Cybernetics And Systems Analysis logo
Editorial Board Announcements Abstracts Authors Archive
Cybernetics And Systems Analysis
International Theoretical Science Journal
Volume 55 >>> № 3 MAY — JUNE 2019
UDC 004.9
Yu.M. Hlavcheva1, O.V. Kanishcheva2, N.V. Borysova3


1 National Technical University “Kharkiv Polytechnic University,” Kharkiv

 glavcheva@khpi.edu.ua

2 National Technical University “Kharkiv Polytechnic University,” Kharkiv

 kanichshevaolga@gmail.com

3 National Technical University “Kharkiv Polytechnic University,” Kharkiv

 borysova.n.v@gmail.com

SURVEY OF INFORMETRY METHODS AND TECHNOLOGIES

Abstract. The paper overviews the methods and technologies in informetry. The authors define the tasks and directions of informetry, show the interaction of terms such as scientometrics, bibliometrics; informetry, webometrics and altmetrics. Available informetry models, methods and current problems in a rapidly developing information society are analyzed. The authors review the available analytic-and-search science-based databases and systems, identify their disadvantages and advantages. As a result of the analysis, the characteristics of scientometric systems, their components, and factors that affect scientometric indices have been identified. On the basis of the study, the authors show the perspective directions of development of scientometric systems.

Keywords: scientometrics, informetry, scientometric systems, bibliometric systems, metrics, citation indexes.



FULL TEXT

REFERENCES

  1. Akoev M.A., Markusova V.A., Moskaleva O.V., Pislyakov V.V. Guide to scientometrics: indicators of the development of science and technology (Akoeva M.A. ed., in Russian). Ekaterinburg: Izd-vo Ural. un-ta, 2014. 250 p.

  2. Redkina N.S. Bibliometry: history and modernity. Molodyye v bibliotechnom dele. 2003. No. 2. P. 76–86.

  3. Galyavieva M.S. Information and Libraries: Intersection Points. URL: http://kpfu.ru/portal/ docs/F1469809912/Galyavieva.MS.pdf. 22.12.2017.

  4. Gordukalova G.F. Bibliometry, scientometrics and webometry - from the number of lines in the works of Aristotle. Scientific Periodicals: Problems and Solutions. 2014. No. 2 (20). P. 40–46.

  5. Efimenko I. Is it possible to measure science: philosophy, language and culture of modern scientometrics? URL: https://www.hse.ru/mirror/pubs/share/150125175. 14.01.2018.

  6. Bjrneborn L., Ingwersen P. Towards a basis framework for webometrics. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 2004. Vol. 55, N 14. P. 1216–1227.

  7. Priem J., Taraborelli D., Groth P., Neylon C. Altmetrics: A manifesto. 26 Oct. 2010. URL: http://altmetrics.org/manifesto.

  8. Priem J., Piwowar H.A., Hemminger B.H. Altmetrics in the wild: An exploratory study of impact metrics based on social media. URL: http://jasonpriem.org/self-archived/PLoS-altmetrics-sigmetrics11- abstract.pdf. 14.01.2018.

  9. Pindlowa W. Wokol informetrii, bibliometrii i naukometrii. Aktual. Probl. Inf. i Dok. 1989. Vol. 34, N 1–2. Р. 3–7.

  10. Aseev G.G. The ratio of various metric studies in science. Systems Information Processing. 2017. Iss. 1 (147). P. 119–126.

  11. Galyavieva M.S. On the formation of the concept of informetrics. Scientific and Technical Information Processing. 2013. Vol. 40, N 2. P. 89–96. DOI: 10.3103/S014768821302007X.

  12. Khaitun S.D. Scientometrics: state and prospects (in Russian). Moscow: Nauka, 1983. 344 p.

  13. Tchaikovsky Yu.B., Silkina Yu.V., Pototskaya O.Yu. Naukometric bases and their quantitative indices. Part I. Comparative characteristics of the scientometric bases. Visn. NAN Ukrayiny. 2013. No. 8. P. 89–98.

