFreq=509, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2213)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.44444445 = coord(4/9)

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 55(2004) no.4, S.363-365 (J.W. Schneider): "Theories and methods for mapping scientific frontiers have existed for decades-especially within quantitative studies of science. This book investigates mapping scientific frontiers from the perspective of visual thinking and visual exploration (visual communication). The central theme is construction of visual-spatial representations that may convey insights into the dynamic structure of scientific frontiers. The author's previous book, Information Visualisation and Virtual Environments (1999), also concerns some of the ideas behind and possible benefits of visual communication. This new book takes a special focus an knowledge visualization, particularly in relation to science literature. The book is not a technical tutorial as the focus is an principles of visual communication and ways that may reveal the dynamics of scientific frontiers. The new approach to science mapping presented is the culmination of different approaches from several disciplines, such as philosophy of science, information retrieval, scientometrics, domain analysis, and information visualization. The book therefore addresses an audience with different disciplinary backgrounds and tries to stimulate interdisciplinary research. Chapter 1, The Growth of Scientific Knowledge, introduces a range of examples that illustrate fundamental issues concerning visual communication in general and science mapping in particular. Chapter 2, Mapping the Universe, focuses an the basic principles of cartography for visual communication. Chapter 3, Mapping the Mind, turns the attention inward and explores the design of mind maps, maps that represent our thoughts, experience, and knowledge. Chapter 4, Enabling Techniques for Science Mapping, essentially outlines the author's basic approach to science mapping.
The title of Chapter 5, On the Shoulders of Giants, implies that knowledge of the structure of scientific frontiers in the immediate past holds the key to a fruitful exploration of people's intellectual assets. Chapter 6, Tracing Competing Paradigms explains how information visualization can draw upon the philosophical framework of paradigm shifts and thereby enable scientists to track the development of Competing paradigms. The final chapter, Tracking Latent Domain Knowledge, turns citation analysis upside down by looking at techniques that may reveal latent domain knowledge. Mapping Scientific Frontiers: The Quest for Knowledge Visualization is an excellent book and is highly recommended. The book convincingly outlines general theories conceming cartography, visual communication, and science mapping-especially how metaphors can make a "big picture"simple and useful. The author likewise Shows how the GSA framework is based not only an technical possibilities but indeed also an the visualization principles presented in the beginning chapters. Also, the author does a fine job of explaining why the mapping of scientific frontiers needs a combined effort from a diverse range of underlying disciplines, such as philosophy of science, sociology of science, scientometrics, domain analyses, information visualization, knowledge discovery, and data mining.

0.04780719 = product of:
  0.21513236 = sum of:
    0.013190207 = weight(_text_:information in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013190207 = score(doc=3925,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06800663 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 3925, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3925)
    0.20194215 = sum of:
      0.12771446 = weight(_text_:theories in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.12771446 = score(doc=3925,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.21161452 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.4624767 = idf(docFreq=509, maxDocs=44218)
            0.038739666 = queryNorm
          0.6035241 = fieldWeight in 3925, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.4624767 = idf(docFreq=509, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3925)
      0.07422768 = weight(_text_:22 in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07422768 = score(doc=3925,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.13565971 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.038739666 = queryNorm
          0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 3925, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3925)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Date

22. 7.2006 15:22:28

Source

Information Research. 6(2001), no.2

0.041899532 = product of:
  0.1256986 = sum of:
    0.027918408 = weight(_text_:information in 3361) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027918408 = score(doc=3361,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.06800663 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.41052482 = fieldWeight in 3361, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3361)
    0.031331215 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3361) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031331215 = score(doc=3361,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1171842 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 3361, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3361)
    0.06644897 = weight(_text_:techniques in 3361) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06644897 = score(doc=3361,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17065717 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.405231 = idf(docFreq=1467, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.3893711 = fieldWeight in 3361, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.405231 = idf(docFreq=1467, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3361)
  0.33333334 = coord(3/9)

Abstract

Draws attention to the vast potential of online information databases and to the many new possibilities which advanced search techniques offer those who want to explore databases. Looks at informetrics, an emerging subfield in information science, which is based on the combination of advanced information retrieval and quantitative studies of information flow. Describes 3 studies carried out at the Centre for Information studies at the Royal School of Library and Information Science in Copenhagen, Denmark, to illustrate the scope and nature of informetric analysis

