...
首页> 外文期刊>Science & Technology Libraries >Finding Chemistry Information Using Google Scholar: A Comparison with Chemical Abstracts Service
【24h】

Finding Chemistry Information Using Google Scholar: A Comparison with Chemical Abstracts Service

机译:使用Google学术搜索查找化学信息:与化学文摘服务的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Since its introduction in November 2004, Google Scholar has been the subject of considerable discussion among librarians. Though there has been much concern about the lack of transparency of the product, there has been relatively little direct comparison between Google Scholar and traditional library resources. This study compares Google Scholar and Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) as resources for finding chemistry information. Of the 702 records found in six different searches, 65.1% were in Google Scholar and 45.1% were in CAS. Of these, 55.0% were unique to Google Scholar, 34.9% were unique to CAS, and 10.1% overlapped. When each record found was searched by title in the two databases, the figures change, with 79.5% in Google Scholar, 85.6% in CAS, and 65.1% overlapping. Based on this, researchers are more likely to find known published information through CAS than in Google Scholar. Results vary by type of search, type of resource, and date. For many types of searching, CAS performs significantly better than Google Scholar. This is especially true for searches on compounds or arnpersonal name, both of which take advantage of advanced search features in CAS. For simple keyword searches, Google Scholar tends to perform better, most probably because Google Scholar searches through the full text of journal articles, while a keyword search through CAS only finds abstract and index terms.
机译:自2004年11月推出以来,“ Google学术搜索”一直是图书馆管理员中讨论的主题。尽管人们一直担心产品缺乏透明度,但是Google学术搜索与传统图书馆资源之间的直接比较却相对较少。本研究将Google学术搜索和化学文摘社(CAS)作为查找化学信息的资源进行了比较。在六次不同的搜索中找到的702条记录中,有65.1%在Google Scholar中,而45.1%在CAS中。其中,55.0%是Google Scholar独有的,34.9%是CAS独有的,重叠的是10.1%。当在两个数据库中按标题搜索找到的每条记录时,数字发生变化,其中Google Scholar为79.5%,CAS为85.6%,重叠为65.1%。基于此,与Google学术搜索相比,研究人员更有可能通过CAS查找已知的公开信息。结果因搜索类型,资源类型和日期而异。对于许多类型的搜索,CAS的性能明显优于Google Scholar。对于化合物或别名的搜索尤其如此,这两者都利用了CAS中的高级搜索功能。对于简单的关键字搜索,Google Scholar的效果往往更好,这很可能是因为Google Scholar会搜索期刊文章的全文,而通过CAS的关键字搜索只能找到摘要和索引词。

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