1,721,360 research outputs found
Water en waarden : ecologisch onderzoek als basis voor waterbeheer en natuurbeheer
Contains fulltext :
19361.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access)27 p
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
We provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
We conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
koamabayili/VECTRON-author-checklist: VECTRON author checklist
We have done our best to complete the author checklist relating to the use of animals in the hut study. Note that the objective for the hut study was to evaluate the IRS treatment applications for residual efficacy against Anopheles mosquitoes, including the local An. coluzzii mosquito population. Cows were only used to attract mosquitoes into the huts and no tests were carried out directly on the cows. The author checklist is intended for use with studies where experiments are carried out on animals, which is why we have had such difficulty in completing this for the hut study, as many of the questions do not relate to how the cows were used
Logic and Learning (Dagstuhl Seminar 19361)
The goal of building truly intelligent systems has forever been a central problem in computer science. While logic-based approaches of yore have had their successes and failures, the era of machine learning, specifically deep learning is also coming upon significant challenges. There is a growing consensus that the inductive reasoning and complex, high-dimensional pattern recognition capabilities of deep learning models need to be combined with symbolic (even programmatic), deductive capabilities traditionally developed in the logic and automated reasoning communities in order to achieve the next step towards building intelligent systems, including making progress at the frontier of hard problems such as explainable AI. However, these communities tend to be quite separate and interact only minimally, often at odds with each other upon the subject of the ``correct approach'' to AI. This report documents the efforts of Dagstuhl Seminar 19361 on ``Logic and Learning'' to bring these communities together in order to: (i) bridge the research efforts between them and foster an exchange of ideas in order to create unified formalisms and approaches that bear the advantages of both research methodologies; (ii) review and analyse the progress made across both communities; (iii) understand the subtleties and difficulties involved in solving hard problems using both perspectives; (iv) make attempts towards a consensus on what the hard problems are and what the elements of good solutions to these problems would be.
The three focal points of the seminar were the strands of ``Logic for Machine Learning'', ``Machine Learning for Logic'', and ``Logic vs. Machine Learning''. The seminar format consisted of long and short talks, as well as breakout sessions. We summarise the motivations and proceedings of the seminar, and report on the abstracts of the talks and the results of the breakout sessions
- …
