1,720,963 research outputs found
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Get PDFThe 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
Get PDF“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
Get PDFWe 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
tikk3r/lofar-grid-hpccloud: LOFAR_SKSP 4.0
No full textFirst release supporting CWL and Python3. The genericpipeline framework is no longer included nor supported in this or newer versions.
Updates
cwltool and toil now included.
EveryBeam Python bindings are now included.
Montage removed for now due to build issues.
Update DDFacet to v0.7.1.
Update DP3 to 87c51352.
Changes
Based on Fedora 34
Python 2 venv no longer included.
Python 3 is at 3.9.1
tikk3r/flocs: LOFAR_SKSP 4.2.2
No full textFixes
Downgrade IPython to 8.10 to avoid a bug in interactive mode
tikk3r/lofar-grid-hpccloud: LOFAR-VLBI
No full textSingularity container created as a reference point for the lofar-vlbi pipeline. It contains the necessary software required to run the required pipelines in order to reduce LOFAR data including international baselines
tikk3r/lofar-grid-hpccloud: LOFAR-SKSP 3.0
No full textVersion bump to 3.0.0 to synchronize major version with prefactor v3.0.
This container provides an installation of the LOFAR software in order to run the genericpipeline, along with additional software that is required to run prefactor and potentially other pipelines. The pipelines themselves are purposely not included. The software versions are intended to be compatible with the prefactor 3.0 releas.
Updates
Added difmap
Added nano
Added vim
All AVX512 instructions disabled
Freeze most software versions for prefactor 3.0
Bug fixes
Fix PyTables installation for Python 2.7 causing other packages to fai
tikk3r/flocs: 5.0.0
No full text<p>Base container updated to Fedora 38</p>
<p><strong>Updates</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Add altair and polars Python packages.</li>
<li>Refactored <code>create_ms_list.py</code> to be more flexible (<em>not</em> backwards compatible with older versions).</li>
<li>Update ddf-pipeline to 72e5285.</li>
<li>Update DDFacet to v0.7.2.</li>
<li>Update DP3 to 4df56d1f.</li>
<li>Update EveryBeam to d52668ec.</li>
<li>Update LOFAR H5plot to 2.8.1.</li>
<li>Update IDG to 011687ed.</li>
<li>Update WSClean to 843f87c8.</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Fixes</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Split-Directions runner now clones the master branch again.</li>
</ul>
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Get PDFWe 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
- …
