-
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
0.003224636 = product of:
0.03224636 = sum of:
0.0073510436 = product of:
0.014702087 = sum of:
0.014702087 = weight(_text_:29 in 3441) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014702087 = score(doc=3441,freq=2.0), product of:
0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = 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)
0.012739129 = weight(_text_:u in 3441) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012739129 = score(doc=3441,freq=2.0), product of:
0.058687534 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.21706703 = fieldWeight in 3441, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3441)
0.012156183 = product of:
0.018234273 = sum of:
0.003532186 = weight(_text_:a in 3441) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.003532186 = score(doc=3441,freq=10.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 3441, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3441)
0.014702087 = weight(_text_:29 in 3441) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014702087 = score(doc=3441,freq=2.0), product of:
0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
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.
- Date
- 16.11.2017 13:29:52
- Type
- a
-
Rousseau, R.: Timelines in citation research (2006)
0.00
0.0016867955 = product of:
0.025301931 = sum of:
0.0098013915 = product of:
0.019602783 = sum of:
0.019602783 = weight(_text_:29 in 1746) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019602783 = score(doc=1746,freq=2.0), product of:
0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 1746, 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=1746)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.01550054 = product of:
0.023250809 = sum of:
0.0036480257 = weight(_text_:a in 1746) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0036480257 = score(doc=1746,freq=6.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.17652355 = fieldWeight in 1746, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1746)
0.019602783 = weight(_text_:29 in 1746) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019602783 = score(doc=1746,freq=2.0), product of:
0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 1746, 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=1746)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
- Abstract
- The timeline used in ISI's Journal Citation Reports (JCR; Thomson ISI, formerly the Institute for Scientific Information, Philadelphia, PA) for half-life calculations, is not a timeline for (average) cited age. These two timelines are shifted over half a year.
- Date
- 18. 8.2006 14:29:40
- Type
- a
-
Liu, Y.; Rousseau, R.: Citation analysis and the development of science : a case study using articles by some Nobel prize winners (2014)
0.00
0.0016570432 = product of:
0.024855647 = sum of:
0.0098013915 = product of:
0.019602783 = sum of:
0.019602783 = weight(_text_:29 in 1197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019602783 = score(doc=1197,freq=2.0), product of:
0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = 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)
0.015054256 = product of:
0.022581384 = sum of:
0.0029786006 = weight(_text_:a in 1197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0029786006 = score(doc=1197,freq=4.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 1197, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1197)
0.019602783 = weight(_text_:29 in 1197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019602783 = score(doc=1197,freq=2.0), product of:
0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
- Date
- 29. 1.2014 16:31:35
- Type
- a
-
Frandsen, T.F.; Rousseau, R.: Article impact calculated over arbitrary periods (2005)
0.00
0.0013292441 = product of:
0.01993866 = sum of:
0.0073510436 = product of:
0.014702087 = sum of:
0.014702087 = weight(_text_:29 in 3264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014702087 = score(doc=3264,freq=2.0), product of:
0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 3264, 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=3264)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.012587617 = product of:
0.018881425 = sum of:
0.0041793385 = weight(_text_:a in 3264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0041793385 = score(doc=3264,freq=14.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.20223314 = fieldWeight in 3264, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3264)
0.014702087 = weight(_text_:29 in 3264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014702087 = score(doc=3264,freq=2.0), product of:
0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 3264, 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=3264)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
- Abstract
- In this paper we address the various formulations of impact of articles, usually groups of articles as gauged by citations that these articles receive over a certain period of time. The journal impact factor, as published by ISI (Philadelphia, PA), is the best-known example of a formulation of impact of journals (considered as a set of articles) but many others have been defined in the literature. Impact factors have varying publication and citation periods and the chosen length of these periods enables, e.g., a distinction between synchronous and diachronous impact factors. It is shown how an impact factor for the general case can be defined. Two alternatives for a general impact factor are proposed, depending an whether different publication years are seen as a whole, and hence treating each one of them differently, or by operating with citation periods of identical length but allowing each publication period different starting points.
