-
Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.: Introduction to informetrics : quantitative methods in library, documentation and information science (1990)
0.14
0.1387584 = product of:
0.378432 = sum of:
0.076796174 = weight(_text_:allgemeines in 1515) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.076796174 = score(doc=1515,freq=4.0), product of:
0.12306474 = queryWeight, product of:
5.705423 = idf(docFreq=399, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.62403065 = fieldWeight in 1515, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
5.705423 = idf(docFreq=399, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1515)
0.050997887 = weight(_text_:buch in 1515) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050997887 = score(doc=1515,freq=4.0), product of:
0.10028592 = queryWeight, product of:
4.64937 = idf(docFreq=1149, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.5085249 = fieldWeight in 1515, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.64937 = idf(docFreq=1149, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1515)
0.011589034 = weight(_text_:und in 1515) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011589034 = score(doc=1515,freq=4.0), product of:
0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.24241515 = fieldWeight in 1515, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1515)
0.033148594 = product of:
0.06629719 = sum of:
0.06629719 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 1515) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06629719 = score(doc=1515,freq=8.0), product of:
0.09615103 = queryWeight, product of:
4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.68951094 = fieldWeight in 1515, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1515)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.047873653 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 1515) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047873653 = score(doc=1515,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09716552 = queryWeight, product of:
4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.4927021 = fieldWeight in 1515, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1515)
0.06629719 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 1515) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06629719 = score(doc=1515,freq=8.0), product of:
0.09615103 = queryWeight, product of:
4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.68951094 = fieldWeight in 1515, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1515)
0.06629719 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 1515) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06629719 = score(doc=1515,freq=8.0), product of:
0.09615103 = queryWeight, product of:
4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.68951094 = fieldWeight in 1515, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1515)
0.0030866629 = weight(_text_:in in 1515) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0030866629 = score(doc=1515,freq=2.0), product of:
0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.10520181 = fieldWeight in 1515, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1515)
0.008784681 = product of:
0.026354041 = sum of:
0.026354041 = weight(_text_:l in 1515) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026354041 = score(doc=1515,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0857324 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.30739886 = fieldWeight in 1515, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1515)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.011589034 = weight(_text_:und in 1515) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011589034 = score(doc=1515,freq=4.0), product of:
0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.24241515 = fieldWeight in 1515, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1515)
0.0019719584 = weight(_text_:s in 1515) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0019719584 = score(doc=1515,freq=2.0), product of:
0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.08408674 = fieldWeight in 1515, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1515)
0.36666667 = coord(11/30)
- Classification
- AN 70400 Allgemeines / Buch- und Bibliothekswesen, Informationswissenschaft / Bibliothekswesen / Bibliotheksverwaltung / Bibliotheksanalyse, -statistik
- Pages
- XI,450 S
- RVK
- AN 70400 Allgemeines / Buch- und Bibliothekswesen, Informationswissenschaft / Bibliothekswesen / Bibliotheksverwaltung / Bibliotheksanalyse, -statistik
-
Impe, S. van; Rousseau, R.: Web-to-print citations and the humanities (2006)
0.00
0.0029805864 = product of:
0.022354396 = sum of:
0.0070240153 = weight(_text_:und in 82) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0070240153 = score(doc=82,freq=2.0), product of:
0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.14692576 = fieldWeight in 82, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=82)
0.005915991 = weight(_text_:in in 82) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.005915991 = score(doc=82,freq=10.0), product of:
0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.20163295 = fieldWeight in 82, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=82)
0.0070240153 = weight(_text_:und in 82) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0070240153 = score(doc=82,freq=2.0), product of:
0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.14692576 = fieldWeight in 82, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=82)
0.002390375 = weight(_text_:s in 82) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.002390375 = score(doc=82,freq=4.0), product of:
0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.101928525 = fieldWeight in 82, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=82)
0.13333334 = coord(4/30)
- Abstract
- References to printed documents made on the web are called web-to-print references. These printed documents then in turn receive web-to-print citations. Webto-print citations and web-to-print references are the topic of this article, in which we study the online impact of printed sources. Web-to-print citations are discussed from a structural point of view and a small-scale experiment related to web-to-print citations for local history journals is performed. The main research question in setting up this experiment concerns the possibility of using web-to-print citations as a substitute for classical citation indexes by gauging the importance, visibility and impact of journals in the humanities. Results show the importance of web bibliographies in the field, but, at least for what concerns the journals and the period studied here, the amount of received web-to-print citations is too small to draw general conclusions.
