Search (61 results, page 1 of 4)

  • × author_ss:"Bornmann, L."
  1. Marx, W.; Bornmann, L.: On the problems of dealing with bibliometric data (2014) 0.04 
    0.041002322 = product of:
  0.1025058 = sum of:
    0.008173384 = weight(_text_:a in 1239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008173384 = score(doc=1239,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 1239, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1239)
    0.09433242 = sum of:
      0.018945174 = weight(_text_:information in 1239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.018945174 = score(doc=1239,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046368346 = queryNorm
          0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 1239, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1239)
      0.07538725 = weight(_text_:22 in 1239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07538725 = score(doc=1239,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046368346 = queryNorm
          0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 1239, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1239)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Date
    18. 3.2014 19:13:22
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.4, S.866-867
    Type
    a
  2. Bornmann, L.; Mutz, R.: From P100 to P100' : a new citation-rank approach (2014) 0.03 
    0.02951445 = product of:
  0.073786125 = sum of:
    0.010897844 = weight(_text_:a in 1431) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010897844 = score(doc=1431,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 1431, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1431)
    0.06288828 = sum of:
      0.012630116 = weight(_text_:information in 1431) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.012630116 = score(doc=1431,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046368346 = queryNorm
          0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 1431, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1431)
      0.050258167 = weight(_text_:22 in 1431) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.050258167 = score(doc=1431,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046368346 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1431, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1431)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Properties of a percentile-based rating scale needed in bibliometrics are formulated. Based on these properties, P100 was recently introduced as a new citation-rank approach (Bornmann, Leydesdorff, & Wang, 2013). In this paper, we conceptualize P100 and propose an improvement which we call P100'. Advantages and disadvantages of citation-rank indicators are noted.
    Date
    22. 8.2014 17:05:18
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.9, S.1939-1943
    Type
    a
  3. Leydesdorff, L.; Bornmann, L.; Wagner, C.S.: ¬The relative influences of government funding and international collaboration on citation impact (2019) 0.02 
    0.022521732 = product of:
  0.056304332 = sum of:
    0.009138121 = weight(_text_:a in 4681) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009138121 = score(doc=4681,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 4681, 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=4681)
    0.04716621 = sum of:
      0.009472587 = weight(_text_:information in 4681) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.009472587 = score(doc=4681,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046368346 = queryNorm
          0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4681, 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=4681)
      0.037693623 = weight(_text_:22 in 4681) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.037693623 = score(doc=4681,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046368346 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4681, 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=4681)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    A recent publication in Nature reports that public R&D funding is only weakly correlated with the citation impact of a nation's articles as measured by the field-weighted citation index (FWCI; defined by Scopus). On the basis of the supplementary data, we up-scaled the design using Web of Science data for the decade 2003-2013 and OECD funding data for the corresponding decade assuming a 2-year delay (2001-2011). Using negative binomial regression analysis, we found very small coefficients, but the effects of international collaboration are positive and statistically significant, whereas the effects of government funding are negative, an order of magnitude smaller, and statistically nonsignificant (in two of three analyses). In other words, international collaboration improves the impact of research articles, whereas more government funding tends to have a small adverse effect when comparing OECD countries.