- Date
- 20. 3.2005 10:29:08
- Type
- a
-
Liang, L.; Rousseau, R.: Yield sequences as journal attractivity indicators : "payback times" for Science and Nature (2008)
0.00
0.0013154654 = product of:
0.01973198 = sum of:
0.0073510436 = product of:
0.014702087 = sum of:
0.014702087 = weight(_text_:29 in 1737) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014702087 = score(doc=1737,freq=2.0), product of:
0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 1737, 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=1737)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.012380935 = product of:
0.018571403 = sum of:
0.0038693151 = weight(_text_:a in 1737) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0038693151 = score(doc=1737,freq=12.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.18723148 = fieldWeight in 1737, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1737)
0.014702087 = weight(_text_:29 in 1737) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014702087 = score(doc=1737,freq=2.0), product of:
0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 1737, 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=1737)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
- 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.
- Date
- 21. 3.2008 14:29:54
- Type
- a
-
Colebunders, R.; Kenyon, C.; Rousseau, R.: Increase in numbers and proportions of review articles in Tropical Medicine, Infectious Diseases, and oncology (2014)
0.00
0.0012137021 = product of:
0.018205531 = sum of:
0.0073510436 = product of:
0.014702087 = sum of:
0.014702087 = weight(_text_:29 in 1189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014702087 = score(doc=1189,freq=2.0), product of:
0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.010854486 = product of:
0.01628173 = sum of:
0.0015796415 = weight(_text_:a in 1189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0015796415 = score(doc=1189,freq=2.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.07643694 = fieldWeight in 1189, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1189)
0.014702087 = weight(_text_:29 in 1189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014702087 = score(doc=1189,freq=2.0), product of:
0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
- Date
- 29. 1.2014 15:56:36
- Type
- a
-
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
0.0010962212 = product of:
0.016443316 = sum of:
0.00612587 = product of:
0.01225174 = sum of:
0.01225174 = weight(_text_:29 in 4461) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01225174 = score(doc=4461,freq=2.0), product of:
0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = 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)
0.010317447 = product of:
0.01547617 = sum of:
0.0032244297 = weight(_text_:a in 4461) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0032244297 = score(doc=4461,freq=12.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.15602624 = fieldWeight in 4461, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4461)
0.01225174 = weight(_text_:29 in 4461) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01225174 = score(doc=4461,freq=2.0), product of:
0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
- 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
- Type
- a
-
Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.: Introduction to informetrics : quantitative methods in library, documentation and information science (1990)
0.00
9.52913E-4 = product of:
0.014293695 = sum of:
0.008576217 = product of:
0.017152434 = sum of:
0.017152434 = weight(_text_:29 in 1515) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017152434 = score(doc=1515,freq=2.0), product of:
0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 1515, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1515)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.005717478 = product of:
0.017152434 = sum of:
0.017152434 = weight(_text_:29 in 1515) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017152434 = score(doc=1515,freq=2.0), product of:
0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 1515, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1515)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
- Date
- 29. 2.2008 19:02:46
-
Egghe, L.; Guns, R.; Rousseau, R.; Leuven, K.U.: Erratum (2012)
0.00
5.981287E-4 = product of:
0.017943861 = sum of:
0.017943861 = product of:
0.02691579 = sum of:
0.0026327355 = weight(_text_:a in 4992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0026327355 = score(doc=4992,freq=2.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 4992, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4992)
0.024283055 = weight(_text_:22 in 4992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024283055 = score(doc=4992,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06276294 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
- Date
- 14. 2.2012 12:53:22
- Type
- a
-
Impe, S. van; Rousseau, R.: Web-to-print citations and the humanities (2006)
0.00
4.3498748E-4 = product of:
0.006524812 = sum of:
0.0054717176 = product of:
0.010943435 = sum of:
0.010943435 = weight(_text_:online in 82) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010943435 = score(doc=82,freq=2.0), product of:
0.05439423 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.20118743 = fieldWeight in 82, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=82)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.0010530944 = product of:
0.003159283 = sum of:
0.003159283 = weight(_text_:a in 82) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.003159283 = score(doc=82,freq=8.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 82, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=82)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
- 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.