- Source
- Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 57(2006) H.8, S.422-426
-
Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.: Averaging and globalising quotients of informetric and scientometric data (1996)
0.00
0.0028971736 = product of:
0.0217288 = sum of:
0.003741601 = weight(_text_:in in 7659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.003741601 = score(doc=7659,freq=4.0), product of:
0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.12752387 = fieldWeight in 7659, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7659)
0.007529726 = product of:
0.022589177 = sum of:
0.022589177 = weight(_text_:l in 7659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022589177 = score(doc=7659,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0857324 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.26348472 = fieldWeight in 7659, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7659)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.0016902501 = weight(_text_:s in 7659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0016902501 = score(doc=7659,freq=2.0), product of:
0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 7659, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7659)
0.008767224 = product of:
0.017534448 = sum of:
0.017534448 = weight(_text_:22 in 7659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017534448 = score(doc=7659,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07553371 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 7659, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7659)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.13333334 = coord(4/30)
- Abstract
- It is possible, using ISI's Journal Citation Report (JCR), to calculate average impact factors (AIF) for LCR's subject categories but it can be more useful to know the global Impact Factor (GIF) of a subject category and compare the 2 values. Reports results of a study to compare the relationships between AIFs and GIFs of subjects, based on the particular case of the average impact factor of a subfield versus the impact factor of this subfield as a whole, the difference being studied between an average of quotients, denoted as AQ, and a global average, obtained as a quotient of averages, and denoted as GQ. In the case of impact factors, AQ becomes the average impact factor of a field, and GQ becomes its global impact factor. Discusses a number of applications of this technique in the context of informetrics and scientometrics
- Source
- Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.3, S.165-170
-
Egghe, L.; Liang, L.; Rousseau, R.: ¬A relation between h-index and impact factor in the power-law model (2009)
0.00
0.0022561864 = product of:
0.022561863 = sum of:
0.006110009 = weight(_text_:in in 6759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.006110009 = score(doc=6759,freq=6.0), product of:
0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.2082456 = fieldWeight in 6759, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6759)
0.014198188 = product of:
0.042594563 = sum of:
0.042594563 = weight(_text_:l in 6759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042594563 = score(doc=6759,freq=4.0), product of:
0.0857324 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.49683157 = fieldWeight in 6759, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6759)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.002253667 = weight(_text_:s in 6759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.002253667 = score(doc=6759,freq=2.0), product of:
0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.09609913 = fieldWeight in 6759, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6759)
0.1 = coord(3/30)
- Abstract
- Using a power-law model, the two best-known topics in citation analysis, namely the impact factor and the Hirsch index, are unified into one relation (not a function). The validity of our model is, at least in a qualitative way, confirmed by real data.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.11, S.2362-2365
-
Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.: Duality in information retrieval and the hypegeometric distribution (1997)
0.00
0.0019348533 = product of:
0.019348532 = sum of:
0.00705523 = weight(_text_:in in 647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.00705523 = score(doc=647,freq=8.0), product of:
0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.24046129 = fieldWeight in 647, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=647)
0.010039635 = product of:
0.030118903 = sum of:
0.030118903 = weight(_text_:l in 647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030118903 = score(doc=647,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0857324 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.35131297 = fieldWeight in 647, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=647)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.002253667 = weight(_text_:s in 647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.002253667 = score(doc=647,freq=2.0), product of:
0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.09609913 = fieldWeight in 647, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=647)
0.1 = coord(3/30)
- Abstract
- Asserts that duality is an important topic in informetrics, especially in connection with the classical informetric laws. Yet this concept is less studied in information retrieval. It deals with the unification or symmetry between queries and documents, search formulation versus indexing, and relevant versus retrieved documents. Elaborates these ideas and highlights the connection with the hypergeometric distribution
- Source
- Journal of documentation. 53(1997) no.5, S.499-496
-
Egghe, L.; Liang, L.; Rousseau, R.: Fundamental properties of rhythm sequences (2008)
0.00
0.0018760574 = product of:
0.018760573 = sum of:
