Search (253 results, page 1 of 13)

  • × theme_ss:"Informetrie"
  1. Nicholls, P.T.: Empirical validation of Lotka's law (1986) 0.11 
    0.10588467 = product of:
  0.158827 = sum of:
    0.10315535 = weight(_text_:management in 5509) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10315535 = score(doc=5509,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051362853 = queryNorm
        0.5958457 = fieldWeight in 5509, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5509)
    0.05567166 = product of:
      0.11134332 = sum of:
        0.11134332 = weight(_text_:22 in 5509) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11134332 = score(doc=5509,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17986396 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 5509, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5509)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Source
    Information processing and management. 22(1986), S.417-419
  2. Mingers, J.; Burrell, Q.L.: Modeling citation behavior in Management Science journals (2006) 0.07 
    0.065495595 = product of:
  0.098243386 = sum of:
    0.077366516 = weight(_text_:management in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.077366516 = score(doc=994,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051362853 = queryNorm
        0.44688427 = fieldWeight in 994, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=994)
    0.020876871 = product of:
      0.041753743 = sum of:
        0.041753743 = weight(_text_:22 in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041753743 = score(doc=994,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17986396 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 994, 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=994)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Citation rates are becoming increasingly important in judging the research quality of journals, institutions and departments, and individual faculty. This paper looks at the pattern of citations across different management science journals and over time. A stochastic model is proposed which views the generating mechanism of citations as a gamma mixture of Poisson processes generating overall a negative binomial distribution. This is tested empirically with a large sample of papers published in 1990 from six management science journals and found to fit well. The model is extended to include obsolescence, i.e., that the citation rate for a paper varies over its cited lifetime. This leads to the additional citations distribution which shows that future citations are a linear function of past citations with a time-dependent and decreasing slope. This is also verified empirically in a way that allows different obsolescence functions to be fitted to the data. Conclusions concerning the predictability of future citations, and future research in this area are discussed.
    Date
    26.12.2007 19:22:05
    Source
    Information processing and management. 42(2006) no.6, S.1451-1464
  3. Falkingham, L.T.; Reeves, R.: Context analysis : a technique for analysing research in a field, applied to literature on the management of R&D at the section level (1998) 0.06 
    0.05878698 = product of:
  0.08818047 = sum of:
    0.06382412 = weight(_text_:management in 3689) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06382412 = score(doc=3689,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051362853 = queryNorm
        0.36866072 = fieldWeight in 3689, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3689)
    0.02435635 = product of:
      0.0487127 = sum of:
        0.0487127 = weight(_text_:22 in 3689) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0487127 = score(doc=3689,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17986396 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3689, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3689)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Context analysis is a new method for appraising a body of publications. the process consists of creating a database of attributes assigned to each paper by the reviewer and then looking for interesting relationships in the data. Assigning the attributes requires an understanding of the subject matter of the papers. Presents findings about one particular research field, Management of R&D at the Section Level. The findings support the view that this body of academic publications does not meet the needs of practitioner R&D managers. Discusses practical aspects of how to apply the method in other fields
    Date
    22. 5.1999 19:18:46
  4. Costas, R.; Perianes-Rodríguez, A.; Ruiz-Castillo, J.: On the quest for currencies of science : field "exchange rates" for citations and Mendeley readership (2017) 0.06 
    0.056979075 = product of:
  0.08546861 = sum of:
    0.025788838 = weight(_text_:management in 4051) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025788838 = score(doc=4051,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051362853 = queryNorm
        0.14896142 = fieldWeight in 4051, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4051)
    0.059679776 = sum of:
      0.03184395 = weight(_text_:system in 4051) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03184395 = score(doc=4051,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.16177002 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051362853 = queryNorm
          0.19684705 = fieldWeight in 4051, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4051)
      0.02783583 = weight(_text_:22 in 4051) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02783583 = score(doc=4051,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17986396 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051362853 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 4051, 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=4051)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Purpose The introduction of "altmetrics" as new tools to analyze scientific impact within the reward system of science has challenged the hegemony of citations as the predominant source for measuring scientific impact. Mendeley readership has been identified as one of the most important altmetric sources, with several features that are similar to citations. The purpose of this paper is to perform an in-depth analysis of the differences and similarities between the distributions of Mendeley readership and citations across fields. Design/methodology/approach The authors analyze two issues by using in each case a common analytical framework for both metrics: the shape of the distributions of readership and citations, and the field normalization problem generated by differences in citation and readership practices across fields. In the first issue the authors use the characteristic scores and scales method, and in the second the measurement framework introduced in Crespo et al. (2013). Findings There are three main results. First, the citations and Mendeley readership distributions exhibit a strikingly similar degree of skewness in all fields. Second, the results on "exchange rates (ERs)" for Mendeley readership empirically supports the possibility of comparing readership counts across fields, as well as the field normalization of readership distributions using ERs as normalization factors. Third, field normalization using field mean readerships as normalization factors leads to comparably good results. Originality/value These findings open up challenging new questions, particularly regarding the possibility of obtaining conflicting results from field normalized citation and Mendeley readership indicators; this suggests the need for better determining the role of the two metrics in capturing scientific recognition.