    Date
    8. 1.2019 18:22:45
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 70(2019) no.2, S.198-201
    Type
    a
  4. Bornmann, L.: How to analyze percentile citation impact data meaningfully in bibliometrics : the statistical analysis of distributions, percentile rank classes, and top-cited papers (2013) 0.02 
    0.020501161 = product of:
  0.0512529 = sum of:
    0.004086692 = weight(_text_:a in 656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004086692 = score(doc=656,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.07643694 = fieldWeight in 656, 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=656)
    0.04716621 = sum of:
      0.009472587 = weight(_text_:information in 656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.009472587 = score(doc=656,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046368346 = queryNorm
          0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 656, 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=656)
      0.037693623 = weight(_text_:22 in 656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.037693623 = score(doc=656,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046368346 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 656, 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=656)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Date
    22. 3.2013 19:44:17
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.3, S.587-595
    Type
    a
  5. Leydesdorff, L.; Bornmann, L.: How fractional counting of citations affects the impact factor : normalization in terms of differences in citation potentials among fields of science (2011) 0.02 
    0.020076003 = product of:
  0.050190005 = sum of:
    0.0076151006 = weight(_text_:a in 4186) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0076151006 = score(doc=4186,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.14243183 = fieldWeight in 4186, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4186)
    0.042574905 = sum of:
      0.011163551 = weight(_text_:information in 4186) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.011163551 = score(doc=4186,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046368346 = queryNorm
          0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 4186, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4186)
      0.031411353 = weight(_text_:22 in 4186) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.031411353 = score(doc=4186,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046368346 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4186, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4186)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The Impact Factors (IFs) of the Institute for Scientific Information suffer from a number of drawbacks, among them the statistics-Why should one use the mean and not the median?-and the incomparability among fields of science because of systematic differences in citation behavior among fields. Can these drawbacks be counteracted by fractionally counting citation weights instead of using whole numbers in the numerators? (a) Fractional citation counts are normalized in terms of the citing sources and thus would take into account differences in citation behavior among fields of science. (b) Differences in the resulting distributions can be tested statistically for their significance at different levels of aggregation. (c) Fractional counting can be generalized to any document set including journals or groups of journals, and thus the significance of differences among both small and large sets can be tested. A list of fractionally counted IFs for 2008 is available online at http:www.leydesdorff.net/weighted_if/weighted_if.xls The between-group variance among the 13 fields of science identified in the U.S. Science and Engineering Indicators is no longer statistically significant after this normalization. Although citation behavior differs largely between disciplines, the reflection of these differences in fractionally counted citation distributions can not be used as a reliable instrument for the classification.
    Date
    22. 1.2011 12:51:07
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.2, S.217-229
    Type
    a
  6. Bornmann, L.; Leydesdorff, L.: Statistical tests and research assessments : a comment on Schneider (2012) (2013) 0.01 
    0.008412599 = product of:
  0.021031497 = sum of:
    0.01155891 = weight(_text_:a in 752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01155891 = score(doc=752,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 752, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=752)
    0.009472587 = product of:
      0.018945174 = sum of:
        0.018945174 = weight(_text_:information in 752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018945174 = score(doc=752,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 752, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=752)
      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.1306-1308
    Type
    a
  7. Bornmann, L.: Is there currently a scientific revolution in Scientometrics? (2014) 0.01 
    0.008412599 = product of:
  0.021031497 = sum of:
    0.01155891 = weight(_text_:a in 1206) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01155891 = score(doc=1206,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 1206, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1206)
    0.009472587 = product of:
      0.018945174 = sum of:
        0.018945174 = weight(_text_:information in 1206) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018945174 = score(doc=1206,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 1206, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1206)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.3, S.647-648
    Type
    a
  8. Bornmann, L.: What do altmetrics counts mean? : a plea for content analyses (2016) 0.01 
    0.008412599 = product of:
  0.021031497 = sum of:
    0.01155891 = weight(_text_:a in 2858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01155891 = score(doc=2858,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 2858, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2858)
    0.009472587 = product of:
      0.018945174 = sum of:
