-
D'Angelo, C.A.; Giuffrida, C.; Abramo, G.: ¬A heuristic approach to author name disambiguation in bibliometrics databases for large-scale research assessments (2011)
0.02
0.022521732 = product of:
0.056304332 = sum of:
0.009138121 = weight(_text_:a in 4190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009138121 = score(doc=4190,freq=10.0), product of:
0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 4190, 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=4190)
0.04716621 = sum of:
0.009472587 = weight(_text_:information in 4190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009472587 = score(doc=4190,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4190, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4190)
0.037693623 = weight(_text_:22 in 4190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.037693623 = score(doc=4190,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4190, 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=4190)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- National exercises for the evaluation of research activity by universities are becoming regular practice in ever more countries. These exercises have mainly been conducted through the application of peer-review methods. Bibliometrics has not been able to offer a valid large-scale alternative because of almost overwhelming difficulties in identifying the true author of each publication. We will address this problem by presenting a heuristic approach to author name disambiguation in bibliometric datasets for large-scale research assessments. The application proposed concerns the Italian university system, comprising 80 universities and a research staff of over 60,000 scientists. The key advantage of the proposed approach is the ease of implementation. The algorithms are of practical application and have considerably better scalability and expandability properties than state-of-the-art unsupervised approaches. Moreover, the performance in terms of precision and recall, which can be further improved, seems thoroughly adequate for the typical needs of large-scale bibliometric research assessments.
- Date
- 22. 1.2011 13:06:52
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.2, S.257-269
- Type
- a
-
Abramo, G.; D'Angelo, C.A.: ¬The VQR, Italy's second national research assessment : methodological failures and ranking distortions (2015)
0.01
0.006334501 = product of:
0.015836252 = sum of:
0.009138121 = weight(_text_:a in 2256) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009138121 = score(doc=2256,freq=10.0), product of:
0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 2256, 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=2256)
0.0066981306 = product of:
0.013396261 = sum of:
0.013396261 = weight(_text_:information in 2256) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013396261 = score(doc=2256,freq=4.0), product of:
0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 2256, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2256)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- The 2004-2010 VQR (Research Quality Evaluation), completed in July 2013, was Italy's second national research assessment exercise. The VQR performance evaluation followed a pattern also seen in other nations, as it was based on a selected subset of products. In this work, we identify the exercise's methodological weaknesses and measure the distortions that result from them in the university performance rankings. First, we create a scenario in which we assume the efficient selection of the products to be submitted by the universities and, from this, simulate a set of rankings applying the precise VQR rating criteria. Next, we compare these "VQR rankings" with those that would derive from the application of more-appropriate bibliometrics. Finally, we extend the comparison to university rankings based on the entire scientific production for the period, as indexed in the Web of Science.
- Series
- Advances in information science
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.11, S.2202-2214
- Type
- a
-
Abramo, G.; D'Angelo, C.A.; Viel, F.: ¬A robust benchmark for the h- and g-indexes (2010)
0.01
0.006219466 = product of:
0.015548665 = sum of:
0.010812371 = weight(_text_:a in 3470) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010812371 = score(doc=3470,freq=14.0), product of:
0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.20223314 = fieldWeight in 3470, 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=3470)
0.0047362936 = product of:
0.009472587 = sum of:
0.009472587 = weight(_text_:information in 3470) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009472587 = score(doc=3470,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 3470, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3470)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- The use of Hirsch's h-index as a joint proxy of the impact and productivity of a scientist's research work continues to gain ground, accompanied by the efforts of bibliometrists to resolve some of its critical issues through the application of a number of more or less sophisticated variants. However, the literature does not reveal any appreciable attempt to overcome the objective problems of measuring h-indexes on a large scale for purposes of comparative evaluation. Scientists may succeed in calculating their own h-indexes but, being unable to compare them to those of their peers, they are unable to obtain truly useful indications of their individual research performance. This study proposes to overcome this gap, measuring the h- and Egghe's g-indexes of all Italian university researchers in the hard sciences over a 5-year window. Descriptive statistics are provided concerning all of the 165 subject fields examined, offering robust benchmarks for those who wish to compare their individual performance to those of their colleagues in the same subject field.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.6, S.1275-1280
- Type
- a
-
Abramo, G.; D'Angelo, C.A.: ¬A decision support system for public research organizations participating in national research assessment exercises (2009)
0.01
0.005182888 = product of:
0.012957219 = sum of:
0.009010308 = weight(_text_:a in 3123) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009010308 = score(doc=3123,freq=14.0), product of:
0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.1685276 = fieldWeight in 3123, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3123)