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
    Footnote
    Beitrag eines Special issue on "The reward system of science".
    Source
    Aslib journal of information management. 69(2017) no.5, S.557-575
  5. Tsai, B.-s.: Information landscaping : information mapping, charting, querying and reporting techniques for total quality knowledge management (2003) 0.05 
    0.05347328 = product of:
  0.08020992 = sum of:
    0.055834472 = weight(_text_:management in 1079) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.055834472 = score(doc=1079,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051362853 = queryNorm
        0.32251096 = fieldWeight in 1079, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1079)
    0.024375446 = product of:
      0.048750892 = sum of:
        0.048750892 = weight(_text_:system in 1079) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.048750892 = score(doc=1079,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.16177002 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.30135927 = fieldWeight in 1079, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1079)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Information landscaping--an integration of information mapping, charting, querying and reporting techniques--has been developed to enable the construction of a total quality knowledge management system focusing on a particular subject information field. The techniques apply five major parameters of the Fuzzy commonality model (FCM) including unionization, quantity, continuity or stability, changeability, and critical probability, to construct a series of information maps (infomaps) and a set of chronological-statistical charts (infocharts). The infomaps and infocharts are used as the blueprints and navigation agents for building and developing a web-based subject experts depository and query-report system. Focusing on the subject experts/expertise, this system enables a researcher to expedite a query search through infomaps (qualitative reference) and infocharts (quantitative reference). The entropy measurement and the entropy constant (the square root of the average entropy measure) are calculated to compare with the critical probability of the FCM. This leads to the finding of a set of regression straight lines and the establishment of an information oscillogram. The tropics (upper limit, middle range, lower limit), and the potential/solstitial population and its growth rate within a subject information domain during a particular time period can be determined. They can effectively and efficiently guide librarians and information professionals towards the construction and the continuous development of an electronic collection. The cultivation of a virtual learning and referencing environment can also be created by utilizing this data.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 39(2003) no.4, S.639-664
  6. Rees-Potter, L.K.: Dynamic thesaural systems : a bibliometric study of terminological and conceptual change in sociology and economics with application to the design of dynamic thesaural systems (1989) 0.05 
    0.0493965 = product of:
  0.07409475 = sum of:
    0.051577676 = weight(_text_:management in 5059) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.051577676 = score(doc=5059,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051362853 = queryNorm
        0.29792285 = fieldWeight in 5059, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5059)
    0.022517072 = product of:
      0.045034144 = sum of:
        0.045034144 = weight(_text_:system in 5059) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045034144 = score(doc=5059,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16177002 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.27838376 = fieldWeight in 5059, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5059)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Thesauri have been used in the library and information science field to provide a standard descriptor language for indexers or searchers to use in an informations storage and retrieval system. One difficulty has been the maintenance and updating of thesauri since terms used to describe concepts change over time and vary between users. This study investigates a mechanism by which thesauri can be updated and maintained using citation, co-citation analysis and citation context analysis.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 25(1989) no.6, S.677-691
  7. Kurtz, M.J.; Eichhorn, G.; Accomazzi, A.; Grant, C.; Demleitner, M.; Henneken, E.; Murray, S.S.: ¬The effect of use and access on citations (2005) 0.05 
    0.0493965 = product of:
  0.07409475 = sum of:
    0.051577676 = weight(_text_:management in 1064) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.051577676 = score(doc=1064,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051362853 = queryNorm
        0.29792285 = fieldWeight in 1064, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1064)
    0.022517072 = product of:
      0.045034144 = sum of:
