Universality of citation distributions revisited

Radicchi, Fortunato, and Castellano [arXiv:0806.0974, PNAS 105(45), 17268] claim that, apart from a scaling factor, all fields of science are characterized by the same citation distribution. We present a large-scale validation study of this universality-of-citation-distributions claim. Our analysis shows that claiming citation distributions to be universal for all fields of science is not warranted. Although many fields indeed seem to have fairly similar citation distributions, there are quite some exceptions as well. We also briefly discuss the consequences of our findings for the measurement of scientific impact using citation-based bibliometric indicators

Towards a new crown indicator: Some theoretical considerations

The crown indicator is a well-known bibliometric indicator of research performance developed by our institute. The indicator aims to normalize citation counts for differences among fields. We critically examine the theoretical basis of the normalization mechanism applied in the crown indicator. We also make a comparison with an alternative normalization mechanism. The alternative mechanism turns out to have more satisfactory properties than the mechanism applied in the crown indicator. In particular, the alternative mechanism has a so-called consistency property. The mechanism applied in the crown indicator lacks this important property. As a consequence of our findings, we are currently moving towards a new crown indicator, which relies on the alternative normalization mechanism

Rivals for the crown: Reply to Opthof and Leydesdorff

We reply to the criticism of Opthof and Leydesdorff [arXiv:1002.2769] on the way in which our institute applies journal and field normalizations to citation counts. We point out why we believe most of the criticism is unjustified, but we also indicate where we think Opthof and Leydesdorff raise a valid point

Getting to Yes in Specialized Courts: The Unique Role of ADR in Business Court Cases

The assumed compatibility between ADR and specialized courts is largely unexamined. Without being able to statistically validate the motivations and preferences of individual disputants in a manner to draw generalized conclusions, this article examines the relationship between ADR and specialized business courts by looking at how the two are structurally intertwined through existing procedural rules and implementation practices. Part I of this article describes the foundational structures and concepts behind both ADR and specialized business courts, as well as the similarities and differences between them. Part II explores the existing formal structural relationship between ADR and specialized courts by examining the procedural rules facilitating ADR in both the general trial court and the specialized business courts in twenty-two jurisdictions. Part III observes the relationship between ADR and specialized courts through a judicial survey instrument investigating the use of ADR in specialized business cases and a discussion of the survey results. Part IV makes general observations about the existing collaboration between these two tools, in addition to reviewing trends and proffering suggestions

Citation analysis may severely underestimate the impact of clinical research as compared to basic research

Background: Citation analysis has become an important tool for research performance assessment in the medical sciences. However, different areas of medical research may have considerably different citation practices, even within the same medical field. Because of this, it is unclear to what extent citation-based bibliometric indicators allow for valid comparisons between research units active in different areas of medical research. Methodology: A visualization methodology is introduced that reveals differences in citation practices between medical research areas. The methodology extracts terms from the titles and abstracts of a large collection of publications and uses these terms to visualize the structure of a medical field and to indicate how research areas within this field differ from each other in their average citation impact. Results: Visualizations are provided for 32 medical fields, defined based on journal subject categories in the Web of Science database. The analysis focuses on three fields. In each of these fields, there turn out to be large differences in citation practices between research areas. Low-impact research areas tend to focus on clinical intervention research, while high-impact research areas are often more oriented on basic and diagnostic research. Conclusions: Popular bibliometric indicators, such as the h-index and the impact factor, do not correct for differences in citation practices between medical fields. These indicators therefore cannot be used to make accurate between-field comparisons. More sophisticated bibliometric indicators do correct for field differences but still fail to take into account within-field heterogeneity in citation practices. As a consequence, the citation impact of clinical intervention research may be substantially underestimated in comparison with basic and diagnostic research

Online effects of beta-tACS over the left prefrontal cortex on phonological decisions

The left posterior inferior frontal gyrus in the prefrontal cortex is a key region for phonological aspects of language processing. A previous study has shown that alpha-tACS over the prefrontal cortex applied before task processing facilitated phonological decision-making and increased task-related theta power. However, it is unclear how alpha-tACS affects phonological processing when applied directly during the task. Moreover, the frequency specificity of this effect is also unclear since the majority of neurostimulation studies tested a single frequency only. The present study addressed the question whether and how 10 Hz online tACS affects phonological decisions. To this end, 24 healthy participants received tACS at 10 Hz or 16.18 Hz (control frequency) or sham stimulation over the left prefrontal cortex during task processing in three sessions. As an unexpected finding, 16.18 Hz significantly impaired task accuracy relative to sham stimulation, without affecting response speed. There was no significant difference in phonological task performance between 10 Hz and 16.18 Hz tACS or between 10 Hz and sham stimulation. Our results support the functional relevance of the left prefrontal cortex for phonological decisions and suggest that online beta-tACS may modulate language comprehension

A fiber‐mounted, micromachined photoconductive probe with 15 nV/Hz1/2 sensitivity

We report the performance of a micromachined, photoconductive‐sampling probe that is fabricated on low‐temperature‐grown GaAs and mounted on a single‐mode optical fiber. The epitaxial probe has a temporal resolution of 3.5 ps, a spatial resolution of 7 μm, and a sensitivity of 15 nV/(Hz)1/2 when integrated with a high impedance, junction field‐effect transistor source follower. The fiber, which couples short laser pulses to the interdigitated detector pattern on the probe, also provides flexible support and mobility. The probe’s compact cross section makes it ideal for applications as an internal‐node, picosecond‐response, photoconductive sampling probe or wave form launcher for test and characterization of integrated circuits. © 1996 American Institute of Physics.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/70779/2/APPLAB-69-13-1843-1.pd

A field‐sensitive photoconductive probe for sampling through passivation layers

A field‐sensitive photoconductive sampling technique has been demonstrated in measurements performed through an insulating layer without the need for conductive contact. Sampled signals are sensed by a virtual‐ground, floating‐gate amplifier without draining charge from the device under test or the photoconductive switch. The minimum detectable signal is 2.5 μV/Hz1/2 with a spatial resolution of 7 μm, while the sampling bandwidth is essentially that observed using photoconductive sampling with a conductive contact to the device under test. The photovoltaic and shot current noise are negligible in comparison with the lock‐in amplifier noise since the current flowing in this high‐impedance, floating‐gate probe is negligible. © 1996 American Institute of Physics.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/70307/2/APPLAB-69-15-2211-1.pd

The Leiden Ranking 2011/2012: Data collection, indicators, and interpretation

The Leiden Ranking 2011/2012 is a ranking of universities based on bibliometric indicators of publication output, citation impact, and scientific collaboration. The ranking includes 500 major universities from 41 different countries. This paper provides an extensive discussion of the Leiden Ranking 2011/2012. The ranking is compared with other global university rankings, in particular the Academic Ranking of World Universities (commonly known as the Shanghai Ranking) and the Times Higher Education World University Rankings. Also, a detailed description is offered of the data collection methodology of the Leiden Ranking 2011/2012 and of the indicators used in the ranking. Various innovations in the Leiden Ranking 2011/2012 are presented. These innovations include (1) an indicator based on counting a university's highly cited publications, (2) indicators based on fractional rather than full counting of collaborative publications, (3) the possibility of excluding non-English language publications, and (4) the use of stability intervals. Finally, some comments are made on the interpretation of the ranking, and a number of limitations of the ranking are pointed out