0.004365201 = weight(_text_:in in 1965) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004365201 = score(doc=1965,freq=4.0), product of:
0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.14877784 = fieldWeight in 1965, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1965)
0.012423414 = product of:
0.03727024 = sum of:
0.03727024 = weight(_text_:l in 1965) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03727024 = score(doc=1965,freq=4.0), product of:
0.0857324 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.4347276 = fieldWeight in 1965, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1965)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.0019719584 = weight(_text_:s in 1965) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0019719584 = score(doc=1965,freq=2.0), product of:
0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.08408674 = fieldWeight in 1965, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1965)
0.1 = coord(3/30)
- Abstract
- Fundamental mathematical properties of rhythm sequences are studied. In particular, a set of three axioms for valid rhythm indicators is proposed, and it is shown that the R-indicator satisfies only two out of three but that the R-indicator satisfies all three. This fills a critical, logical gap in the study of these indicator sequences. Matrices leading to a constant R-sequence are called baseline matrices. They are characterized as matrices with constant w-year diachronous impact factors. The relation with classical impact factors is clarified. Using regression analysis matrices with a rhythm sequence that is on average equal to 1 (smaller than 1, larger than 1) are characterized.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.9, S.1469-1478
-
Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.; Rousseau, S.: TOP-curves (2007)
0.00
0.0018475441 = product of:
0.018475441 = sum of:
0.006901989 = weight(_text_:in in 50) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.006901989 = score(doc=50,freq=10.0), product of:
0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.23523843 = fieldWeight in 50, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=50)
0.008784681 = product of:
0.026354041 = sum of:
0.026354041 = weight(_text_:l in 50) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026354041 = score(doc=50,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0857324 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.30739886 = fieldWeight in 50, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=50)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.0027887707 = weight(_text_:s in 50) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0027887707 = score(doc=50,freq=4.0), product of:
0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.118916616 = fieldWeight in 50, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=50)
0.1 = coord(3/30)
- Abstract
- Several characteristics of classical Lorenz curves make them unsuitable for the study of a group of topperformers. TOP-curves, defined as a kind of mirror image of TIP-curves used in poverty studies, are shown to possess the properties necessary for adequate empirical ranking of various data arrays, based on the properties of the highest performers (i.e., the core). TOP-curves and essential TOP-curves, also introduced in this article, simultaneously represent the incidence, intensity, and inequality among the top. It is shown that TOPdominance partial order, introduced in this article, is stronger than Lorenz dominance order. In this way, this article contributes to the study of cores, a central issue in applied informetrics.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.6, S.777-785
-
Asonuma, A.; Fang, Y.; Rousseau, R.: Reflections on the age distribution of Japanese scientists (2006)
0.00
0.0018394608 = product of:
0.018394608 = sum of:
0.007937134 = weight(_text_:in in 5270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.007937134 = score(doc=5270,freq=18.0), product of:
0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.27051896 = fieldWeight in 5270, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5270)
0.0016902501 = weight(_text_:s in 5270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0016902501 = score(doc=5270,freq=2.0), product of:
0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 5270, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5270)
0.008767224 = product of:
0.017534448 = sum of:
0.017534448 = weight(_text_:22 in 5270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017534448 = score(doc=5270,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07553371 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5270, 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=5270)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.1 = coord(3/30)
- Abstract
- The age distribution of a country's scientists is an important element in the study of its research capacity. In this article we investigate the age distribution of Japanese scientists in order to find out whether major events such as World War II had an appreciable effect on its features. Data have been obtained from population censuses taken in Japan from 1970 to 1995. A comparison with the situation in China and the United States has been made. We find that the group of scientific researchers outside academia is dominated by the young: those younger than age 35. The personnel group in higher education, on the other hand, is dominated by the baby boomers: those who were born after World War II. Contrary to the Chinese situation we could not find any influence of major nondemographic events. The only influence we found was the increase in enrollment of university students after World War II caused by the reform of the Japanese university system. Female participation in the scientific and university systems in Japan, though still low, is increasing.
