1,720,965 research outputs found

    Libraries as e-infrastructure

    Get PDF
    Horstmann W, Morais-Pires C, Schallier W, Siren J. Libraries as e-infrastructure. Zeitschrift für Bibliothekswesen und Bibliographie (ZfBB). 2014;61(4–5 Schwerpunkt: Bibliothek als Forschungsinfrastruktur – Aktuelle Herausforderungen und Chancen):215-219.Libraries have served as education and research infrastructures for centuries. In this paper, we will describe major opportunities and future challenges in the context of digital research and the »e-infrastructures« that are required for e-science. We will provide examples of current involvements and focus on the importance of cooperation at local, international, specifically European, and global scale. Bibliotheken fungieren seit Jahrhunderten als Bildungs- und Forschungsinfrastrukturen. In dem vorliegenden Aufsatz werden die Chancen und Herausforderungen von digitalen Forschungsumgebungen und von – für die sogenannte E-Science benötigten – E-Infrastrukturen erörtert. Es werden aktuelle Beispiele beschrieben; außerdem wird aufgezeigt, wie wichtig Kooperation auf lokaler, internationaler, speziell europäischer Ebene in diesem Zusammenhang ist

    Del Acceso Abierto a la Ciencia Abierta

    No full text
    Presentación realizada por Wouter Schallier en el marco del panel "Desafíos en lo Abierto" de la edición 2018 de OpenCon LatAm. Las notas de la sesión en español pueden encontrarse en el siguiente link https://goo.gl/ovpD6R This presentation was given by Wouter Schallier in the panel discussion "Challenges in Openness" at the 2018 edition of OpenCon LatAm. Spanish notes of the session can be found in the following link https://goo.gl/ovpD6R</p

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Get PDF
    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

    Subject retrieval in OPAC: a study of three interfaces

    No full text
    corecore