Secondary information services: Mirrors of scholarly communication. Forces and trends

The statistics published each year by U.S. secondary publishers reveal trends in scientific communication, including political, economic, and social factors. For the first time since 1957, the number of documents abstracted and indexed by U.S. secondary services has declined—following thirty-five years of often rapid growth. The author traces the history of abstracting and indexing services in the United States, considers reasons that the coverage of secondary services has stabilized, and discusses why comprehensive coverage of the scholarly literature may no longer be a viable strategy for secondary services to follow in the years ahead.     

Modeling scholarly book literature

Recent technology provides the means to gauge the declining ability of the nation's research libraries to maintain fairly comprehensive book collections in the face of the extraordinary growth and price inflation of scholarly publishing since the 1970s. An application of this technology is presented here in the form of a model of total book publication output and the aggregate holdings of 71 research libraries in a selected field, general sociology, for the period 1979–88. The usefulness of such modeling is discussed in terms of generating knowledge that, while low on precision, has broad reliability and relevance.     

参考文献与编辑的学术鉴审

文献资料是科研工作的一个基础和起点,也是评价科研成果的一个参照系。从参考文献的角度对学术文稿进行鉴审,是编辑总体鉴审的一个重要方面。通过查阅文献原文和(或)分析文献的文题、发表时间、所涉学科的分布,以及文献观点在文稿中的具体作用等,可以从一个侧面为编辑的学术鉴审提供重要参考依据。     

Challenges to scholarly publishing

Conclusion Threats to professional and scholarly publishers abound since publishing is at a strategic inflection point. The inability of users to identity quality information, the advent of new technologies and services, and the fact that users want a variety of experiences all threaten your well-being. However, focusing on marketing, editorial, reputation, and by partnering effectively, publishers can avail themselves of the marketing opportunities presented, ironically enough, by the very threats themselves.     

Universality of scholarly impact metrics

Given the growing use of impact metrics in the evaluation of scholars, journals, academic institutions, and even countries, there is a critical need for means to compare scientific impact across disciplinary boundaries. Unfortunately, citation-based metrics are strongly biased by diverse field sizes and publication and citation practices. As a result, we have witnessed an explosion in the number of newly proposed metrics that claim to be “universal.” However, there is currently no way to objectively assess whether a normalized metric can actually compensate for disciplinary bias. We introduce a new method to assess the universality of any scholarly impact metric, and apply it to evaluate a number of established metrics. We also define a very simple new metric h_s, which proves to be universal, thus allowing to compare the impact of scholars across scientific disciplines. These results move us closer to a formal methodology in the measure of scholarly impact.     

关于"馆员学者化"问题的思考

本文探讨了“馆员学者化”的内涵和导向错误及形成这种观点的成因，分析了馆员应具备的知识结构，提出了“学科馆员”才是馆员努力发展的方向，才是提高文献信息服务水平的必由之路。     

许倬云先生治学谈

2006年5—6月，许倬云先生作为南京大学人文社会科学高级研究院特聘的首位讲座教授，在南京大学进行了为期一个月的学术交流活动。 6月13日上午，许先生再次和南京大学信息管理系教授、人文社会科学研究院研究员徐雁先生门下的研究生进行了一次关于治学和人生座谈。以下内容以此次座谈为核心，同时综合组织了许先生著作中的一些观点。 座谈结束后，大家纷纷拿出许先生新近在大陆出版的书请他签名：我曾在他的《从历史看管理》一书中读到这样的一段文字，深得吾心：“历史是看变化的，从变化之中我们会学得一些对变化的认识，并且转换成一种智慧。至于是否能真正转变成智慧，当然要看自己的努力、悟性和造化。有了这些智慧，做人做事就会明白一点，看许多事情不会那么死心眼，老盯着一个角度看。这是我学历史的目的。”遂将其中的第一句抄在一张便条纸上，贴在书中，准备请他题录在扉页上。不过许先生写字不甚方便，遂作罢，只请他在扉页和便条上各签上姓名。之后，许先生和大家合影留念。     

也谈学术期刊的分级问题

文章从学术期刊质量的内涵入手 ,分析了学术期刊分级的意义。并从分级依据、不同专业期刊质量并行定级、分级原则包括要素、期刊的优胜劣汰等方面反驳了反对分级论者 ,从而提出了学术期刊分级的一种方法———主成分分析法     

Predicting the citations of scholarly paper

Citation prediction of scholarly papers is of great significance in guiding funding allocations, recruitment decisions, and rewards. However, little is known about how citation patterns evolve over time. By exploring the inherent involution property in scholarly paper citation, we introduce the Paper Potential Index (PPI) model based on four factors: inherent quality of scholarly paper, scholarly paper impact decaying over time, early citations, and early citers’ impact. In addition, by analyzing factors that drive citation growth, we propose a multi-feature model for impact prediction. Experimental results demonstrate that the two models improve the accuracy in predicting scholarly paper citations. Compared to the multi-feature model, the PPI model yields superior predictive performance in terms of range-normalized RMSE. The PPI model better interprets the changes in citation, without the need to adjust parameters. Compared to the PPI model, the multi-feature model performs better prediction in terms of Mean Absolute Percentage Error and Accuracy; however, their predictive performance is more dependent on the parameter adjustment.     

中文学术期刊文献资源的集成整合与二次编辑

分析当前影响学术期刊文献资源有效利用的因素及传统的手工二次文献整合编辑存在的问题 ,强调了信息时代对中文学术期刊文献资源进行数字化集成整合与二次编辑的必要性 ,介绍《中国学术期刊 (光盘版 )》文献信息编辑的特点 ,以期引发读者对开发其他文献资源的思考。     

学术电子期刊长期保存项目研究

本文介绍了当前各界对学术电子期刊所进行的长期保存项目，并从“保存哪些电子期刊、由谁来保存、如何保存”这三个方面对各种类型的保存项目加以分析，为我国学术电子期刊的长期保存模式提供参考。