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 15:26:24
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.3, S.342-346
-
Zhang, L.; Rousseau, R.; Glänzel, W.: Document-type country profiles (2011)
0.00
0.0017282102 = product of:
0.017282102 = sum of:
0.004988801 = weight(_text_:in in 4487) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004988801 = score(doc=4487,freq=4.0), product of:
0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.17003182 = fieldWeight in 4487, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4487)
0.010039635 = product of:
0.030118903 = sum of:
0.030118903 = weight(_text_:l in 4487) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030118903 = score(doc=4487,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0857324 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.35131297 = fieldWeight in 4487, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4487)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.002253667 = weight(_text_:s in 4487) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.002253667 = score(doc=4487,freq=2.0), product of:
0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.09609913 = fieldWeight in 4487, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4487)
0.1 = coord(3/30)
- Abstract
- A bibliometric method for analyzing and visualizing national research profiles is adapted to describe national preferences for publishing particular document types. Similarities in national profiles and national peculiarities are discussed based on the publication output of the 26 most active countries indexed in the Web of Science annual volume 2007.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.7, S.1403-1411
-
Jin, B.; Li, L.; Rousseau, R.: Long-term influences of interventions in the normal development of science : China and the cultural revolution (2004)
0.00
0.0015836091 = product of:
0.015836092 = sum of:
0.005915991 = weight(_text_:in in 2232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.005915991 = score(doc=2232,freq=10.0), product of:
0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.20163295 = fieldWeight in 2232, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2232)
0.007529726 = product of:
0.022589177 = sum of:
0.022589177 = weight(_text_:l in 2232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022589177 = score(doc=2232,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0857324 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.26348472 = fieldWeight in 2232, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2232)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.002390375 = weight(_text_:s in 2232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.002390375 = score(doc=2232,freq=4.0), product of:
0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.101928525 = fieldWeight in 2232, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2232)
0.1 = coord(3/30)
- Abstract
- Intellectual and technological talents and skills are the driving force for scientific and industrial development, especially in our times characterized by a knowledgebased economy. Major events in society and related political decisions, however, can have a long-term effect an a country's scientific weIl-being. Although the Cultural Revolution took place from 1966 to 1976, its aftermath can still be felt. This is shown by this study of the production and productivity of Chinese scientists as a function of their age. Based an the 1995-2000 data from the Chinese Science Citation database (CSCD), this article investigates the year-by-year age distribution of scientific and technological personnel publishing in China. It is shown that the "Talent Fault" originating during the Cultural Revolution still exists, and that a new gap resulting from recent brain drain might be developing. The purpose of this work is to provide necessary information about the current situation and especially the existing problems of the S&T workforce in China.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 55(2004) no.6, S.544-550
-
Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.: ¬The influence of publication delays on the observed aging distribution of scientific literature (2000)
0.00
0.0015820917 = product of:
0.015820917 = sum of:
0.003527615 = weight(_text_:in in 4385) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.003527615 = score(doc=4385,freq=2.0), product of:
0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.120230645 = fieldWeight in 4385, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4385)
0.010039635 = product of:
0.030118903 = sum of:
0.030118903 = weight(_text_:l in 4385) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030118903 = score(doc=4385,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0857324 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.35131297 = fieldWeight in 4385, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4385)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.002253667 = weight(_text_:s in 4385) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.002253667 = score(doc=4385,freq=2.0), product of:
0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.09609913 = fieldWeight in 4385, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4385)
0.1 = coord(3/30)
- Abstract
- Observed aging curves are influenced by publication delays. In this article, we show how the 'undisturbed' aging function and the publication delay combine to give the observed aging function. This combination is performed by a mathematical operation known as convolution. Examples are given, such as the convolution of 2 Poisson distributions, 2 exponential distributions, a 2 lognormal distributions. A paradox is observed between theory and real data