        0.045034144 = weight(_text_:system in 1064) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045034144 = score(doc=1064,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16177002 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.27838376 = fieldWeight in 1064, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1064)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    It has been shown (Lawrence, S. (2001). Online or invisible? Nature, 411, 521) that journal articles which have been posted without charge on the internet are more heavily cited than those which have not been. Using data from the NASA Astrophysics Data System (ads.harvard.edu) and from the ArXiv e-print archive at Cornell University (arXiv.org) we examine the causes of this effect.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 41(2005) no.6, S.1395-1402
  8. Sidiropoulos, A.; Manolopoulos, Y.: ¬A new perspective to automatically rank scientific conferences using digital libraries (2005) 0.05 
    0.04830591 = product of:
  0.07245886 = sum of:
    0.038683258 = weight(_text_:management in 1011) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.038683258 = score(doc=1011,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051362853 = queryNorm
        0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 1011, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1011)
    0.03377561 = product of:
      0.06755122 = sum of:
        0.06755122 = weight(_text_:system in 1011) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06755122 = score(doc=1011,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.16177002 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.41757566 = fieldWeight in 1011, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1011)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Citation analysis is performed in order to evaluate authors and scientific collections, such as journals and conference proceedings. Currently, two major systems exist that perform citation analysis: Science Citation Index (SCI) by the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) and CiteSeer by the NEC Research Institute. The SCI, mostly a manual system up until recently, is based on the notion of the ISI Impact Factor, which has been used extensively for citation analysis purposes. On the other hand the CiteSeer system is an automatically built digital library using agents technology, also based on the notion of ISI Impact Factor. In this paper, we investigate new alternative notions besides the ISI impact factor, in order to provide a novel approach aiming at ranking scientific collections. Furthermore, we present a web-based system that has been built by extracting data from the Databases and Logic Programming (DBLP) website of the University of Trier. Our system, by using the new citation metrics, emerges as a useful tool for ranking scientific collections. In this respect, some first remarks are presented, e.g. on ranking conferences related to databases.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 41(2005) no.2, S.289-312
  9. Zhu, Q.; Kong, X.; Hong, S.; Li, J.; He, Z.: Global ontology research progress : a bibliometric analysis (2015) 0.05 
    0.046794858 = product of:
  0.070192285 = sum of:
    0.045588657 = weight(_text_:management in 2590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045588657 = score(doc=2590,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051362853 = queryNorm
        0.2633291 = fieldWeight in 2590, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2590)
    0.02460363 = product of:
      0.04920726 = sum of:
        0.04920726 = weight(_text_:22 in 2590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04920726 = score(doc=2590,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17986396 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2590, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2590)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to analyse the global scientific outputs of ontology research, an important emerging discipline that has huge potential to improve information understanding, organization, and management. Design/methodology/approach - This study collected literature published during 1900-2012 from the Web of Science database. The bibliometric analysis was performed from authorial, institutional, national, spatiotemporal, and topical aspects. Basic statistical analysis, visualization of geographic distribution, co-word analysis, and a new index were applied to the selected data. Findings - Characteristics of publication outputs suggested that ontology research has entered into the soaring stage, along with increased participation and collaboration. The authors identified the leading authors, institutions, nations, and articles in ontology research. Authors were more from North America, Europe, and East Asia. The USA took the lead, while China grew fastest. Four major categories of frequently used keywords were identified: applications in Semantic Web, applications in bioinformatics, philosophy theories, and common supporting technology. Semantic Web research played a core role, and gene ontology study was well-developed. The study focus of ontology has shifted from philosophy to information science. Originality/value - This is the first study to quantify global research patterns and trends in ontology, which might provide a potential guide for the future research. The new index provides an alternative way to evaluate the multidisciplinary influence of researchers.
