Search (88 results, page 2 of 5)

  • × theme_ss:"Citation indexing"
  1. Fong, A.C.M.: Mining a Web citation database for document clustering (2002) 0.00 
    0.0047134957 = product of:
  0.047134954 = sum of:
    0.047134954 = weight(_text_:web in 3940) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.047134954 = score(doc=3940,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.50479853 = fieldWeight in 3940, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3940)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)
  2. Smith, A.G.: Web links as analogues of citations (2004) 0.00 
    0.0047134957 = product of:
  0.047134954 = sum of:
    0.047134954 = weight(_text_:web in 4205) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.047134954 = score(doc=4205,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.50479853 = fieldWeight in 4205, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4205)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)
  3. Hammond, C.C.; Brown, S.W.: Citation searching : search smarter & find more (2008) 0.00 
    0.0046706647 = product of:
  0.023353323 = sum of:
    0.016833913 = weight(_text_:web in 2206) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016833913 = score(doc=2206,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 2206, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2206)
    0.00651941 = product of:
      0.019558229 = sum of:
        0.019558229 = weight(_text_:29 in 2206) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019558229 = score(doc=2206,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10064617 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028611459 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 2206, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2206)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.2 = coord(2/10)
    Abstract
    At the University of Connecticut, we have been enticing graduate students to join graduate student trainers to learn how to answer the following questions and improve the breadth of their research: Do you need to find articles published outside your primary discipline? What are some seminal articles in your field? Have you ever wanted to know who cited an article you wrote? We are participating in Elsevier's Student Ambassador Program (SAmP) in which graduate students train their peers on "citation searching" research using Scopus and Web of Science, two tremendous citation databases. We are in the fourth semester of these training programs, and they are wildly successful: We have offered more than 30 classes and taught more than 350 students from March 2007 through March 2008. Chelsea is a Ph.D. candidate in the department of communication science at the University of Connecticut (UConn) and was trained as a librarian; she was one of the first peer trainers in the citation searching program. Stephanie is an electronic resource librarian at the University of Connecticut and is the librarian coordinating the program. Together, we would like to explain what we teach in the classes in the hopes of helping even more researchers perform better searches.
    Date
    17. 8.2008 11:05:29
  4. Prime-Claverie, C.; Beigbeder, M.; Lafouge, T.: Transposition of the cocitation method with a view to classifying Web pages (2004) 0.00 
    0.0045170127 = product of:
  0.04517013 = sum of:
    0.04517013 = weight(_text_:web in 3095) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04517013 = score(doc=3095,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.48375595 = fieldWeight in 3095, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3095)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)
    Abstract
    The Web is a huge source of information, and one of the main problems facing users is finding documents which correspond to their requirements. Apart from the problem of thematic relevance, the documents retrieved by search engines do not always meet the users' expectations. The document may be too general, or conversely too specialized, or of a different type from what the user is looking for, and so forth. We think that adding metadata to pages can considerably improve the process of searching for information an the Web. This article presents a possible typology for Web sites and pages, as weIl as a method for propagating metadata values, based an the study of the Web graph and more specifically the method of cocitation in this graph.
  5. Leydesdorff, L.; Opthof, T.: Citation analysis with medical subject Headings (MeSH) using the Web of Knowledge : a new routine (2013) 0.00 
    0.0045170127 = product of:
  0.04517013 = sum of:
    0.04517013 = weight(_text_:web in 943) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04517013 = score(doc=943,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.48375595 = fieldWeight in 943, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=943)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)
    Abstract
    Citation analysis of documents retrieved from the Medline database (at the Web of Knowledge) has been possible only on a case-by-case basis. A technique is presented here for citation analysis in batch mode using both Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) at the Web of Knowledge and the Science Citation Index at the Web of Science (WoS). This freeware routine is applied to the case of "Brugada Syndrome," a specific disease and field of research (since 1992). The journals containing these publications, for example, are attributed to WoS categories other than "cardiac and cardiovascular systems", perhaps because of the possibility of genetic testing for this syndrome in the clinic. With this routine, all the instruments available for citation analysis can now be used on the basis of MeSH terms. Other options for crossing between Medline, WoS, and Scopus are also reviewed.