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 51(2000) no.2, S.158-165
-
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
0.0014511398 = product of:
0.014511398 = sum of:
0.0052914224 = weight(_text_:in in 3441) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0052914224 = score(doc=3441,freq=8.0), product of:
0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 3441, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3441)
0.007529726 = product of:
0.022589177 = sum of:
0.022589177 = weight(_text_:l in 3441) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022589177 = score(doc=3441,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0857324 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.26348472 = fieldWeight in 3441, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3441)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.0016902501 = weight(_text_:s in 3441) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0016902501 = score(doc=3441,freq=2.0), product of:
0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 3441, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3441)
0.1 = coord(3/30)
- Abstract
- In this article we describe another problem with journal impact factors by showing that one journal's impact factor is dependent on other journals' publication delays. The proposed theoretical model predicts a monotonically decreasing function of the impact factor as a function of publication delay, on condition that the citation curve of the journal is monotone increasing during the publication window used in the calculation of the journal impact factor; otherwise, this function has a reversed U shape. Our findings based on simulations are verified by examining three journals in the information sciences: the Journal of Informetrics, Scientometrics, and the Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology.
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 68(2017) no.3, S.780-789
-
Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.: ¬The Hirsch index of a shifted Lotka function and its relation with the impact factor (2012)
0.00
0.0013843302 = product of:
0.013843302 = sum of:
0.0030866629 = weight(_text_:in in 243) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0030866629 = score(doc=243,freq=2.0), product of:
0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.10520181 = fieldWeight in 243, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=243)
0.008784681 = product of:
0.026354041 = sum of:
0.026354041 = weight(_text_:l in 243) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026354041 = score(doc=243,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0857324 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.30739886 = fieldWeight in 243, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=243)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.0019719584 = weight(_text_:s in 243) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0019719584 = score(doc=243,freq=2.0), product of:
0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.08408674 = fieldWeight in 243, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=243)
0.1 = coord(3/30)
- Abstract
- Based on earlier results about the shifted Lotka function, we prove an implicit functional relation between the Hirsch index (h-index) and the total number of sources (T). It is shown that the corresponding function, h(T), is concavely increasing. Next, we construct an implicit relation between the h-index and the impact factor IF (an average number of items per source). The corresponding function h(IF) is increasing and we show that if the parameter C in the numerator of the shifted Lotka function is high, then the relation between the h-index and the impact factor is almost linear.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.5, S.1048-1053
-
Egghe, L.; Guns, R.; Rousseau, R.: Thoughts on uncitedness : Nobel laureates and Fields medalists as case studies (2011)
0.00
0.0013661701 = product of:
0.013661701 = sum of:
0.003741601 = weight(_text_:in in 4994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.003741601 = score(doc=4994,freq=4.0), product of:
0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.12752387 = fieldWeight in 4994, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4994)
0.007529726 = product of:
0.022589177 = sum of:
0.022589177 = weight(_text_:l in 4994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022589177 = score(doc=4994,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0857324 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.26348472 = fieldWeight in 4994, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4994)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.002390375 = weight(_text_:s in 4994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.002390375 = score(doc=4994,freq=4.0), product of:
0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.101928525 = fieldWeight in 4994, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4994)
0.1 = coord(3/30)
- Abstract
- Contrary to what one might expect, Nobel laureates and Fields medalists have a rather large fraction (10% or more) of uncited publications. This is the case for (in total) 75 examined researchers from the fields of mathematics (Fields medalists), physics, chemistry, and physiology or medicine (Nobel laureates). We study several indicators for these researchers, including the h-index, total number of publications, average number of citations per publication, the number (and fraction) of uncited publications, and their interrelations. The most remarkable result is a positive correlation between the h-index and the number of uncited articles. We also present a Lotkaian model, which partially explains the empirically found regularities.