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
    17. 9.2018 18:22:23
    Source
    Aslib journal of information management. 67(2015) no.1, S.27-54
  10. Marion, L.S.; McCain, K.W.: Contrasting views of software engineering journals : author cocitation choices and indexer vocabulary assignments (2001) 0.05 
    0.046605095 = product of:
  0.06990764 = sum of:
    0.055834472 = weight(_text_:management in 5767) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.055834472 = score(doc=5767,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051362853 = queryNorm
        0.32251096 = fieldWeight in 5767, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5767)
    0.01407317 = product of:
      0.02814634 = sum of:
        0.02814634 = weight(_text_:system in 5767) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02814634 = score(doc=5767,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16177002 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 5767, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5767)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    We explore the intellectual subject structure and research themes in software engineering through the identification and analysis of a core journal literature. We examine this literature via two expert perspectives: that of the author, who identified significant work by citing it (journal cocitation analysis), and that of the professional indexer, who tags published work with subject terms to facilitate retrieval from a bibliographic database (subject profile analysis). The data sources are SCISEARCH (the on-line version of Science Citation Index), and INSPEC (a database covering software engineering, computer science, and information systems). We use data visualization tools (cluster analysis, multidimensional scaling, and PFNets) to show the "intellectual maps" of software engineering. Cocitation and subject profile analyses demonstrate that software engineering is a distinct interdisciplinary field, valuing practical and applied aspects, and spanning a subject continuum from "programming-in-the-smalI" to "programming-in-the-large." This continuum mirrors the software development life cycle by taking the operating system or major application from initial programming through project management, implementation, and maintenance. Object orientation is an integral but distinct subject area in software engineering. Key differences are the importance of management and programming: (1) cocitation analysis emphasizes project management and systems development; (2) programming techniques/languages are more influential in subject profiles; (3) cocitation profiles place object-oriented journals separately and centrally while the subject profile analysis locates these journals with the programming/languages group
  11. Frandsen, T.F.: ¬The integration of open access journals in the scholarly communication system : three science fields (2009) 0.05 
    0.0452892 = product of:
  0.0679338 = sum of:
    0.038683258 = weight(_text_:management in 4210) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.038683258 = score(doc=4210,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051362853 = queryNorm
        0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 4210, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4210)
    0.029250536 = product of:
      0.058501072 = sum of:
        0.058501072 = weight(_text_:system in 4210) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.058501072 = score(doc=4210,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.16177002 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.36163113 = fieldWeight in 4210, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4210)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    The greatest number of open access journals (OAJs) is found in the sciences and their influence is growing. However, there are only a few studies on the acceptance and thereby integration of these OAJs in the scholarly communication system. Even fewer studies provide insight into the differences across disciplines. This study is an analysis of the citing behaviour in journals within three science fields: biology, mathematics, and pharmacy and pharmacology. It is a statistical analysis of OAJs as well as non-OAJs including both the citing and cited side of the journal to journal citations. The multivariate linear regression reveals many similarities in citing behaviour across fields and media. But it also points to great differences in the integration of OAJs. The integration of OAJs in the scholarly communication system varies considerably across fields. The implications for bibliometric research are discussed.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 45(2009) no.1, S.131-141
  12. Quoniam, L.: Bibliometric law used for information retrieval (1998) 0.04 
    0.043221936 = product of:
  0.0648329 = sum of:
    0.045130465 = weight(_text_:management in 1162) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045130465 = score(doc=1162,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051362853 = queryNorm
        0.2606825 = fieldWeight in 1162, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1162)
    0.019702438 = product of:
      0.039404877 = sum of:
        0.039404877 = weight(_text_:system in 1162) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039404877 = score(doc=1162,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16177002 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.2435858 = fieldWeight in 1162, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1162)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Zipf's law was used to qualify all the key words of documents in a data set. This qualification was used to build a graphical representation of the resulting indicator in each document. The graphical resolution leads to a document dispatch in a 3 dimensional space. This graphical representation was used as an information retrieval tool without using any keyword. The presentation of a case study is available on the WWW. The graph is drawn in VRML allowing a dynamic picture which is linked to a database management system (FreeWAIS)
  13. Zhao, D.: Challenges of scholarly publications on the Web to the evaluation of science : a comparison of author visibility on the Web and in print journals (2005) 0.04 
    0.043221936 = product of:
  0.0648329 = sum of:
    0.045130465 = weight(_text_:management in 1065) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045130465 = score(doc=1065,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051362853 = queryNorm
        0.2606825 = fieldWeight in 1065, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1065)
    0.019702438 = product of:
      0.039404877 = sum of:
        0.039404877 = weight(_text_:system in 1065) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039404877 = score(doc=1065,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16177002 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.2435858 = fieldWeight in 1065, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1065)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    This article reveals different patterns of scholarly communication in the XML research field on the Web and in print journals in terms of author visibility, and challenges the common practice of exclusively using the ISI's databases to obtain citation counts as scientific performance indicators. Results from this study demonstrate both the importance and the feasibility of the use of multiple citation data sources in citation analysis studies of scholarly communication, and provide evidence for a developing "two tier" scholarly communication system.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 41(2005) no.6, S.1403-1418
  14. Liu, D.-R.; Shih, M.-J.: Hybrid-patent classification based on patent-network analysis (2011) 0.04 
    0.041990705 = product of:
  0.06298605 = sum of:
    0.045588657 = weight(_text_:management in 4189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045588657 = score(doc=4189,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051362853 = queryNorm
        0.2633291 = fieldWeight in 4189, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4189)
    0.017397394 = product of:
      0.03479479 = sum of:
        0.03479479 = weight(_text_:22 in 4189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03479479 = score(doc=4189,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17986396 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4189, 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=4189)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Effective patent management is essential for organizations to maintain their competitive advantage. The classification of patents is a critical part of patent management and industrial analysis. This study proposes a hybrid-patent-classification approach that combines a novel patent-network-based classification method with three conventional classification methods to analyze query patents and predict their classes. The novel patent network contains various types of nodes that represent different features extracted from patent documents. The nodes are connected based on the relationship metrics derived from the patent metadata. The proposed classification method predicts a query patent's class by analyzing all reachable nodes in the patent network and calculating their relevance to the query patent. It then classifies the query patent with a modified k-nearest neighbor classifier. To further improve the approach, we combine it with content-based, citation-based, and metadata-based classification methods to develop a hybrid-classification approach. We evaluate the performance of the hybrid approach on a test dataset of patent documents obtained from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, and compare its performance with that of the three conventional methods. The results demonstrate that the proposed patent-network-based approach yields more accurate class predictions than the patent network-based approach.