    Object
    Web of Knowledge
  6. Thelwall, M.: Extracting macroscopic information from Web links (2001) 0.00 
    0.0041234493 = product of:
  0.041234493 = sum of:
    0.041234493 = weight(_text_:web in 6851) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041234493 = score(doc=6851,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.4416067 = fieldWeight in 6851, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6851)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)
    Abstract
    Much has been written about the potential and pitfalls of macroscopic Web-based link analysis, yet there have been no studies that have provided clear statistical evidence that any of the proposed calculations can produce results over large areas of the Web that correlate with phenomena external to the Internet. This article attempts to provide such evidence through an evaluation of Ingwersen's (1998) proposed external Web Impact Factor (WIF) for the original use of the Web: the interlinking of academic research. In particular, it studies the case of the relationship between academic hyperlinks and research activity for universities in Britain, a country chosen for its variety of institutions and the existence of an official government rating exercise for research. After reviewing the numerous reasons why link counts may be unreliable, it demonstrates that four different WIFs do, in fact, correlate with the conventional academic research measures. The WIF delivering the greatest correlation with research rankings was the ratio of Web pages with links pointing at research-based pages to faculty numbers. The scarcity of links to electronic academic papers in the data set suggests that, in contrast to citation analysis, this WIF is measuring the reputations of universities and their scholars, rather than the quality of their publications
  7. Cawkell, T.: Checking research progress on 'image retrieval by shape matching' using the Web of Science (1998) 0.00 
    0.004082007 = product of:
  0.04082007 = sum of:
    0.04082007 = weight(_text_:web in 3571) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04082007 = score(doc=3571,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.43716836 = fieldWeight in 3571, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3571)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)
    Abstract
    Discusses the Web of Science database recently introduced by ISI, and which is compiled from 8.000 journals covered in the SCI, SSCI and AHCI. Briefly compares the database with the Citation Indexes as provided by the BIDS service at the University of Bath. Explores the characteristics and usefulness of the WoS through a search of it for articles on the topic of image retrieval by shape matching. Suggests that the selection of articles of interest is much easier and far quicker using the WoS than other methods of conducting a search using ISI's data
    Object
    Web of Science
  8. Whitley, K.M.: Analysis of SciFinder Scholar and Web of Science citation searches (2002) 0.00 
    0.004082007 = product of:
  0.04082007 = sum of:
    0.04082007 = weight(_text_:web in 1255) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04082007 = score(doc=1255,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.43716836 = fieldWeight in 1255, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1255)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)
    Abstract
    Chemical Abstracts Service recently unveiled citation searching in Chemical Abstracts. With Chemical Abstracts and Science Citation Index both now available for citation searching, this study compares the duplication and uniqueness of citing references for works of chemistry researchers for the years 1999-2001. The two indexes cover very similar source material, so one would expect the citation results to be very similar. This analysis of SciFinder Scholar and Web of Science shows some important differences as the databases are currently offered. Authors and institutions using citation counts as measures of scientific productivity should take note.
    Object
    Web of science
  9. Pipp, E.: Inhaltlicher Vergleich von Web of Science und Scopus an Hand der erfassten Zeitschriften (2006) 0.00 
    0.004082007 = product of:
  0.04082007 = sum of:
    0.04082007 = weight(_text_:web in 5940) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04082007 = score(doc=5940,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.43716836 = fieldWeight in 5940, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5940)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)
    Abstract
    Bibliographische Datenbanken sind immer noch von Bedeutung, obwohl diee-Zeitschriften-Plattformen der Verlage (z.B. ScienceDirect) und die Institutional Repositories (Publikationsdatenbanken einzelner wissenschaftlicher Institutionen) auch Suchmöglichkeiten anbieten. Nur in bibliographischen Datenbanken kann verlags- und institutionsübergreifend nach Fachliteratur zu einem Thema bzw. nach wissenschaftlichen Publikationen eines Autors / einer Autorin gesucht werden. Ein wichtiger Ansatzpunktzur Bewertung des Inhaltes einer bibliographischen Datenbank - und erst recht für einen inhaltlichen Vergleich zwischen zwei Konkurrenzdatenbanken - ist daher eine Analyse der darin enthaltenen Zeitschriften hinsichtlich der Anzahl der erfassten Zeitschriften, aber auch hinsichtlich der Wissenschaftlichkeit, der fachlichen Ausrichtung, der Vollständigkeit und der Aktualität derselben. Im Folgenden soll ein solcher Vergleich für das Web of Science und für Scopus versucht werden.