- Footnote
- Vgl.: Erratum. In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.2, S.429.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.8, S.1637-1644
-
Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.: Aging, obsolescence, impact, growth, and utilization : definitions and relations (2000)
0.00
0.0012961577 = product of:
0.012961577 = sum of:
0.003741601 = weight(_text_:in in 5154) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.003741601 = score(doc=5154,freq=4.0), product of:
0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.12752387 = fieldWeight in 5154, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5154)
0.007529726 = product of:
0.022589177 = sum of:
0.022589177 = weight(_text_:l in 5154) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022589177 = score(doc=5154,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0857324 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.26348472 = fieldWeight in 5154, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5154)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.0016902501 = weight(_text_:s in 5154) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0016902501 = score(doc=5154,freq=2.0), product of:
0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 5154, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5154)
0.1 = coord(3/30)
- Abstract
- The notions aging, obsolescence, impact, growth, utilization, and their relations are studied. It is shown how to correct an observed citation distribution for growth, once the growth distribution is known. The relation of this correction procedure with the calculation of impact measures is explained. More interestingly, we have shown how the influence of growth on aging can be studied over a complete period as a whole. Here, the difference between the so-called average and global aging distributions is the main factor. Our main result is that growth can influence aging but that it does not cause aging. A short overview of some classical articles on this topic is given. Results of these earlier works are placed in the framework set up in this article
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 51(2000) no.11, S.1004-1017
-
Liang, L.; Rousseau, R.: Yield sequences as journal attractivity indicators : "payback times" for Science and Nature (2008)
0.00
0.0012961577 = product of:
0.012961577 = sum of:
0.003741601 = weight(_text_:in in 1737) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.003741601 = score(doc=1737,freq=4.0), product of:
0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.12752387 = fieldWeight in 1737, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1737)
0.007529726 = product of:
0.022589177 = sum of:
0.022589177 = weight(_text_:l in 1737) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022589177 = score(doc=1737,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0857324 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.26348472 = fieldWeight in 1737, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1737)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.0016902501 = weight(_text_:s in 1737) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0016902501 = score(doc=1737,freq=2.0), product of:
0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 1737, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1737)
0.1 = coord(3/30)
- Abstract
- Purpose - The yield period of a journal is defined as the time needed to accumulate the same number of citations as the number of references included during the period of study. Yield sequences are proposed as journal attractivity indicators describing dynamic characteristics of a journal. This paper aims to investigate their use. Design/methodology/approach - As a case study the yield sequences of the journals Nature and Science from 1955 onward are determined. Similarities and dissimilarities between these sequences are discussed and factors affecting yield periods are determined. Findings - The study finds that yield sequences make dynamic aspects of a journal visible, as reflected through citations. Exceptional circumstances (here the publication of Laemmli's paper in 1970 in the journal Nature) become clearly visible. The average number of references per article, the citation distribution and the size of the database used to collect citations are factors influencing yield sequences. Originality/value - A new dynamic indicator for the study of journals is introduced.