- Type
- a
-
Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.: Averaging and globalising quotients of informetric and scientometric data (1996)
0.00
4.2908353E-4 = product of:
0.012872505 = sum of:
0.012872505 = product of:
0.019308757 = sum of:
0.004738924 = weight(_text_:a in 7659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004738924 = score(doc=7659,freq=18.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.22931081 = fieldWeight in 7659, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7659)
0.014569832 = weight(_text_:22 in 7659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014569832 = score(doc=7659,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06276294 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
- 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
- Type
- a
-
Asonuma, A.; Fang, Y.; Rousseau, R.: Reflections on the age distribution of Japanese scientists (2006)
0.00
3.9398036E-4 = product of:
0.01181941 = sum of:
0.01181941 = product of:
0.017729115 = sum of:
0.003159283 = weight(_text_:a in 5270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.003159283 = score(doc=5270,freq=8.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 5270, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5270)
0.014569832 = weight(_text_:22 in 5270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014569832 = score(doc=5270,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06276294 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
- 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
- Type
- a
-
Ahlgren, P.; Jarneving, B.; Rousseau, R.: Requirements for a cocitation similarity measure, with special reference to Pearson's correlation coefficient (2003)
0.00
2.6817806E-4 = product of:
0.008045342 = sum of:
0.008045342 = product of:
0.012068012 = sum of:
0.0023547905 = weight(_text_:a in 5171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0023547905 = score(doc=5171,freq=10.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.11394546 = fieldWeight in 5171, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5171)
0.009713221 = weight(_text_:22 in 5171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009713221 = score(doc=5171,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06276294 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = 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)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
- 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
- Type
- a
-
Rousseau, R.: Bradford curves (1994)
0.00
7.02063E-5 = product of:
0.0021061888 = sum of:
0.0021061888 = product of:
0.006318566 = sum of:
0.006318566 = weight(_text_:a in 7304) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.006318566 = score(doc=7304,freq=8.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.30574775 = fieldWeight in 7304, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=7304)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
- Abstract
- It is shown that generalized Leimkuhler functions give proper fits to a large variety of Bradford curves, including those exhibited a so-called Groos droop or a rising tail
- Type
- a
-
Rousseau, R.: ¬A table for estimating the exponent in Lotka's law (1993)
0.00
6.619113E-5 = product of:
0.0019857339 = sum of:
0.0019857339 = product of:
0.005957201 = sum of:
0.005957201 = weight(_text_:a in 5653) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.005957201 = score(doc=5653,freq=4.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.28826174 = fieldWeight in 5653, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5653)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
- Type
- a
-
Rousseau, R.: Use of an existing thesaurus in a knowledge based indexing and retrieval system (1991)
0.00
6.080043E-5 = product of:
0.0018240128 = sum of:
0.0018240128 = product of:
0.0054720384 = sum of:
0.0054720384 = weight(_text_:a in 3007) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0054720384 = score(doc=3007,freq=6.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.26478532 = fieldWeight in 3007, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3007)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
- Abstract
- A simple heuristic method is proposed to use an existing thesaurus for weighted indexing
- Type
- a
-
Rousseau, R.; Ye, F.Y.: ¬A proposal for a dynamic h-type index (2008)
0.00
5.7323196E-5 = product of:
0.0017196957 = sum of:
0.0017196957 = product of:
0.005159087 = sum of:
0.005159087 = weight(_text_:a in 2351) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.005159087 = score(doc=2351,freq=12.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.24964198 = fieldWeight in 2351, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2351)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
- Abstract
- A time-dependent h-type indicator is proposed. This indicator depends on the size of the h-core, the number of citations received, and recent change in the value of the h-index. As such, it tries to combine in a dynamic way older information about the source (e.g., a scientist or research institute that is evaluated) with recent information.
