1,720,958 research outputs found
Weighted and unweighted distances based decision tree for ranking data
Preference data represent a particular type of ranking data (widely used
in sports, web search, social sciences), where a group of people gives their preferences
over a set of alternatives. Within this framework, distance-based decision
trees represent a non-parametric tool for identifying the profiles of subjects giving
a similar ranking. This paper aims at detecting, in the framework of (complete
and incomplete) ranking data, the impact of the differently structured weighted distances
for building decision trees. The traditional metrics between rankings don’t
take into account the importance of swapping elements similar among them (element
weights) or elements belonging to the top (or to the bottom) of an ordering
(position weights). By means of simulations, using weighted distances to build decision
trees, we will compute the impact of different weighting structures both on
splitting and on consensus ranking. The distances that will be used satisfy Kemenys
axioms and, accordingly, a modified version of the rank correlation coefficient τx,
proposed by Edmond and Mason, will be proposed and used for assessing the trees’
goodness
Consensus among preference rankings: a new weighted correlation coefficient for linear and weak orderings
Preference data are a particular type of ranking data where some subjects (voters, judges,...) express their preferences over a set of alternatives (items). In most real life cases, some items receive the same preference by a judge, thus giving rise to a ranking with ties. An important issue involving rankings concerns the aggregation of the preferences into a “consensus”. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the consensus between rankings with ties, taking into account the importance of swapping elements belonging to the top (or to the bottom) of the ordering (position weights). By combining the structure of τx proposed by Emond and Mason (J Multi-Criteria Decis Anal 11(1):17–28, 2002) with the class of weighted Kemeny-Snell distances, a position weighted rank correlation coefficient is proposed for comparing rankings with ties. The one-to-one correspondence between the weighted distance and the rank correlation coefficient is proved, analytically speaking, using both equal and decreasing weights
A new position weight correlation coefficient for consensus ranking process without ties
Preference data represent a particular type of ranking data where a group of people gives their preferences over a set of alternatives. The traditional metrics between rankings do not take into account the importance of swapping elements similar among them (element weights) or elements belonging to the top (or to the bottom) of an ordering (position weights). Following the structure of the τx proposed by Emond and Mason and the class of weighted Kemeny–Snell distances, a proper rank correlation coefficient is defined for measuring the correlation among weighted position rankings without ties. The one‐to‐one correspondence between the weighted distance and the rank correlation coefficient holds, analytically speaking, using both equal and decreasing weights. In order to determine the consensus ranking among rankings, related to a set of subjects, the new coefficient is maximized modifying suitably a branch‐and‐bound algorithm proposed in the literature
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
- …