Source

Managing information. 5(1998) no.7, S.37-40

0.036602147 = product of:
  0.10980643 = sum of:
    0.01582825 = weight(_text_:information in 992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01582825 = score(doc=992,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06800663 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 992, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=992)
    0.023498412 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023498412 = score(doc=992,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1171842 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 992, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=992)
    0.07047977 = weight(_text_:techniques in 992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07047977 = score(doc=992,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.17065717 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.405231 = idf(docFreq=1467, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.4129904 = fieldWeight in 992, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.405231 = idf(docFreq=1467, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=992)
  0.33333334 = coord(3/9)

Abstract

In an earlier study by the authors, full-text analysis and traditional bibliometric methods were combined to map research papers published in the journal Scientometrics. The main objective was to develop appropriate techniques of full-text analysis and to improve the efficiency of the individual methods in the mapping of science. The number of papers was, however, rather limited. In the present study, we extend the quantitative linguistic part of the previous studies to a set of five journals representing the field of Library and Information Science (LIS). Almost 1000 articles and notes published in the period 2002-2004 have been selected for this exercise. The optimum solution for clustering LIS is found for six clusters. The combination of different mapping techniques, applied to the full text of scientific publications, results in a characteristic tripod pattern. Besides two clusters in bibliometrics, one cluster in information retrieval and one containing general issues, webometrics and patent studies are identified as small but emerging clusters within LIS. The study is concluded with the analysis of cluster representations by the selected journals.

Source

Information processing and management. 42(2006) no.6, S.1614-1642

0.03283902 = product of:
  0.14777559 = sum of:
    0.007914125 = weight(_text_:information in 2751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007914125 = score(doc=2751,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06800663 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2751, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2751)
    0.13986146 = sum of:
      0.10836932 = weight(_text_:theories in 2751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.10836932 = score(doc=2751,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.21161452 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.4624767 = idf(docFreq=509, maxDocs=44218)
            0.038739666 = queryNorm
          0.5121072 = fieldWeight in 2751, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            5.4624767 = idf(docFreq=509, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2751)
      0.03149214 = weight(_text_:22 in 2751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03149214 = score(doc=2751,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13565971 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.038739666 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2751, 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=2751)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Why authors choose some references in preference to others is a question that is still not wholly answered despite its being of interest to scientists. The relevance of references is twofold: They are a mechanism for tracing the evolution of science, and because they enhance the image of the cited authors, citations are a widely known and used indicator of scientific endeavor. Following an extensive review of the literature, we selected all papers that seek to answer the central question and demonstrate that the existing theories are not sufficient: Neither citation nor indicator theory provides a complete and convincing answer. Some perspectives in this arena remain, which are isolated from the core literature. The purpose of this article is to offer a fresh perspective on a 30-year-old problem by extending the context of the discussion. We suggest reviving the discussion about citation theories with a new perspective, that of the readers, by layers or phases, in the final choice of references, allowing for a new classification in which any paper, to date, could be included.

Date

22. 3.2009 19:05:07

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.4, S.754-777

0.032703415 = product of:
  0.098110236 = sum of:
    0.0065951035 = weight(_text_:information in 6008) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0065951035 = score(doc=6008,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06800663 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 6008, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6008)
    0.01958201 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 6008) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01958201 = score(doc=6008,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1171842 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 6008, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6008)
    0.07193312 = weight(_text_:techniques in 6008) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07193312 = score(doc=6008,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.17065717 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.405231 = idf(docFreq=1467, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.42150658 = fieldWeight in 6008, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.405231 = idf(docFreq=1467, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6008)
  0.33333334 = coord(3/9)

Abstract

Author Cocitation Analysis (ACA) and Web Colink Analysis (WCA) are examined as sister techniques in the related fields of bibliometrics and webometrics. Comparisons are made between the two techniques based on their data retrieval, mapping, and interpretation procedures, using mathematics as the subject in focus. An ACA is carried out and interpreted for a group of participants (authors) involved in an Isaac Newton Institute (2000) workshop-Singularity Theory and Its Applications to Wave Propagation Theory and Dynamical Systems-and compared/contrasted with a WCA for a list of international mathematics research institute home pages on the Web. Although the practice of ACA may be used to inform a WCA, the two techniques do not share many elements in common. The most important departure between ACA and WCA exists at the interpretive stage when ACA maps become meaningful in light of citation theory, and WCA maps require interpretation based on hyperlink theory. Much of the research concerning link theory and motivations for linking is still new; therefore further studies based on colinking are needed, mainly map-based studies, to understand what makes a Web colink structure meaningful.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.11, S.1487-1502

0.032418955 = product of:
  0.09725686 = sum of:
    0.0065951035 = weight(_text_:information in 2705) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0065951035 = score(doc=2705,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06800663 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 2705, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2705)
    0.058733147 = weight(_text_:techniques in 2705) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.058733147 = score(doc=2705,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.17065717 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.405231 = idf(docFreq=1467, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.34415868 = fieldWeight in 2705, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.405231 = idf(docFreq=1467, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2705)
    0.031928614 = product of:
      0.06385723 = sum of:
        0.06385723 = weight(_text_:theories in 2705) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06385723 = score(doc=2705,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21161452 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.4624767 = idf(docFreq=509, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038739666 = queryNorm
            0.30176204 = fieldWeight in 2705, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.4624767 = idf(docFreq=509, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2705)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(3/9)

Abstract

The multidisciplinary character of the theories supporting research in the discipline of human resources management (HRM), the increasing importance of a more rigorous approach to HRM studies by academics, and the impact of HRM on the competitive advantage of firms are just some of the indicators demonstrating the relevance of this discipline in the broader field of the social sciences. These developments explain why a quantitative analysis of HRM studies based on bibliometric techniques is particularly opportune. The general objective of this article is to analyze the intellectual structure of the HRM discipline; this can be divided into two specific objectives. The first is to identify the most frequently cited studies, with the purpose of identifying the key topics of research in the HRM discipline. The second objective is to represent the networks of relationships between the most-cited studies, grouping them under common themes, with the object of providing a diagrammatic description of the knowledge base constituted by accumulated works of research in the HRM field. The methodology utilized is based on the bibliometric techniques of citation analysis.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.1, S.161-175

0.03166281 = product of:
  0.14248264 = sum of:
    0.13324949 = weight(_text_:line in 3124) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13324949 = score(doc=3124,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.21724595 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.6133578 = fieldWeight in 3124, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3124)
    0.009233146 = weight(_text_:information in 3124) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009233146 = score(doc=3124,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06800663 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 3124, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3124)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

We present a rationale for the Hirsch-index rank-order distribution and prove that it is a power law (hence a straight line in the log-log scale). This is confirmed by experimental data of Pyykkö and by data produced in this article on 206 mathematics journals. This distribution is of a completely different nature than the impact factor (IF) rank-order distribution which (as proved in a previous article) is S-shaped. This is also confirmed by our example. Only in the log-log scale of the h-index distribution do we notice a concave deviation of the straight line for higher ranks. This phenomenon is discussed.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.10, S.2142-2144

0.0309069 = product of:
  0.0927207 = sum of:
    0.019385567 = weight(_text_:information in 2070) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019385567 = score(doc=2070,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.06800663 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.2850541 = fieldWeight in 2070, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2070)
    0.023498412 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2070) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023498412 = score(doc=2070,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1171842 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 2070, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2070)
    0.049836725 = weight(_text_:techniques in 2070) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.049836725 = score(doc=2070,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17065717 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.405231 = idf(docFreq=1467, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.2920283 = fieldWeight in 2070, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.405231 = idf(docFreq=1467, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2070)
  0.33333334 = coord(3/9)

Abstract

This study employed the Perl program, Excel software, and some bibliometric techniques to investigate growth pattern, journal characteristics, and author productivity of the subject indexing literature from 1977 to 2000, based an the subject search of a descriptor field in the Library and Information Science Abstracts (LISA) database. The literature growth from 1977 to 2000 in subject indexing could be fitted well by the logistic curve. The Bradford plot of journal literature fits the typical Bradford-Zipf S-shaped curve. Twenty core journals making a significant contribution could be identified from the Bradford-Zipf distribution. Four major research topics in the area of subject indexing were identified as: (1) information organization, (2) information processing, (3) information storage and retrieval, and (4) information systems and services. It was also found that a vast majority of authors (76.7%) contributed only one article, which is a much larger percentage than the 60% of original Lotka's data. The 15 most productive authors and the key concepts of their research were identified.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 55(2004) no.1, S.64-73

0.028175801 = product of:
  0.0845274 = sum of:
    0.011192262 = weight(_text_:information in 3090) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011192262 = score(doc=3090,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06800663 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 3090, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3090)
    0.023498412 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3090) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023498412 = score(doc=3090,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1171842 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 3090, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3090)
    0.049836725 = weight(_text_:techniques in 3090) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.049836725 = score(doc=3090,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17065717 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.405231 = idf(docFreq=1467, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.2920283 = fieldWeight in 3090, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.405231 = idf(docFreq=1467, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3090)
  0.33333334 = coord(3/9)

Abstract

Recent Web-searching and -mining tools are combining text and link analysis to improve ranking and crawling algorithms. The central assumption behind such approaches is that there is a correiation between the graph structure of the Web and the text and meaning of pages. Here I formalize and empirically evaluate two general conjectures drawing connections from link information to lexical and semantic Web content. The link-content conjecture states that a page is similar to the pages that link to it, and the link-cluster conjecture that pages about the same topic are clustered together. These conjectures are offen simply assumed to hold, and Web search tools are built an such assumptions. The present quantitative confirmation sheds light an the connection between the success of the latest Web-mining techniques and the small world topology of the Web, with encouraging implications for the design of better crawling algorithms.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 55(2004) no.14, S.1261-1269

Theme

Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval

0.02527295 = product of:
  0.07581885 = sum of:
    0.0065951035 = weight(_text_:information in 3763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0065951035 = score(doc=3763,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06800663 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 3763, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3763)
    0.027693143 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027693143 = score(doc=3763,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1171842 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 3763, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3763)
    0.04153061 = weight(_text_:techniques in 3763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04153061 = score(doc=3763,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17065717 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.405231 = idf(docFreq=1467, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.24335694 = fieldWeight in 3763, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.405231 = idf(docFreq=1467, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3763)
  0.33333334 = coord(3/9)

Abstract

References from publications are at the same time citations to other publications. This entry introduces some of the practical uses of citation data in science and scholarship. At the individual level citations identify and permit the retrieval of specific editions of works, while also suggesting their subject matter, authority, and age. Through citation indexes, retrievals may include not only the earlier items referred to by a given work, but also the later items that cite that given work in turn. Some technical notes on retrieval are included here. Counts of citations received over time, and measures derived from them, reveal the varying impacts of works, authors, journals, organizations, and countries. This has obvious implications for the evaluation of, e.g., library collections, academics, research teams, and science policies. When treated as linkages between pairs of publications, references and citations reveal intellectual ties. Several kinds of links have been defined, such as cocitation, bibliographic coupling, and intercitation. In the aggregate, these links form networks that compactly suggest the intellectual histories of research specialties and disciplines, especially when the networks are visualized through mapping software. Citation analysis is of course not without critics, who have long pointed out imperfections in the data or in analytical techniques. However, the criticisms have generally been met by strong counterarguments from proponents.

Source

Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed. Ed.: M.J. Bates

0.02504972 = product of:
  0.11272374 = sum of:
    0.010552166 = weight(_text_:information in 5128) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010552166 = score(doc=5128,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06800663 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 5128, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5128)
    0.10217157 = product of:
      0.20434314 = sum of:
        0.20434314 = weight(_text_:theories in 5128) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.20434314 = score(doc=5128,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.21161452 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.4624767 = idf(docFreq=509, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038739666 = queryNorm
            0.9656386 = fieldWeight in 5128, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              5.4624767 = idf(docFreq=509, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5128)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Theories of citation are as elusive as theories of information science, which have been debated for decade. Gives an overview of some of these theories, and as a basis for discussion offers the term citationology as the theory and practice of citation, including its derivative disciplines citation analysis and bibliometrics

Footnote

Contribution to a thematic issue devoted to 'Theories of citation?'

