-
Yang, B.; Rousseau, R.; Wang, X.; Huang, S.: How important is scientific software in bioinformatics research? : a comparative study between international and Chinese research communities (2018)
0.00
0.0019603071 = product of:
0.022543533 = sum of:
0.008055268 = product of:
0.016110536 = sum of:
0.016110536 = weight(_text_:29 in 4461) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016110536 = score(doc=4461,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08290443 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 4461, 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=4461)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.014488265 = product of:
0.02897653 = sum of:
0.02897653 = weight(_text_:international in 4461) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02897653 = score(doc=4461,freq=8.0), product of:
0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.36856616 = fieldWeight in 4461, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4461)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.08695652 = coord(2/23)
- Abstract
- Software programs are among the most important tools in data-driven research. The popularity of well-known packages and corresponding large numbers of citations received bear testimony of the contribution of scientific software to academic research. Yet software is not generally recognized as an academic outcome. In this study, a usage-based model is proposed with varied indicators including citations, mentions, and downloads to measure the importance of scientific software. We performed an investigation on a sample of international bioinformatics research articles, and on a sample from the Chinese community. Our analysis shows that scientists in the field of bioinformatics rely heavily on scientific software: the major differences between the international community and the Chinese example being how scientific packages are mentioned in publications and the time gap between the introduction of a package and its use. Biologists publishing in international journals tend to apply the latest tools earlier; Chinese scientists publishing in Chinese tend to follow later. Further, journals with higher impact factors tend to publish articles applying the latest tools earlier.
- Date
- 29. 9.2018 12:36:19
-
Colebunders, R.; Kenyon, C.; Rousseau, R.: Increase in numbers and proportions of review articles in Tropical Medicine, Infectious Diseases, and oncology (2014)
0.00
0.0012504549 = product of:
0.028760463 = sum of:
0.028760463 = sum of:
0.0094278185 = weight(_text_:1 in 1189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0094278185 = score(doc=1189,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.16284466 = fieldWeight in 1189, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1189)
0.019332644 = weight(_text_:29 in 1189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019332644 = score(doc=1189,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08290443 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 1189, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1189)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Date
- 29. 1.2014 15:56:36
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.1, S.201-205
-
Egghe, L.; Guns, R.; Rousseau, R.; Leuven, K.U.: Erratum (2012)
0.00
6.94157E-4 = product of:
0.01596561 = sum of:
0.01596561 = product of:
0.03193122 = sum of:
0.03193122 = weight(_text_:22 in 4992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03193122 = score(doc=4992,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08253069 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4992, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4992)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Date
- 14. 2.2012 12:53:22
-
Rousseau, R.; Ding, J.: Does international collaboration yield a higher citation potential for US scientists publishing in highly visible interdisciplinary Journals? (2016)
0.00
6.2359346E-4 = product of:
0.01434265 = sum of:
0.01434265 = product of:
0.0286853 = sum of:
0.0286853 = weight(_text_:international in 2860) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0286853 = score(doc=2860,freq=4.0), product of:
0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.36486188 = fieldWeight in 2860, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2860)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Abstract
- Generally, multicountry papers receive more citations than single-country ones. In this contribution, we examine if this rule also applies to American scientists publishing in highly visible interdisciplinary journals. Concretely, we compare the citations received by American scientists in Nature, Science, and the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS). It is shown that, statistically, American scientists publishing in Nature and Science do not benefit from international collaboration. This statement also holds for communicated submissions, but not for direct and for contributed submissions, to PNAS.
-
Liu, Y.; Rousseau, R.: Citation analysis and the development of science : a case study using articles by some Nobel prize winners (2014)
0.00
5.603665E-4 = product of:
0.012888429 = sum of:
0.012888429 = product of:
0.025776858 = sum of:
0.025776858 = weight(_text_:29 in 1197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025776858 = score(doc=1197,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08290443 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 1197, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1197)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Date
- 29. 1.2014 16:31:35
-
Shi, D.; Rousseau, R.; Yang, L.; Li, J.: ¬A journal's impact factor is influenced by changes in publication delays of citing journals (2017)
0.00
4.2027488E-4 = product of:
0.009666322 = sum of:
0.009666322 = product of:
0.019332644 = sum of:
0.019332644 = weight(_text_:29 in 3441) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019332644 = score(doc=3441,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08290443 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 3441, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3441)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Date
- 16.11.2017 13:29:52
-
Rousseau, R.; Egghe, L.; Guns, R.: Becoming metric-wise : a bibliometric guide for researchers (2018)
0.00
3.149623E-4 = product of:
0.0072441325 = sum of:
0.0072441325 = product of:
0.014488265 = sum of:
0.014488265 = weight(_text_:international in 5226) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014488265 = score(doc=5226,freq=2.0), product of:
0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.18428308 = fieldWeight in 5226, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5226)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Abstract
- Aims to inform researchers about metrics so that they become aware of the evaluative techniques being applied to their scientific output. Understanding these concepts will help them during their funding initiatives, and in hiring and tenure. The book not only describes what indicators do (or are designed to do, which is not always the same thing), but also gives precise mathematical formulae so that indicators can be properly understood and evaluated. Metrics have become a critical issue in science, with widespread international discussion taking place on the subject across scientific journals and organizations. As researchers should know the publication-citation context, the mathematical formulae of indicators being used by evaluating committees and their consequences, and how such indicators might be misused, this book provides an ideal tome on the topic. Provides researchers with a detailed understanding of bibliometric indicators and their applications. Empowers researchers looking to understand the indicators relevant to their work and careers. Presents an informed and rounded picture of bibliometrics, including the strengths and shortcomings of particular indicators. Supplies the mathematics behind bibliometric indicators so they can be properly understood. Written by authors with longstanding expertise who are considered global leaders in the field of bibliometrics
-
Liu, Y.; Rafols, I.; Rousseau, R.: ¬A framework for knowledge integration and diffusion (2012)
0.00
2.0495258E-4 = product of:
0.0047139092 = sum of:
0.0047139092 = product of:
0.0094278185 = sum of:
0.0094278185 = weight(_text_:1 in 297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0094278185 = score(doc=297,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.16284466 = fieldWeight in 297, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=297)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Source
- Journal of documentation. 68(2012) no.1, S.31-44
