177,541 research outputs found
Schnee und Lawinen in den Schweizer Alpen. Winter 1988/89: Winterbericht des Eidg. Institutes für Schnee- und Lawinenforschung, Weissfluhjoch/Davos. Wetterablauf und Schneedeckenentwicklung, Lawinenverhältnisse, Lawinenschäden, spezielle Untersuchungen
No full textSchnee und Lawinen in den Schweizer Alpen. Winter 1984/85: Winterbericht des Eidg. Institutes für Schnee- und Lawinenforschung, Weissfluhjoch/Davos. Wetterablauf und Schneedeckenentwicklung, Lawinenverhältnisse, Lawinenschäden, spezielle Untersuchungen
No full textSchnee und Lawinen in den Schweizer Alpen. Winter 1983/84: Winterbericht des Eidg. Institutes für Schnee- und Lawinenforschung, Weissfluhjoch/Davos. Wetterablauf und Schneedeckenentwicklung, Lawinenverhältnisse, Lawinenschäden, spezielle Untersuchungen
No full textStudien- und Forschungsführer Bioinformatik
No full textHofestädt R, Schnee R. Studien- und Forschungsführer Bioinformatik. 1. Edition. Heidelberg: Spektrum Akademischer Verlag; 2002
Entitlement, Leaching and Counter-Closure
No full textPublisher Copyright: © 2024 selection and editorial matter, Rodrigo Borges and Ian Schnee; individual chapters, the contributors
The Werner-Henneberger Accident
No full textEach year the Swiss Federal Institute for Snow and Avalanche Research compiles a comprehensive report on snow and avalanches in the Swiss Alps. This report is published about a year and a half after the winter in question. From the report for the winter of 1963/64 we have translated the account of an accident which had widespread publicity both in the U.S. and abroad. This is the accident which caused the death of Buddy Werner, America\u27s outstanding racer, and Barbara Henneberger from Germany. Because many conflicting reports were circulated here about the accident and its subsequent legal ramifications, we have translated the official Swiss Government report in order to present to the American skiers an accurate account of the events
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
No full textWe 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
"Closing the R&D Gap, Evaluating the Sources of R&D Spending"
No full textBoth spending and tax policies have been implemented in the United States with the goal of stimulating private sector research and development (R&D). Karier questions whether current R&D policy, especially the research and experimentation tax credit, can contribute to closing the gap between nondefense expenditures on R&D in the United States and such expenditures in other countries, such as Japan and Germany. He also explores possible changes to our current R&D policy to make it more effective.
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
No full textThe 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
- …
