1,720,957 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
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
koamabayili/VECTRON-author-checklist: VECTRON author checklist
No full textWe 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
Behind the one-way mirror : reviewing the legality of EU tax algorithmic governance
No full textAbstract: Tax algorithmic governance has surged from a handful of Member States a decade ago, to a majority of tax administrations in the European Union (EU) integrating artificial intelligence (AI) systems. In light of the ever-increasing volume of tax returns and tax documentation to be processed, the digital transformation of the administration has become an imperative. Yet, cases such as system risico indicatie (SyRI), the toeslagenaffaire and eKasa show that automation poses risks to taxpayers. These cases cast doubts on the secretive nature of the tax administration\u2019s prerogatives and the information and communications technology (ICT) tools used to perform its missions, begging the question of what lies behind the administrations\u2019 one-way mirror. Section 2 presents the current state of use of AI tax systems on the basis of a synthesized literature review of publicly available data, mapping how many and what EU States have integrated AI systems. Section 3 examines compliance of the AI systems identified with the principle of legality. This research finds that while EU Member States have heavily invested into the integration of AI tax systems, very few have adopted specific norms to mitigate the risks to taxpayers\u2019 fundamental rights. As a result, tax algorithmic governance is creating a noticeable gap in the protection of taxpayers\u2019 rights. Keywords: Fiscal algorithmic governance, taxpayers\u2019 rights, artificial intelligence, tax secrecy, digital constitutionalis
Breaking the fiscal omerta: the roadmap to transparency in EU tax algorithmic governance
No full textAbstract: This anthology is a collection of scholarly articles drawn from contributions to the inaugural international and interdisciplinary conference of the Financial Information Retrieval Ecosystem (FIRE) research project. This conference took place from November 10th to 11th in 2022 at
6rebro University, Sweden, and was generously financed by the Riksbankens Jubileumsfond. The FIRE consortium is an international and interdisciplinary research collective unified by a core inquiry: how is society, particularly from a legal viewpoint, being fundamentally reshaped by the swift digitalisation of business-related information? This inquiry deeply resonates at both national and international echelons, given the extensive influence digitalisation holds over the social, economic, and legal dimensions of our global society
\u201cError 404 \u2013 Match not found\u201d : Tax Enforcement and Law Enforcement in the EU Artificial Intelligence Act
No full textAbstract: In EU Member States, tax administrations are the public organs that make most use of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) systems to perform State prerogatives. At least 18 EU Member States frequently use AI tax enforcement systems. In certain areas of taxation, such as value-added tax, AI and ML are already used throughout the EU. These systems perform a relatively broad range of tasks, reflecting the wide array of prerogatives of the administration itself. Generally, these different systems can be categorized into two archetypes: coercive and non-coercive AI systems. While non-coercive AI tax systems do not generate significant risks of conflict with taxpayers\u2019 fundamental rights, coercive AI tax systems used for tax enforcement bring about serious risks of conflict with taxpayers\u2019 fundamental rights and tax procedure as a whole. These risks have already materialised in a number of cases and have even led to serious scandals, such as RoboDebt and the toeslagenaffaire. Yet, substantial confusion exists around the treatment of AI tax enforcement systems in the upcoming Regulation laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (\u2018EU AI Act\u2019) and whether these systems will be qualified as high-risk. Recital 38 of the current draft prescribes that systems used by tax administrations specifically for administrative purposes should not be viewed as high-risk AI law enforcement systems. While prima facie logical, distinguishing between administrative and law enforcement purposes is bound to be an impractical and arbitrary exercise. Law enforcement is becoming increasingly integrated through the involvement of administrative authorities and private actors, precisely because of the use of AI. In such contexts, the boundaries between administrative and penal processes are blurred and will generate confusion. By remaining attached to that anachronistic distinction, Recital 38 not only replicates that confusion but will exacerbate its effects
- …