    Object
    Web of Science
  10. Brody, T.; Harnad, S.; Carr, L.: Earlier Web usage statistics as predictors of later citation impact (2006) 0.00 
    0.004082007 = product of:
  0.04082007 = sum of:
    0.04082007 = weight(_text_:web in 165) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04082007 = score(doc=165,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.43716836 = fieldWeight in 165, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=165)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)
    Abstract
    The use of citation counts to assess the impact of research articles is well established. However, the citation impact of an article can only be measured several years after it has been published. As research articles are increasingly accessed through the Web, the number of times an article is downloaded can be instantly recorded and counted. One would expect the number of times an article is read to be related both to the number of times it is cited and to how old the article is. The authors analyze how short-term Web usage impact predicts medium-term citation impact. The physics e-print archive-arXiv.org-is used to test this.
  11. Zhao, D.: Challenges of scholarly publications on the Web to the evaluation of science : a comparison of author visibility on the Web and in print journals (2005) 0.00 
    0.004082007 = product of:
  0.04082007 = sum of:
    0.04082007 = weight(_text_:web in 1065) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04082007 = score(doc=1065,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.43716836 = fieldWeight in 1065, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1065)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)
    Abstract
    This article reveals different patterns of scholarly communication in the XML research field on the Web and in print journals in terms of author visibility, and challenges the common practice of exclusively using the ISI's databases to obtain citation counts as scientific performance indicators. Results from this study demonstrate both the importance and the feasibility of the use of multiple citation data sources in citation analysis studies of scholarly communication, and provide evidence for a developing "two tier" scholarly communication system.
  12. Stock, W.G.: ¬Ein Netz wissenschaftlicher Informationen : gesponnen aus Fußnoten (1999) 0.00 
    0.004040139 = product of:
  0.040401388 = sum of:
    0.040401388 = weight(_text_:web in 3890) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.040401388 = score(doc=3890,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.43268442 = fieldWeight in 3890, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3890)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)
    Abstract
    Das ISI in Philadelphia bündelt seine großen Zitationsdatenbanken und bietet sie (vorzugsweise als Intranet-, aber auch als Internetlösung) als 'Web of Science'an. Im derzeitigen entwicklungsstand geht 'Web of Science' bis in die 70er Jahre zurück und weist damit knapp 20 Mill. Quellenartikel mit darin enthaltenen rund 300 Mill. Zitationen in einer einzigen datenbank nach. Neben 'gewohnten' Suchstrategien etwa nach Sachthemen oder Namen werden zitationsanalytische Suchstrategien geboten: Recherchen nach zitierter Literatur, nach zitierenden Artikeln und nach (im Sinne gemeinsamer Fußnoten) 'verwandten' Artikeln. Die Ausgabefunktionen umfassen Document Delivery via ISI sowie Links zu Artikeln, die parallel zur Druckausgabe im WWW erscheinen. Durch die Multidisziplinarität der ISI-Datenbanken sind als Kundenkreis vor allem Einrichtungen angesprochen, die mehrere Wissenschaftsfächer berühren. Hochschulbibliotheken oder Bibliotheken großer Forschungseinrichtungen dürften am 'Web of Science' kaum vorbeikommen. Parallele Produkte bei Online-Archiven, auf CD-ROM oder als Druckausgabe verlieren an Bedeutung
    Object
    Web of Science
  13. Stock, W.G.: Eugene Garfield und die Folgen : der Weg der Fußnote bis in die Wissenschaftspolitik (2002) 0.00 
    0.004040139 = product of:
  0.040401388 = sum of:
    0.040401388 = weight(_text_:web in 472) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.040401388 = score(doc=472,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.43268442 = fieldWeight in 472, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=472)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)
    Abstract
    Ein Besprechungsaufsatz zur Festschrift für E. Garfield: The Web of knowledge: Festschrift in honor of Eugene Garfield. Medford, NJ: Information Today 2000.
  14. McVeigh, M.E.: Citation indexes and the Web of Science (2009) 0.00 
    0.004040139 = product of:
  0.040401388 = sum of:
    0.040401388 = weight(_text_:web in 3848) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.040401388 = score(doc=3848,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.43268442 = fieldWeight in 3848, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3848)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)
    Abstract
    The Web of Science, an online database of bibliographic information produced by Thomson Reuters- draws its real value from the scholarly citation index at its core. By indexing the cited references from each paper as a separate part of the bibliographic data, a citation index creates a pathway by which a paper can be linked backward in time to the body of work that preceded it, as well as linked forward in time to its scholarly descendants. This entry provides a brief history of the development of the citation index, its core functionalities, and the way these unique data are provided to users through the Web of Science.
    Object
    Web of Science
  15. Zhao, D.; Strotmann, A.: Can citation analysis of Web publications better detect research fronts? (2007) 0.00 
    0.0037641774 = product of:
  0.037641775 = sum of:
    0.037641775 = weight(_text_:web in 471) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.037641775 = score(doc=471,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.40312994 = fieldWeight in 471, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=471)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)
    Abstract
    We present evidence that in some research fields, research published in journals and reported on the Web may collectively represent different evolutionary stages of the field, with journals lagging a few years behind the Web on average, and that a "two-tier" scholarly communication system may therefore be evolving. We conclude that in such fields, (a) for detecting current research fronts, author co-citation analyses (ACA) using articles published on the Web as a data source can outperform traditional ACAs using articles published in journals as data, and that (b) as a result, it is important to use multiple data sources in citation analysis studies of scholarly communication for a complete picture of communication patterns. Our evidence stems from comparing the respective intellectual structures of the XML research field, a subfield of computer science, as revealed from three sets of ACA covering two time periods: (a) from the field's beginnings in 1996 to 2001, and (b) from 2001 to 2006. For the first time period, we analyze research articles both from journals as indexed by the Science Citation Index (SCI) and from the Web as indexed by CiteSeer. We follow up by an ACA of SCI data for the second time period. We find that most trends in the evolution of this field from the first to the second time period that we find when comparing ACA results from the SCI between the two time periods already were apparent in the ACA results from CiteSeer during the first time period.
  16. Ahlgren, P.; Jarneving, B.; Rousseau, R.: Requirements for a cocitation similarity measure, with special reference to Pearson's correlation coefficient (2003) 0.00 
    0.003727148 = product of:
  0.01863574 = sum of:
    0.013467129 = weight(_text_:web in 5171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013467129 = score(doc=5171,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.14422815 = fieldWeight in 5171, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5171)
    0.0051686107 = product of:
      0.015505832 = sum of:
        0.015505832 = weight(_text_:22 in 5171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015505832 = score(doc=5171,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10019246 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028611459 = 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)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.2 = coord(2/10)
    Abstract
    Ahlgren, Jarneving, and. Rousseau review accepted procedures for author co-citation analysis first pointing out that since in the raw data matrix the row and column values are identical i,e, the co-citation count of two authors, there is no clear choice for diagonal values. They suggest the number of times an author has been co-cited with himself excluding self citation rather than the common treatment as zeros or as missing values. When the matrix is converted to a similarity matrix the normal procedure is to create a matrix of Pearson's r coefficients between data vectors. Ranking by r and by co-citation frequency and by intuition can easily yield three different orders. It would seem necessary that the adding of zeros to the matrix will not affect the value or the relative order of similarity measures but it is shown that this is not the case with Pearson's r. Using 913 bibliographic descriptions form the Web of Science of articles form JASIS and Scientometrics, authors names were extracted, edited and 12 information retrieval authors and 12 bibliometric authors each from the top 100 most cited were selected. Co-citation and r value (diagonal elements treated as missing) matrices were constructed, and then reconstructed in expanded form. Adding zeros can both change the r value and the ordering of the authors based upon that value. A chi-squared distance measure would not violate these requirements, nor would the cosine coefficient. It is also argued that co-citation data is ordinal data since there is no assurance of an absolute zero number of co-citations, and thus Pearson is not appropriate. The number of ties in co-citation data make the use of the Spearman rank order coefficient problematic.