    Date
    22. 1.2011 13:04:21
  15. Lin, X.; White, H.D.; Buzydlowski, J.: Real-time author co-citation mapping for online searching (2003) 0.04 
    0.041710816 = product of:
  0.06256622 = sum of:
    0.038683258 = weight(_text_:management in 1080) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.038683258 = score(doc=1080,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051362853 = queryNorm
        0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 1080, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1080)
    0.02388296 = product of:
      0.04776592 = sum of:
        0.04776592 = weight(_text_:system in 1080) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04776592 = score(doc=1080,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16177002 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.29527056 = fieldWeight in 1080, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1080)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Author searching is traditionally based on the matching of name strings. Special characteristics of authors as personal names and subject indicators are not considered. This makes it difficult to identify a set of related authors or to group authors by subjects in retrieval systems. In this paper, we describe the design and implementation of a prototype visualization system to enhance author searching. The system, called AuthorLink, is based on author co-citation analysis and visualization mapping algorithms such as Kohonen's feature maps and Pathfinder networks. AuthorLink produces interactive author maps in real time from a database of 1.26 million records supplied by the Institute for Scientific Information. The maps show subject groupings and more fine-grained intellectual connections among authors. Through the interactive interface the user can take advantage of such information to refine queries and retrieve documents through point-and-click manipulation of the authors' names.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 39(2003) no.5, S.689-706
  16. Huang, M.-H.; Huang, W.-T.; Chang, C.-C.; Chen, D. Z.; Lin, C.-P.: The greater scattering phenomenon beyond Bradford's law in patent citation (2014) 0.04 
    0.03970675 = product of:
  0.059560128 = sum of:
    0.038683258 = weight(_text_:management in 1352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.038683258 = score(doc=1352,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051362853 = queryNorm
        0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 1352, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1352)
    0.020876871 = product of:
      0.041753743 = sum of:
        0.041753743 = weight(_text_:22 in 1352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041753743 = score(doc=1352,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17986396 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1352, 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=1352)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Patent analysis has become important for management as it offers timely and valuable information to evaluate R&D performance and identify the prospects of patents. This study explores the scattering patterns of patent impact based on citations in 3 distinct technological areas, the liquid crystal, semiconductor, and drug technological areas, to identify the core patents in each area. The research follows the approach from Bradford's law, which equally divides total citations into 3 zones. While the result suggests that the scattering of patent citations corresponded with features of Bradford's law, the proportion of patents in the 3 zones did not match the proportion as proposed by the law. As a result, the study shows that the distributions of citations in all 3 areas were more concentrated than what Bradford's law proposed. The Groos (1967) droop was also presented by the scattering of patent citations, and the growth rate of cumulative citation decreased in the third zone.
