A new classification scheme of science fields and subfields designed for scientometric evaluation purposes
By Wolfgang Glänzel, A. Schubert. Scientometrics, 2004
361 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Statistics and Probability
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/53f3a9675d7bc1ed7ecc35fd058329cc12387371
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Statistics and Probability
Citations in the corpus
- The Dynamics of Resource-Based Economic Development: Evidence from Australia and Norway (2013, background): “This is supported by work drawing upon the new economic geography which emphasises the importance of urban agglomeration of manufacturing industry in knowledge creation and dissemination (Greasley and Madsen 2010).”
- A new methodology for constructing a publication-level classification system of science (2012, background): “…of Web of Science and Scopus, researchers have been working on developing their own classification systems (Archambault, Beauchesne, & Caruso, 2011; Glänzel & Schubert, 2003; Klavans & Boyack, 2010) or on testing techniques that can be used to construct such systems (e.g., Rafols & Leydesdorff,…”
- A review of the literature on citation impact indicators (2015, methodology): “(2009) compare normalization at the level of WoS journal subject categories with normalization at higher aggregation levels defined according to the Leuven/Budapest field classification system (Glänzel and Schubert, 2003).”
- Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century - A review (2008, neutral): “Glänzel and Schubert (2003) introduced a new two-level hierarchical system of scientific fields using a three-step approach: setting the categories, classifying the journals and classifying the articles.”
- Large-scale analysis of the accuracy of the journal classification systems of Web of Science and Scopus (2015, neutral): “ A classification system can assist with various problems; for instance, it can be used to demarcate research areas (e.g., Glänzel & Schubert, 2003; Waltman & Van Eck, 2012), to evaluate and compare the impact of research across scientific…”