        0.018945174 = weight(_text_:information in 2858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018945174 = score(doc=2858,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 2858, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2858)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.4, S.1016-1017
    Type
    a
  9. Collins, H.; Bornmann, L.: On scientific misconduct (2014) 0.01 
    0.008234787 = product of:
  0.020586967 = sum of:
    0.009535614 = weight(_text_:a in 1247) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009535614 = score(doc=1247,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 1247, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1247)
    0.011051352 = product of:
      0.022102704 = sum of:
        0.022102704 = weight(_text_:information in 1247) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022102704 = score(doc=1247,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 1247, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1247)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.5, S.1089-1090
    Type
    a
  10. Bornmann, L.: Scientific peer review (2011) 0.01 
    0.008234787 = product of:
  0.020586967 = sum of:
    0.009535614 = weight(_text_:a in 1600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009535614 = score(doc=1600,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 1600, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1600)
    0.011051352 = product of:
      0.022102704 = sum of:
        0.022102704 = weight(_text_:information in 1600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022102704 = score(doc=1600,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 1600, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1600)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 45(2011) no.1, S.197-245
    Type
    a
  11. Bornmann, L.: Nature's top 100 revisited (2015) 0.01 
    0.007189882 = product of:
  0.017974705 = sum of:
    0.0068111527 = weight(_text_:a in 2351) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0068111527 = score(doc=2351,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 2351, 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=2351)
    0.011163551 = product of:
      0.022327103 = sum of:
        0.022327103 = weight(_text_:information in 2351) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022327103 = score(doc=2351,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.27429342 = fieldWeight in 2351, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2351)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Content
    Bezug: Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.12, S.2714. Vgl.: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asi.23554/abstract.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.10, S.2166
    Type
    a
  12. Bornmann, L.: On the function of university rankings (2014) 0.01 
    0.007058388 = product of:
  0.01764597 = sum of:
    0.008173384 = weight(_text_:a in 1188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008173384 = score(doc=1188,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 1188, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1188)
    0.009472587 = product of:
      0.018945174 = sum of:
        0.018945174 = weight(_text_:information in 1188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018945174 = score(doc=1188,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 1188, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1188)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.2, S.428-429
    Type
    a
  13. Bornmann, L.: ¬The reception of publications by scientists in the early days of modern science (2014) 0.01 
    0.007058388 = product of:
  0.01764597 = sum of:
    0.008173384 = weight(_text_:a in 1509) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008173384 = score(doc=1509,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 1509, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1509)
    0.009472587 = product of:
      0.018945174 = sum of:
        0.018945174 = weight(_text_:information in 1509) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018945174 = score(doc=1509,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 1509, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1509)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.10, S.2160-2161
    Type
    a
  14. Bornmann, L.; Bauer, J.; Haunschild, R.: Distribution of women and men among highly cited scientists (2015) 0.01 
    0.007058388 = product of:
  0.01764597 = sum of:
    0.008173384 = weight(_text_:a in 2349) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008173384 = score(doc=2349,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 2349, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2349)
    0.009472587 = product of:
      0.018945174 = sum of:
        0.018945174 = weight(_text_:information in 2349) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018945174 = score(doc=2349,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 2349, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2349)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.12, S.2715-2716
    Type
    a
  15. Besselaar, P. van den; Wagner, C,; Bornmann, L.: Correct assumptions? (2016) 0.01 
    0.007058388 = product of:
  0.01764597 = sum of:
    0.008173384 = weight(_text_:a in 3020) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008173384 = score(doc=3020,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 3020, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3020)
    0.009472587 = product of:
      0.018945174 = sum of:
        0.018945174 = weight(_text_:information in 3020) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018945174 = score(doc=3020,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 3020, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3020)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.7, S.1779
    Type
    a
  16. Leydesdorff, L.; Wagner, C,; Bornmann, L.: Replicability and the public/private divide (2016) 0.01 
    0.007058388 = product of:
  0.01764597 = sum of:
    0.008173384 = weight(_text_:a in 3023) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008173384 = score(doc=3023,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 3023, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3023)
    0.009472587 = product of:
      0.018945174 = sum of:
        0.018945174 = weight(_text_:information in 3023) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018945174 = score(doc=3023,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 3023, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3023)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.7, S.1777-1778
    Type
    a
  17. Bornmann, L.; Bauer, J.: Which of the world's institutions employ the most highly cited researchers : an analysis of the data from highlycited.com (2015) 0.01 
    0.0068851607 = product of:
  0.017212901 = sum of:
    0.010897844 = weight(_text_:a in 1556) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010897844 = score(doc=1556,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 1556, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1556)
    0.006315058 = product of:
      0.012630116 = sum of:
        0.012630116 = weight(_text_:information in 1556) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012630116 = score(doc=1556,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 1556, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1556)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    In 2014, Thomson Reuters published a list of the most highly cited researchers worldwide (highlycited.com). Because the data are freely available for downloading and include the names of the researchers' institutions, we produced a ranking of the institutions on the basis of the number of highly cited researchers per institution. This ranking is intended to be a helpful amendment of other available institutional rankings.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.10, S.2146-2148
    Type
    a
  18. Bornmann, L.; Bauer, J.: Which of the world's institutions employ the most highly cited researchers : an analysis of the data from highlycited.com (2015) 0.01 
    0.0068851607 = product of:
  0.017212901 = sum of:
    0.010897844 = weight(_text_:a in 2223) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010897844 = score(doc=2223,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 2223, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2223)
    0.006315058 = product of:
      0.012630116 = sum of:
        0.012630116 = weight(_text_:information in 2223) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012630116 = score(doc=2223,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 2223, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2223)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    In 2014, Thomson Reuters published a list of the most highly cited researchers worldwide (highlycited.com). Because the data are freely available for downloading and include the names of the researchers' institutions, we produced a ranking of the institutions on the basis of the number of highly cited researchers per institution. This ranking is intended to be a helpful amendment of other available institutional rankings.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.10, S.2146-2148
    Type
    a
  19. Bornmann, L.; Marx, W.: ¬The wisdom of citing scientists (2014) 0.01 
    0.0068817483 = product of:
  0.01720437 = sum of:
    0.011678694 = weight(_text_:a in 1293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011678694 = score(doc=1293,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.21843673 = fieldWeight in 1293, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1293)
    0.005525676 = product of:
      0.011051352 = sum of:
        0.011051352 = weight(_text_:information in 1293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011051352 = score(doc=1293,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 1293, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1293)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    This Brief Communication discusses the benefits of citation analysis in research evaluation based on Galton's "Wisdom of Crowds" (1907). Citations are based on the assessment of many which is why they can be considered to have some credibility. However, we show that citations are incomplete assessments and that one cannot assume that a high number of citations correlates with a high level of usefulness. Only when one knows that a rarely cited paper has been widely read is it possible to say-strictly speaking-that it was obviously of little use for further research. Using a comparison with "like" data, we try to determine that cited reference analysis allows for a more meaningful analysis of bibliometric data than times-cited analysis.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.6, S.1288-1292
    Type
    a
  20. Dobrota, M.; Bulajic, M.; Bornmann, L.; Jeremic, V.: ¬A new approach to the QS university ranking using the composite I-distance indicator : uncertainty and sensitivity analyses (2016) 0.01 
    0.0065180818 = product of:
  0.016295204 = sum of:
    0.01155891 = weight(_text_:a in 2500) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01155891 = score(doc=2500,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 2500, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2500)
    0.0047362936 = product of:
      0.009472587 = sum of:
        0.009472587 = weight(_text_:information in 2500) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009472587 = score(doc=2500,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2500, 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=2500)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Some major concerns of universities are to provide quality in higher education and enhance global competitiveness, thus ensuring a high global rank and an excellent performance evaluation. This article examines the Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) World University Ranking methodology, pointing to a drawback of using subjective, possibly biased, weightings to build a composite indicator (QS scores). We propose an alternative approach to creating QS scores, which is referred to as the composite I-distance indicator (CIDI) methodology. The main contribution is the proposal of a composite indicator weights correction based on the CIDI methodology. It leads to the improved stability and reduced uncertainty of the QS ranking system. The CIDI methodology is also applicable to other university rankings by proposing a specific statistical approach to creating a composite indicator.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.1, S.200-211
    Type
    a

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 60
  • d 1
  • More… Less…

Themes