    Date
    22. 8.2014 17:11:29
  17. Kumar, S.: Co-authorship networks : a review of the literature (2015) 0.04 
    0.03970675 = product of:
  0.059560128 = sum of:
    0.038683258 = weight(_text_:management in 2586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.038683258 = score(doc=2586,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051362853 = queryNorm
        0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 2586, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2586)
    0.020876871 = product of:
      0.041753743 = sum of:
        0.041753743 = weight(_text_:22 in 2586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041753743 = score(doc=2586,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17986396 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2586, 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=2586)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
    Source
    Aslib journal of information management. 67(2015) no.1, S.55-73
  18. Lorentzen, D.G.: Bridging polarised Twitter discussions : the interactions of the users in the middle (2021) 0.04 
    0.03970675 = product of:
  0.059560128 = sum of:
    0.038683258 = weight(_text_:management in 182) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.038683258 = score(doc=182,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051362853 = queryNorm
        0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 182, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=182)
    0.020876871 = product of:
      0.041753743 = sum of:
        0.041753743 = weight(_text_:22 in 182) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041753743 = score(doc=182,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17986396 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 182, 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=182)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
    Source
    Aslib journal of information management. 73(2021) no.1, S.129-143
  19. Moed, H.F.; Leeuwen, T.N. van; Reedijk, J.: ¬A new classification system to describe the ageing of scientific journals and their impact factors (1998) 0.04 
    0.039325334 = product of:
  0.058987997 = sum of:
    0.036470924 = weight(_text_:management in 4719) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.036470924 = score(doc=4719,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051362853 = queryNorm
        0.21066327 = fieldWeight in 4719, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4719)
    0.022517072 = product of:
      0.045034144 = sum of:
        0.045034144 = weight(_text_:system in 4719) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045034144 = score(doc=4719,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.16177002 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.27838376 = fieldWeight in 4719, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4719)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    During the past decades, journal impact data obtained from the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) have gained relevance in library management, research management and research evaluation. Hence, both information scientists and bibliometricians share the responsibility towards the users of the JCR to analyse the reliability and validity of its measures thoroughly, to indicate pitfalls and to suggest possible improvements. In this article, ageing patterns are examined in 'formal' use or impact of all scientific journals processed for the Science Citation Index (SCI) during 1981-1995. A new classification system of journals in terms of their ageing characteristics is introduced. This system has been applied to as many as 3,098 journals covered by the Science Citation Index. Following an earlier suggestion by Glnzel and Schoepflin, a maturing and a decline phase are distinguished. From an analysis across all subfields it has been concluded that ageing characteristics are primarily specific to the individual journal rather than to the subfield, while the distribution of journals in terms of slowly or rapidly maturing or declining types is specific to the subfield. It is shown that the cited half life (CHL), printed in the JCR, is an inappropriate measure of decline of journal impact. Following earlier work by Line and others, a more adequate parameter of decline is calculated taking into account the size of annual volumes during a range of fifteen years. For 76 per cent of SCI journals the relative difference between this new parameter and the ISI CHL exceeds 5 per cent. The current JCR journal impact factor is proven to be biased towards journals revealing a rapid maturing and decline in impact. Therefore, a longer term impact factor is proposed, as well as a normalised impact statistic, taking into account citation characteristics of the research subfield covered by a journal and the type of documents published in it. When these new measures are combined with the proposed ageing classification system, they provide a significantly improved picture of a journal's impact to that obtained from the JCR.
  20. Lee, D.H.; Brusilovsky, P.: ¬The first impression of conference papers : does it matter in predicting future citations? (2019) 0.03 
    0.03475901 = product of:
  0.052138515 = sum of:
    0.032236047 = weight(_text_:management in 4677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032236047 = score(doc=4677,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051362853 = queryNorm
        0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 4677, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4677)
    0.01990247 = product of:
      0.03980494 = sum of:
        0.03980494 = weight(_text_:system in 4677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03980494 = score(doc=4677,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16177002 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.24605882 = fieldWeight in 4677, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4677)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    This article explores the factors influencing the future citations of conference papers. We concentrated on the explanatory power of early attention on conference papers for citations collected from Google Scholar and Scopus. The early attention data includes users' online activities in a conference support system: CN3. Bookmarks from the bibliographic management system, Citeulike, were used as a collateral source of early attention. To examine the chronological contributions of 13 factors on citations, a multiple sequential regression analysis was conducted for three timepoints of the publication cycle-paper submission, time of conferences, and months after conferences. Our results illustrate that online readers' early attention of Citeulike bookmarks were found to have the most influence on the future impact of the conference papers. The early attention records from CN3 made noteworthy improvements to explaining both the Google and Scopus citations as well. We also found that the type of papers the number of papers presented at a conference, and the best article award records were significant factors influencing future citations. However, the magnitude of the effects made by online readers' early attention from both sources appears to be larger than these three traditional factors.

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 238
  • d 14
  • ro 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 247
  • m 6
  • el 2
  • s 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications