首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Information Science >A bibliometric study of Video Retrieval Evaluation Benchmarking (TRECVid): A methodological analysis
【24h】

A bibliometric study of Video Retrieval Evaluation Benchmarking (TRECVid): A methodological analysis

机译:视频检索评估基准(TRECVid)的文献计量研究:方法论分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

This paper provides a discussion and analysis of methodological issues encountered during a scholarly impact and bibliometric study within the field of Computer Science (TRECVid Text Retrieval and Evaluation Conference, Video Retrieval Evaluation). The purpose of this paper is to provide a reflection and analysis of the methods used to provide useful information and guidance for those who may wish to undertake similar studies, and is of particular relevance for the academic disciplines which have publication and citation norms that may not perform well using traditional tools. Scopus and Google Scholar are discussed and a detailed comparison of the effects of different search methods and cleaning methods within and between these tools for subject and author analysis is provided. The additional database capabilities and usefulness of 'Scopus More' in addition to 'Scopus General' are discussed and evaluated. Scopus paper coverage is found to favourably compare with Google Scholar but Scholar consistently has superior performance at finding citations to those papers. These additional citations significantly increase the citation totals and also change the relative ranking of papers. Publish or Perish, a software wrapper for Google Scholar, is also examined and its limitations and some possible solutions are described. Data cleaning methods, including duplicate checks, expert domain checking of bibliographic data, and content checking of retrieved papers, are compared and their relative effects on paper and citation count discussed. Google Scholar and Scopus are also compared as tools for collecting bibliographic data for visualizations of developing trends and, owing to the comparative ease of collecting abstracts, Scopus is found far more effective.
机译:本文提供了在计算机科学领域(TRECVid文本检索和评估会议,视频检索评估)领域的学术影响力和文献计量研究期间遇到的方法论问题的讨论和分析。本文的目的是反思和分析用于为可能希望进行类似研究的人员提供有用信息和指导的方法,并与那些具有出版和引用规范但又可能没有的学术学科特别相关使用传统工具表现良好。讨论了Scopus和Google Scholar,并详细比较了这些工具中主题和作者分析工具内部以及之间的不同搜索方法和清洗方法的效果。除了“ Scopus General”之外,还讨论和评估了“ Scopus More”的其他数据库功能和实用性。发现Scopus的论文覆盖率可与Google Scholar进行比较,但Scholar在查找被引用文献方面始终表现出色。这些额外的引文可以显着提高引文总数,还可以改变论文的相对排名。还检查了Publish或Perish(Google学术搜索的软件包装),并描述了其局限性和一些可能的解决方案。比较了数据清理方法,包括重复检查,书目数据的专家域检查以及检索到的论文的内容检查,并讨论了它们对论文和引文计数的相对影响。还比较了Google Scholar和Scopus作为收集书目数据以可视化发展趋势的工具,并且由于比较容易收集摘要,因此发现Scopus更为有效。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号