    Date
    9. 7.2006 10:22:35
  17. Daquino, M.; Peroni, S.; Shotton, D.; Colavizza, G.; Ghavimi, B.; Lauscher, A.; Mayr, P.; Romanello, M.; Zumstein, P.: ¬The OpenCitations Data Model (2020) 0.00 
    0.0034988632 = product of:
  0.03498863 = sum of:
    0.03498863 = weight(_text_:web in 38) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03498863 = score(doc=38,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.37471575 = fieldWeight in 38, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=38)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)
    Abstract
    A variety of schemas and ontologies are currently used for the machine-readable description of bibliographic entities and citations. This diversity, and the reuse of the same ontology terms with different nuances, generates inconsistencies in data. Adoption of a single data model would facilitate data integration tasks regardless of the data supplier or context application. In this paper we present the OpenCitations Data Model (OCDM), a generic data model for describing bibliographic entities and citations, developed using Semantic Web technologies. We also evaluate the effective reusability of OCDM according to ontology evaluation practices, mention existing users of OCDM, and discuss the use and impact of OCDM in the wider open science community.
    Content
    Erschienen in: The Semantic Web - ISWC 2020, 19th International Semantic Web Conference, Athens, Greece, November 2-6, 2020, Proceedings, Part II. Vgl.: DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-62466-8_28.
  18. ¬The Web of knowledge : Festschrift in honor of Eugene Garfield (2000) 0.00 
    0.0033667826 = product of:
  0.033667825 = sum of:
    0.033667825 = weight(_text_:web in 461) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033667825 = score(doc=461,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.36057037 = fieldWeight in 461, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=461)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)
  19. Garfield, E.: Agony and ecstasy of the Internet : experiences of an information scientist qua publisher (1996) 0.00 
    0.0033329446 = product of:
  0.033329446 = sum of:
    0.033329446 = weight(_text_:web in 3044) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033329446 = score(doc=3044,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.35694647 = fieldWeight in 3044, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3044)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)
    Abstract
    Reports recent experiences with the publishing, via the Internet and WWW of ISI's biweekly newspaper, The Scientist; which was originally mounted on the NSFnet. Compares the use of the Internet for SDI by comparing Web searches via AltaVista with similar searches on CD-ROM. Predicts that future current awareness services and SDI services will be linked to electronic periodicals in electronic libraries. Concludes with a note on cited reference searching, a variation on the theme of hypertext searching, with particular reference to SCI and Web crawlers
  20. Trkulja, V.: Weltgrößte Abstracts- und Zitationsdatenbank aus dem wissenschaftlichen Web (2005) 0.00 
    0.0033329446 = product of:
  0.033329446 = sum of:
    0.033329446 = weight(_text_:web in 3437) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033329446 = score(doc=3437,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.0933738 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028611459 = queryNorm
        0.35694647 = fieldWeight in 3437, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3437)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)
    Abstract
    Scopus ist ein Such- und Navigationssystem für interdisziplinäre, wissenschaftliche Literatur. Die zur Zeit weltgrößte Abstract- & Zitationsdatenbank deckt 14.000 WTM-Titel von 4.000 Verlagen ab und liefert Ergebnisse aus dem wissenschaftlichen Web, inklusive Patentinformationen. Darüber hinaus unterstützt Scopus ein Volltext-Linking sowie eine erweiterte Bibliotheksintegration mit personalisierten Konfigurationsmöglichkeiten. Das neue Angebot ist überzeugend.

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 73
  • d 15

Types

  • a 82
  • el 7
  • m 3
  • r 1
  • s 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications