-
Marion, L.S.; McCain, K.W.: Contrasting views of software engineering journals : author cocitation choices and indexer vocabulary assignments (2001)
0.01
0.0130871665 = product of:
0.052348666 = sum of:
0.052348666 = product of:
0.10469733 = sum of:
0.10469733 = weight(_text_:software in 5767) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10469733 = score(doc=5767,freq=14.0), product of:
0.18056466 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.045514934 = queryNorm
0.5798329 = fieldWeight in 5767, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5767)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- 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
-
Nicolaisen, J.: Citation analysis (2007)
0.01
0.012333291 = product of:
0.049333163 = sum of:
0.049333163 = product of:
0.098666325 = sum of:
0.098666325 = weight(_text_:22 in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.098666325 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15938555 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045514934 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 6091, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6091)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 13. 7.2008 19:53:22
-
Van der Veer Martens, B.: Do citation systems represent theories of truth? (2001)
0.01
0.010901191 = product of:
0.043604765 = sum of:
0.043604765 = product of:
0.08720953 = sum of:
0.08720953 = weight(_text_:22 in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08720953 = score(doc=3925,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15938555 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045514934 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 15:22:28
-
Larivière, V.; Gingras, Y.; Archambault, E.: ¬The decline in the concentration of citations, 1900-2007 (2009)
0.01
0.0065407157 = product of:
0.026162863 = sum of:
0.026162863 = product of:
0.052325726 = sum of:
0.052325726 = weight(_text_:22 in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.052325726 = score(doc=2763,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15938555 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045514934 = queryNorm
0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 2763, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2763)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 22. 3.2009 19:22:35
-
Leydesdorff, L.: Clusters and maps of science journals based on bi-connected graphs in Journal Citation Reports (2004)
0.01
0.0059357807 = product of:
0.023743123 = sum of:
0.023743123 = product of:
0.047486246 = sum of:
0.047486246 = weight(_text_:software in 4427) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047486246 = score(doc=4427,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18056466 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.045514934 = queryNorm
0.2629875 = fieldWeight in 4427, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4427)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- The aggregated journal-journal citation matrix derived from Journal Citation Reports 2001 can be decomposed into a unique subject classification using the graph-analytical algorithm of bi-connected components. This technique was recently incorporated in software tools for social network analysis. The matrix can be assessed in terms of its decomposability using articulation points which indicate overlap between the components. The articulation points of this set did not exhibit a next-order network of "general science" journals. However, the clusters differ in size and in terms of the internal density of their relations. A full classification of the journals is provided in the Appendix. The clusters can also be extracted and mapped for the visualization.
-
White, H.D.: Citation analysis : history (2009)
0.00
0.0049464838 = product of:
0.019785935 = sum of:
0.019785935 = product of:
0.03957187 = sum of:
0.03957187 = weight(_text_:software in 3763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03957187 = score(doc=3763,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18056466 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.045514934 = queryNorm
0.21915624 = fieldWeight in 3763, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3763)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- 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.
-
Chan, H.C.; Kim, H.-W.; Tan, W.C.: Information systems citation patterns from International Conference on Information Systems articles (2006)
0.00
0.0046249838 = product of:
0.018499935 = sum of:
0.018499935 = product of:
0.03699987 = sum of:
0.03699987 = weight(_text_:22 in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03699987 = score(doc=201,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15938555 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045514934 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 201, 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=201)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 3. 1.2007 17:22:03
-
H-Index auch im Web of Science (2008)
0.00
0.0046249838 = product of:
0.018499935 = sum of:
0.018499935 = product of:
0.03699987 = sum of:
0.03699987 = weight(_text_:22 in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03699987 = score(doc=590,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15938555 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045514934 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 6. 4.2008 19:04:22
-
Mingers, J.; Burrell, Q.L.: Modeling citation behavior in Management Science journals (2006)
0.00
0.0046249838 = product of:
0.018499935 = sum of:
0.018499935 = product of:
0.03699987 = sum of:
0.03699987 = weight(_text_:22 in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03699987 = score(doc=994,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15938555 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045514934 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 994, 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=994)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 26.12.2007 19:22:05
-
Hayer, L.: Lazarsfeld zitiert : eine bibliometrische Analyse (2008)
0.00
0.0038541534 = product of:
0.015416614 = sum of:
0.015416614 = product of:
0.030833228 = sum of:
0.030833228 = weight(_text_:22 in 1934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030833228 = score(doc=1934,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15938555 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045514934 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1934, 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=1934)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 22. 6.2008 12:54:12
-
Ahlgren, P.; Jarneving, B.; Rousseau, R.: Requirements for a cocitation similarity measure, with special reference to Pearson's correlation coefficient (2003)
0.00
0.0030833227 = product of:
0.012333291 = sum of:
0.012333291 = product of:
0.024666581 = sum of:
0.024666581 = weight(_text_:22 in 5171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024666581 = score(doc=5171,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15938555 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045514934 = queryNorm
0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 5171, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5171)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 9. 7.2006 10:22:35
