time distribution citations

[Manuel Lopez Estornell]

Dear Doctor Morris:

Excuse me for the delay. I have been out of my office for several days.

Thank you very much for your useful advises and for your time. The contents
of your message is impresive.
I'll take it in account for my work.

Thanks again.
Best regards,

Manuel Lopez-Estornell
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steven A. Morris" <samorri at OKSTATE.EDU>
To: <SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2004 7:51 PM
Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] time distribution citations


> Dear Manuel,
>
> I think there are quite a few studies on literature aging out there
already.
>  Do you have some hypothesis about an underlying model of citation aging
> that you're trying to test?  That would be interesting to discuss.
>
> My own feeling is that you'll need to divide the references you study into
> two groups, "highly cited" and "normal" references.
>
> "Highly cited" would correspond to "concept symbols" as defined by Small,
> and could also be thought of as "exemplar references" for the specialty's
> paradigm. They may have citation rates that are fairly constant for long
> periods.  (The literature equivalent of what "punctuated equilibria" is
for
> biological evolution).
>
> "Normal references" are probably background noise, subject to predictable
> statistical distributions and aging.
>
> We've all read about preferential attachment models of citation networks,
> like the Barabasi-Albert model.  Many of these models incorporate an
initial
> "attractiveness" as well a "success breeds success" attractiveness of
> references to citations. I think it would be very interesting to attempt
to
> measure this total (initial plus SBS) attractiveness as a function of
time.
>  I don't recall seeing empirical studies like this, though I recall one
> paper by a coworker of Barabasi (Jeung, "Measuring preferential attachment
> for evolving networks").
>
> For a study like that my own inclination would be to stick to well-focused
> collections of papers covering specific specialties, rather than try to
> study  some other huge heterogeneous collection of papers.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> S. Morris
>
> On Tue, 6 Apr 2004 09:12:34 +0200, Manuel Lopez Estornell
> <lopez_manest at GVA.ES> wrote:
>
> >Dear colleagues:
> >
> >I am currently working on time distribution of citations after the
> publication of  papers in scientific journals, it is,  1) the lag between
> publication and first citations and
> >2) the average frecuency of citations (in %) during the t+1, t+2...t+n
> years after the publication of papers.
> >
> >Please, may you give me your opinion about this issue?.
> >
> >Thank you very much in advance.
> >
> >Best regards
> >
> >Manuel Lopez-Estornell
> > Advisor Council on S&T
> >Regional Government of Valencia
> >Juristas, 10
> >46001-Valencia
> >
> >lopez_manest at gva.es
> >