Regression for citation data: An evaluation of different methods
about
Science and Facebook: The same popularity law!Effects of research complexity and competition on the incidence and growth of coauthorship in biomedicine.Open access to journal articles in oncology: current situation and citation impact.Do Mendeley reader counts reflect the scholarly impact of conference papers? An investigation of computer science and engineeringWhy do papers have many Mendeley readers but few Scopus-indexed citations and vice versa?ResearchGate articles: Age, discipline, audience size, and impactStopped sum models and proposed variants for citation dataAlternative metric indicators for funding scheme evaluations
P2860
Q33873802-6271AE89-9864-4A55-9F16-6ED32B6556BDQ36318484-563FA954-3170-4BE7-B2AB-4DD422F5445AQ42694063-7B545088-4A5E-4896-AC45-F8387B9EFFFFQ56220035-248635BC-22ED-49F9-9F40-15652D0AA646Q56220037-9D95FF49-CD3A-4CEB-BB40-9332BEBFB66EQ56220049-858610F4-B22F-436D-B351-A57D9833B8F9Q56220093-5479127A-DF8F-4CD9-BEF0-DFB3CD637821Q58899846-18CD3AF5-97C1-4A5F-9653-9A3DDA6BD8F8
P2860
Regression for citation data: An evaluation of different methods
description
im Oktober 2014 veröffentlichter wissenschaftlicher Artikel
@de
wetenschappelijk artikel
@nl
наукова стаття, опублікована в жовтні 2014
@uk
name
Regression for citation data: An evaluation of different methods
@en
Regression for citation data: An evaluation of different methods
@nl
type
label
Regression for citation data: An evaluation of different methods
@en
Regression for citation data: An evaluation of different methods
@nl
prefLabel
Regression for citation data: An evaluation of different methods
@en
Regression for citation data: An evaluation of different methods
@nl
P1476
Regression for citation data: An evaluation of different methods
@en
P2093
Paul Wilson
P304
P356
10.1016/J.JOI.2014.09.011
P577
2014-10-01T00:00:00Z
P5875
P818
1510.08877