0.024976473 = product of:
  0.11239413 = sum of:
    0.011423056 = weight(_text_:information in 2590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011423056 = score(doc=2590,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06800663 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 2590, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2590)
    0.10097107 = sum of:
      0.06385723 = weight(_text_:theories in 2590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06385723 = score(doc=2590,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.21161452 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.4624767 = idf(docFreq=509, maxDocs=44218)
            0.038739666 = queryNorm
          0.30176204 = fieldWeight in 2590, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.4624767 = idf(docFreq=509, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2590)
      0.03711384 = weight(_text_:22 in 2590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03711384 = score(doc=2590,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.13565971 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.038739666 = queryNorm
          0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2590, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2590)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to analyse the global scientific outputs of ontology research, an important emerging discipline that has huge potential to improve information understanding, organization, and management. Design/methodology/approach - This study collected literature published during 1900-2012 from the Web of Science database. The bibliometric analysis was performed from authorial, institutional, national, spatiotemporal, and topical aspects. Basic statistical analysis, visualization of geographic distribution, co-word analysis, and a new index were applied to the selected data. Findings - Characteristics of publication outputs suggested that ontology research has entered into the soaring stage, along with increased participation and collaboration. The authors identified the leading authors, institutions, nations, and articles in ontology research. Authors were more from North America, Europe, and East Asia. The USA took the lead, while China grew fastest. Four major categories of frequently used keywords were identified: applications in Semantic Web, applications in bioinformatics, philosophy theories, and common supporting technology. Semantic Web research played a core role, and gene ontology study was well-developed. The study focus of ontology has shifted from philosophy to information science. Originality/value - This is the first study to quantify global research patterns and trends in ontology, which might provide a potential guide for the future research. The new index provides an alternative way to evaluate the multidisciplinary influence of researchers.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22
17. 9.2018 18:22:23

Source

Aslib journal of information management. 67(2015) no.1, S.27-54

0.024767607 = product of:
  0.07430282 = sum of:
    0.013190207 = weight(_text_:information in 1459) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013190207 = score(doc=1459,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06800663 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 1459, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1459)
    0.01958201 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1459) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01958201 = score(doc=1459,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1171842 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 1459, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1459)
    0.04153061 = weight(_text_:techniques in 1459) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04153061 = score(doc=1459,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17065717 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.405231 = idf(docFreq=1467, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.24335694 = fieldWeight in 1459, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.405231 = idf(docFreq=1467, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1459)
  0.33333334 = coord(3/9)

Abstract

In their 1998 article "Visualizing a discipline: An author cocitation analysis of information science, 1972-1995," White and McCain used multidimensional scaling, hierarchical clustering, and factor analysis to display the specialty groupings of 120 highly-cited ("paradigmatic") information scientists. These statistical techniques are traditional in author cocitation analysis (ACA). It is shown here that a newer technique, Pathfinder Networks (PFNETs), has considerable advantages for ACA. In PFNETs, nodes represent authors, and explicit links represent weighted paths between nodes, the weights in this case being cocitation counts. The links can be drawn to exclude all but the single highest counts for author pairs, which reduces a network of authors to only the most salient relationships. When these are mapped, dominant authors can be defined as those with relatively many links to other authors (i.e., high degree centrality). Links between authors and dominant authors define specialties, and links between dominant authors connect specialties into a discipline. Maps are made with one rather than several computer routines and in one rather than many computer passes. Also, PFNETs can, and should, be generated from matrices of raw counts rather than Pearson correlations, which removes a computational step associated with traditional ACA. White and McCain's raw data from 1998 are remapped as a PFNET. It is shown that the specialty groupings correspond closely to those seen in the factor analysis of the 1998 article. Because PFNETs are fast to compute, they are used in AuthorLink, a new Web-based system that creates live interfaces for cocited author retrieval an the fly.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 54(2003) no.5, S.423-434

0.024181385 = product of:
  0.10881623 = sum of:
    0.027415333 = weight(_text_:information in 4589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027415333 = score(doc=4589,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06800663 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.40312737 = fieldWeight in 4589, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4589)
    0.08140089 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08140089 = score(doc=4589,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1171842 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.6946405 = fieldWeight in 4589, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4589)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

The author demonstrates how informetric analysis of information retrieval system content and use provides valuable insights that have applications for the modelling, design, and evaluation of information retrieval systems.

