LIBLICENSE-L Archives

LibLicense-L Discussion Forum

LIBLICENSE-L@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
LibLicense-L Discussion Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 27 Sep 2012 19:11:04 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (54 lines)
From: Subbiah Arunachalam <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 23:11:12 -0700

Thanks very much Loet.

Suppose we are able to negotiate with GS and increase the download
limit to 200,000/ search. Will it still be equal to WoS? If not, what
should the OS and OA and the OER communities request GS to do? That
was my interest. What technical improvements are needed to make GS,
the only cost-free service, the best?

As you know, there is considerable interest among the OA community to
develop alternative metrics. Can GS take up the challenge? If they do,
it will be welcomed by many in the developing world and probably also
many in the developed countries.

Arun


On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 10:38 PM, Loet Leydesdorff <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Dear Subbiah,
>
> The problems are with the systems limitations. GS has a download maximum of 1,000/search and Scopus 2,000/search. In WoS, this is 100,000/search. That is orders of magnitude larger.
>
> Best,
>
> Loet
>
>
> From: Subbiah Arunachalam [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 1:51 AM
> To: Subbiah Gunasekaran; G Mahesh
> Cc: [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask]; Loet Leydesdorff; [log in to unmask]; Andras Schubert; Ronald Rousseau; Leo Egghe; Kate McCain; bcronin
> Subject: Google Scholar rather than academic data bases?
>
> Dear Both:
>
> Please read these two papers and examine what improvements are needed (and we can suggest) to make Google Scholar the best source of data for bibliometric analysis as distinct from mere literature reviews. I am also forwarding this mail to experts around the world.
>
> Thanks and best wishes.
>
> Arun
>
>
> Chen, Xiaotian. (2010). Google Scholar’s Dramatic Coverage Improvement
> Five Years after Debut. Serials Review. 36 (4), 221-226.
>
> Chen, Xiaotian. (2010). The Declining Value of Subscription-Based
> Abstracting and Indexing Services in the New Knowledge Dissemination
> Era. Serials Review. 36 (2), 79-85.
>
> Scopus, WoS, etc. are really unaffordable. They are the equivalents of Cell, Brain Research, etc. among toll-access journals.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2