- Type
- a
-
Liu, Y.; Rafols, I.; Rousseau, R.: ¬A framework for knowledge integration and diffusion (2012)
0.00
5.5502947E-5 = product of:
0.0016650883 = sum of:
0.0016650883 = product of:
0.004995265 = sum of:
0.004995265 = weight(_text_:a in 297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004995265 = score(doc=297,freq=20.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.24171482 = fieldWeight in 297, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=297)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
- Abstract
- Purpose - This paper aims to introduce a general framework for the analysis of knowledge integration and diffusion using bibliometric data. Design/methodology/approach - The authors propose that in order to characterise knowledge integration and diffusion of a given issue (the source, for example articles on a topic or by an organisation, etc.), one has to choose a set of elements from the source (the intermediary set, for example references, keywords, etc.). This set can then be classified into categories (cats), thus making it possible to investigate its diversity. The set can also be characterised according to the coherence of a network associated to it. Findings - This framework allows a methodology to be developed to assess knowledge integration and diffusion. Such methodologies can be useful for a number of science policy issues, including the assessment of interdisciplinarity in research and dynamics of research networks. Originality/value - The main contribution of this article is to provide a simple and easy to use generalisation of an existing approach to study interdisciplinarity, bringing knowledge integration and knowledge diffusion together in one framework.
- Type
- a
-
Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.: Topological aspects of information retrieval (1998)
0.00
5.4176617E-5 = product of:
0.0016252984 = sum of:
0.0016252984 = product of:
0.004875895 = sum of:
0.004875895 = weight(_text_:a in 2157) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004875895 = score(doc=2157,freq=14.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.23593865 = fieldWeight in 2157, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2157)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
- Abstract
- Let (DS, DQ, sim) be a retrieval system consisting of a document space DS, a query space QS, and a function sim, expressing the similarity between a document and a query. Following D.M. Everett and S.C. Cater (1992), we introduce topologies on the document space. These topologies are generated by the similarity function sim and the query space QS. 3 topologies will be studied: the retrieval topology, the similarity topology and the (pseudo-)metric one. It is shown that the retrieval topology is the coarsest of the three, while the (pseudo-)metric is the strongest. These 3 topologies are generally different, reflecting distinct topological aspects of information retrieval. We present necessary and sufficient conditions for these topological aspects to be equal
- Type
- a
-
Rousseau, S.; Rousseau, R.: Interactions between journal attributes and authors' willingness to wait for editorial decisions (2012)
0.00
5.2654716E-5 = product of:
0.0015796414 = sum of:
0.0015796414 = product of:
0.004738924 = sum of:
0.004738924 = weight(_text_:a in 250) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004738924 = score(doc=250,freq=18.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.22931081 = fieldWeight in 250, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=250)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
- Abstract
- In this article, we report on a discrete choice experiment to determine the willingness-to-wait (WTW) in the context of journal submissions. Respondents to our survey are mostly active in the information sciences, including librarians. Besides WTW, other attributes included in the study are the quality of the editorial board, the quality of referee reports, the probability of being accepted, the ISI impact factor, and the standing of the journal among peers. Interaction effects originating from scientists' personal characteristics (age, region of origin, motivations to publish) with the WTW are highlighted. A difference was made between submitting a high quality article and a standard article. Among the interesting results obtained from our analysis we mention that for a high-quality article, researchers are willing to wait some 18 months longer for a journal with an ISI impact factor above 2 than for a journal without an impact factor, keeping all other factors constant. For a standard article, the WTW decreases to some 8 months. Gender had no effect on our conclusions.
- Type
- a