- Source
- Journal of documentation. 64(2008) no.2, S.229-245
-
Rousseau, R.; Egghe, L.; Guns, R.: Becoming metric-wise : a bibliometric guide for researchers (2018)
0.00
0.001267627 = product of:
0.01267627 = sum of:
0.004409519 = weight(_text_:in in 5226) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004409519 = score(doc=5226,freq=8.0), product of:
0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.15028831 = fieldWeight in 5226, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5226)
0.006274772 = product of:
0.018824315 = sum of:
0.018824315 = weight(_text_:l in 5226) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018824315 = score(doc=5226,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0857324 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.2195706 = fieldWeight in 5226, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5226)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.001991979 = weight(_text_:s in 5226) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.001991979 = score(doc=5226,freq=4.0), product of:
0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.08494043 = fieldWeight in 5226, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5226)
0.1 = coord(3/30)
- 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
- Footnote
- Rez. in: JASIST 70(2019) no.5, S.530-532 (I. Dorsch)
- Pages
- xv, 385 S
-
Zhang, L.; Rousseau, R.; Glänzel, W.: Diversity of references as an indicator of the interdisciplinarity of journals : taking similarity between subject fields into account (2016)
0.00
0.0012613306 = product of:
0.012613306 = sum of:
0.004929992 = weight(_text_:in in 2902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004929992 = score(doc=2902,freq=10.0), product of:
0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.16802745 = fieldWeight in 2902, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2902)
0.006274772 = product of:
0.018824315 = sum of:
0.018824315 = weight(_text_:l in 2902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018824315 = score(doc=2902,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0857324 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.2195706 = fieldWeight in 2902, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2902)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.0014085418 = weight(_text_:s in 2902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0014085418 = score(doc=2902,freq=2.0), product of:
0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 2902, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2902)
0.1 = coord(3/30)
- Abstract
- The objective of this article is to further the study of journal interdisciplinarity, or, more generally, knowledge integration at the level of individual articles. Interdisciplinarity is operationalized by the diversity of subject fields assigned to cited items in the article's reference list. Subject fields and subfields were obtained from the Leuven-Budapest (ECOOM) subject-classification scheme, while disciplinary diversity was measured taking variety, balance, and disparity into account. As diversity measure we use a Hill-type true diversity in the sense of Jost and Leinster-Cobbold. The analysis is conducted in 3 steps. In the first part, the properties of this measure are discussed, and, on the basis of these properties it is shown that the measure has the potential to serve as an indicator of interdisciplinarity. In the second part the applicability of this indicator is shown using selected journals from several research fields ranging from mathematics to social sciences. Finally, the often-heard argument, namely, that interdisciplinary research exhibits larger visibility and impact, is studied on the basis of these selected journals. Yet, as only 7 journals, representing a total of 15,757 articles, are studied, albeit chosen to cover a large range of interdisciplinarity, further research is still needed.
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.5, S.1257-1265
-
Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.; Hooydonk, G. van: Methods for accrediting publications to authors or countries : consequences for evaluation studies (2000)
0.00
0.0011865686 = product of:
0.011865687 = sum of:
0.0026457112 = weight(_text_:in in 4384) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0026457112 = score(doc=4384,freq=2.0), product of:
0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.09017298 = fieldWeight in 4384, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4384)
0.007529726 = product of:
0.022589177 = sum of:
0.022589177 = weight(_text_:l in 4384) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022589177 = score(doc=4384,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0857324 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.26348472 = fieldWeight in 4384, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4384)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.0016902501 = weight(_text_:s in 4384) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0016902501 = score(doc=4384,freq=2.0), product of:
0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 4384, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4384)
0.1 = coord(3/30)
- Abstract
- One aim of science evaluation studies is to determine quantitatively the contribution of different players (authors, departments, countries) to the whole system. This information is then used to study the evolution of the system, for instance to gauge the results of special national or international programs. Taking articles as our basic data, we want to determine the exact relative contribution of each coauthor or each country. These numbers are brought together to obtain country scores, or department scores, etc. It turns out, as we will show in this article, that different scoring methods can yield totally different rankings. Conseqeuntly, a ranking between countries, universities, research groups or authors, based on one particular accrediting methods does not contain an absolute truth about their relative importance
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 51(2000) no.2, S.145-157
-
Ahlgren, P.; Jarneving, B.; Rousseau, R.: Requirements for a cocitation similarity measure, with special reference to Pearson's correlation coefficient (2003)
0.00
0.0010026655 = product of:
0.010026654 = sum of:
0.0030550044 = weight(_text_:in in 5171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0030550044 = score(doc=5171,freq=6.0), product of:
0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.1041228 = fieldWeight in 5171, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5171)
0.0011268335 = weight(_text_:s in 5171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0011268335 = score(doc=5171,freq=2.0), product of:
0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.048049565 = fieldWeight in 5171, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5171)
0.005844816 = product of:
0.011689632 = sum of:
0.011689632 = weight(_text_:22 in 5171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011689632 = score(doc=5171,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07553371 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = 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)
0.1 = coord(3/30)
- 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
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 54(2003) no.6, S.549-568