0.003946911 = product of:
0.007893822 = sum of:
0.007893822 = weight(_text_:information in 3123) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.007893822 = score(doc=3123,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 3123, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3123)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- We are witnessing a rapid trend toward the adoption of exercises for evaluation of national research systems, generally based on peer review. They respond to two main needs: stimulating higher efficiency in research activities by public laboratories, and realizing better allocative efficiency in government funding of such institutions. However, the peer review approach is typified by several limitations that raise doubts for the achievement of the ultimate objectives. In particular, subjectivity of judgment, which occurs during the step of selecting research outputs to be submitted for the evaluations, risks heavily distorting both the final ratings of the organizations evaluated and the ultimate funding they receive. These distortions become ever more relevant if the evaluation is limited to small samples of the scientific production of the research institutions. The objective of the current study is to propose a quantitative methodology based on bibliometric data that would provide a reliable support for the process of selecting the best products of a laboratory, and thus limit distortions. Benefits are twofold: single research institutions can maximize the probability of receiving a fair evaluation coherent with the real quality of their research. At the same time, broader adoptions of this approach could also provide strong advantages at the macroeconomic level, since it guarantees financial allocations based on the real value of the institutions under evaluation. In this study the proposed methodology was applied to the hard science sectors of the Italian university research system for the period 2004-2006.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.10, S.2095-2106
- Type
- a
-
Abramo, G.; D'Angelo, C.A.; Di Costa, F.: ¬A new approach to measure the scientific strengths of territories (2015)
0.00
0.004725861 = product of:
0.011814652 = sum of:
0.007078358 = weight(_text_:a in 1852) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.007078358 = score(doc=1852,freq=6.0), product of:
0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 1852, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1852)
0.0047362936 = product of:
0.009472587 = sum of:
0.009472587 = weight(_text_:information in 1852) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009472587 = score(doc=1852,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 1852, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1852)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- The current work applies a method for mapping the supply of new knowledge from public research organizations, in this case from Italian institutions at the level of regions and provinces (NUTS2 and NUTS3). Through the analysis of scientific production indexed in the Web of Science for the years 2006-2010, the new knowledge is classified in subject categories and mapped according to an algorithm for the reconciliation of authors' affiliations. Unlike other studies in the literature based on simple counting of publications, the present study adopts an indicator, Scientific Strength, which takes account of both the quantity of scientific production and its impact on the advancement of knowledge. The differences in the results that arise from the 2 approaches are examined. The results of works of this kind can inform public research policies, at national and local levels, as well as the localization strategies of research-based companies.
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.6, S.1167-1177
- Type
- a
-
Abramo, G.; D'Angelo, C.A.; Costa, F. Di: Identifying interdisciplinarity through the disciplinary classification of coauthors of scientific publications (2012)
0.00
0.003529194 = product of:
0.008822985 = sum of:
0.004086692 = weight(_text_:a in 491) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004086692 = score(doc=491,freq=2.0), product of:
0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.07643694 = fieldWeight in 491, 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=491)
0.0047362936 = product of:
0.009472587 = sum of:
0.009472587 = weight(_text_:information in 491) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009472587 = score(doc=491,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 491, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=491)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.11, S.2206-2222
- Type
- a
-
Abramo, G.; D'Angelo, C.A.; Viel, F.: Assessing the accuracy of the h- and g-indexes for measuring researchers' productivity (2013)
0.00
0.003529194 = product of:
0.008822985 = sum of:
0.004086692 = weight(_text_:a in 957) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004086692 = score(doc=957,freq=2.0), product of:
0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.07643694 = fieldWeight in 957, 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=957)
0.0047362936 = product of:
0.009472587 = sum of:
0.009472587 = weight(_text_:information in 957) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009472587 = score(doc=957,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 957, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=957)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.6, S.1224-1234
- Type
- a
-
Abramo, G.; D'Angelo, C.A.; Di Costa, F.: Testing the trade-off between productivity and quality in research activities (2009)
0.00
0.002940995 = product of:
0.007352487 = sum of:
0.0034055763 = weight(_text_:a in 3317) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0034055763 = score(doc=3317,freq=2.0), product of:
0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.06369744 = fieldWeight in 3317, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3317)
0.003946911 = product of:
0.007893822 = sum of:
0.007893822 = weight(_text_:information in 3317) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.007893822 = score(doc=3317,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046368346 = queryNorm
0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 3317, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3317)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.1, S.132-140
- Type
- a