  14. Russian Science Citation Index. URL: https://elibrary.ru/projects/citation/cit_index.asp.

  15. Index Copernicus. URL: https://indexcopernicus.com. 14.01.2018.

  16. Microsoft Academic. URL: https://academic.microsoft.com. 14.01.2018.

  17. Tchaikovsky Yu.B., Silkina Yu.V., Pototskaya O.Yu. Naukometric bases and their quantitative indices. Part II. Factors influencing the quantitative indices of science-based databases. Visn. NAN Ukrayiny. 2013. № 9. С. 84–92.

  18. Google Scholar. URL: http://scholar.google.com.

  19. Aguillo I.F. Informetrics for librarians: Describing their important role in the evaluation process. El Professional de la Informaci 2016. Vol. 25, N 1. P. 5–10.

  20. Bar-Ilan J. Which h-index? A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics. 2008. Vol. 74, N 2. P. 257–271.

  21. Peters I. Informetrics, bibliometrics, altmetrics: What is it all about? Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 2014. Vol. 51, Iss. 1. P. 1–4.

  22. Scimago Journal & Country Rank. URL: http://www.scimagojr.com. 14.01.2018.

  23. Eigenfactor: About. URL: http://www.eigenfactor.org/about.php. 14.01.2018.

  24. Shtovba S.D., Shtovba E.V. Review of scientometric indicators to assess the publication activity of the scientist. Management of large systems. Spec. Issue "Scientometrics and expertise in the management of science". 2013. No. 44. P. 262–278.

  25. Egghe L. Theory and practice of the g-index. Scientometrics. 2006. Vol. 69, N 1. P. 131–152.

  26. Alonso S., Cabrerizo F., Herrera-Viedma E., Herrera F. hg-index: a new index to characterize the scientific output of researchers based on the hand g-indices. Scientometrics. 2010. Vol. 82, N 2. P. 391–400.

  27. Eck N.V., Waltman L. Generalizing the h- and g-indices. Journal of Informetrics. 2008. Vol. 2, N 4. P. 263–271.

  28. Schreiber M. A modification of the h-index: The h(m)-index accounts for multi-authored manuscripts. Journal of Informetrics. 2008. Vol. 2, N 3. P. 211–216.

  29. Zhang C.T. The e-index, complementing the h-index for excess citations. PLoS ONE. 2009. Vol. 4, N 5. URL: http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0005429.

  30. Rousseau R. New developments related to the Hirsch index. Science Focus. 2006. Vol. 1, N 4. P. 23–25. URL: http://eprints.rclis.org/6376/.

  31. Liang B.J.L., Rousseau R., Egghe L. The R- and AR-indices: complementing the h-index. Chinese Science Bulletin. 2007. Vol. 52, N 6. P. 855–863.

  32. Jin B. The AR-index: complementing the h-index. ISSI Newsletter. 2007. Vol. 3, N 1. P. 6.

  33. Bornmann L., Mutz R., Daniel H. Are there better indices for evaluation purposes than the h-index? A comparison of nine different variants of the h-index using data from biomedicine. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 2008. Vol. 59, N 5. P. 830–837.

  34. Hirsch J.E. An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proc. National Academy of Sciences of the USA. 2005. Vol. 102, N 46. P. 16569–16572.

  35. Glavcheva Yu.M., Kukharenko V.M., Rybalko O.V. Curator of content (Kukharenko V.M. ed.). Kharkiv: NTU "KhPI", 2016. 157 p.

  36. Welcome to Ranking Web of Universities. URL: http://www. webometrics.info/en. 14.01.2018.

  37. What are altmetrics? URL: https://www.altmetric.com/about-altmetrics/what-are-altmetrics/. 14.01.2018.
Editorial Board Announcements Abstracts Authors Archive
about scope office editorial board instructions for authors subscriptions contacts
© 2019 Kibernetika.org. All rights reserved.