0.02417856 = product of:
  0.07253568 = sum of:
    0.011423056 = weight(_text_:information in 1377) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011423056 = score(doc=1377,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06800663 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 1377, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1377)
    0.01958201 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1377) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01958201 = score(doc=1377,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1171842 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 1377, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1377)
    0.04153061 = weight(_text_:techniques in 1377) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04153061 = score(doc=1377,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17065717 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.405231 = idf(docFreq=1467, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.24335694 = fieldWeight in 1377, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.405231 = idf(docFreq=1467, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1377)
  0.33333334 = coord(3/9)

Abstract

The organization of large collections of documents has become more important with the increase in the amount of digital information available. In certain constricted domains of knowledge, keywords and subject descriptors tend to be similar and therefore insufficient to differentiate documents. In this context, instead of relying only on the presence of common terms, the identification of common cited references can be useful to define semantic relationship among documents. The purpose of this work is to add another instance on the research linking information retrieval and bibliometric techniques aided by information technology. A domain analytic method was developed to generate clusters of documents, which uses self-organizing maps, in the scope of artificial neural networks, to categorize documents. The results obtained show that this approach successfully identified clusters of authors and documents through their cited references. In addition, further qualitative analysis of these clusters demonstrates the existence of semantic relationships between the documents. This study can contribute to the development of the field of knowledge organization by evaluating the use of artificial neural networks in the automatic categorization of documents in a constricted knowledge domain based on the analysis of the references cited by these documents.

0.023839835 = product of:
  0.107279256 = sum of:
    0.094221614 = weight(_text_:line in 1452) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.094221614 = score(doc=1452,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21724595 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.4337094 = fieldWeight in 1452, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1452)
    0.01305764 = weight(_text_:information in 1452) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01305764 = score(doc=1452,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06800663 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 1452, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1452)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Research fronts, defined as clusters of documents that tend to cite a fixed, time invariant set of base documents, are plotted as time lines for visualization and exploration. Using a set of documents related to the subject of anthrax research, this article illustrates the construction, exploration, and interpretation of time lines for the purpose of identifying and visualizing temporal changes in research activity through journal articles. Such information is useful for presentation to meinbers of expert panels used for technology forecasting.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 54(2003) no.5, S.413-422

0.023479834 = product of:
  0.0704395 = sum of:
    0.009326885 = weight(_text_:information in 3091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009326885 = score(doc=3091,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06800663 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 3091, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3091)
    0.01958201 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01958201 = score(doc=3091,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1171842 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 3091, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3091)
    0.04153061 = weight(_text_:techniques in 3091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04153061 = score(doc=3091,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17065717 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.405231 = idf(docFreq=1467, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038739666 = queryNorm
        0.24335694 = fieldWeight in 3091, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.405231 = idf(docFreq=1467, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3091)
  0.33333334 = coord(3/9)

Abstract

Because of the increasing presence of scientific publications an the Web, combined with the existing difficulties in easily verifying and retrieving these publications, research an techniques and methods for retrieval of scientific Web publications is called for. In this article, we report an the initial steps taken toward the construction of a test collection of scientific Web publications within the subject domain of plant biology. The steps reported are those of data gathering and data analysis aiming at identifying characteristics of scientific Web publications. The data used in this article were generated based an specifically selected domain topics that are searched for in three publicly accessible search engines (Google, AlITheWeb, and AItaVista). A sample of the retrieved hits was analyzed with regard to how various publication attributes correlated with the scientific quality of the content and whether this information could be employed to harvest, filter, and rank Web publications. The attributes analyzed were inlinks, outlinks, bibliographic references, file format, language, search engine overlap, structural position (according to site structure), and the occurrence of various types of metadata. As could be expected, the ranked output differs between the three search engines. Apparently, this is caused by differences in ranking algorithms rather than the databases themselves. In fact, because scientific Web content in this subject domain receives few inlinks, both AItaVista and AlITheWeb retrieved a higher degree of accessible scientific content than Google. Because of the search engine cutoffs of accessible URLs, the feasibility of using search engine output for Web content analysis is also discussed.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 55(2004) no.14, S.1239-1249