1,721,569 research outputs found
Odor measurement with all means How costly must the analysis of odor emissions be? (Geruchsmessung mit allen Mitteln - Wie aufwendig muss die Analytik von Geruchsemissionen sein?)
No full textGeruchsmessung mit allen Mitteln - wie aufwendig muss die Analytik von Geruchsemissionen sein?
No full textAn Extended GFfit Statistic Defined on Orthogonal Components of Pearson's Chi-Square
Full text linkThe Pearson and likelihood ratio statistics are commonly used to test goodness of fit for models applied to data from a multinomial distribution. The goodness-of-fit test based on Pearson’s chi-squared statistic is sometimes considered to be a global test that gives little guidance to the source of poor fit when the null hypothesis is rejected, and it has also been recognized that the global test can often be outperformed in terms of power by focused or directional tests. For the cross-classification of a large number of manifest variables, the GFfit statistic focused on second-order marginals for variable pairs i; j has been proposed as a diagnostic to aid in finding the source of lack of fit after the model has been rejected based on a more global test. When data are from a table formed by the cross-classification of a large number of variables, the common global statistics may also have low power and inaccurate Type I error level due to sparseness in the cells of the table. The sparseness problem is rarely encountered with the GFfit statistic because it is focused on the lower-order marginals. In this paper, a new and extended version of the GFfit statistic is proposed by decomposing the Pearson statistic from the full table into orthogonal components defined on marginal distributions and then defining the new version, GFfit(ij) , as a partial sum of these orthogonal components. While the emphasis is on lower-order marginals, the new version of GFfit(ij) is also extended to higher-order tables so that the GFfit statistics sum to the Pearson statistic. As orthogonal components of the Pearson X2 statistic, the GFfit(ij) have advantages over other lack-of-fit diagnostics that are currently available for cross-classified tables: the GFfit(ij) have higher power to detect lack of fit while maintaining good Type I error control even if the joint frequencies are very sparse, as will be shown in simulation results; theoretical results will establish that the GFfit(ij) have known degrees of freedom and are asymptotically independent statistics with known joint distribution, a property which facilitates less conservative control of false discovery rate (FDR) or familywise error rate (FWER) in a high-dimensional table which would produce a large number of bivariate lack-of-fit diagnostics. GFfit(ij) are also computationally stable. The extended GFfit(ij)statistic can be applied to a variety of models for cross-classified tables. An application of the new GFfit statistic as a diagnostic for a latent variable model is presented
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe 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
Full text link“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
Full text linkWe 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
Full text linkWe 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
- …
