The CYE Journal by the Numbers: Exponential Growth, the Most Popular Articles, and More
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Children, Youth and Environments 15(2), 2005 The CYE Journal by the Numbers: Exponential Growth, the Most Popular Articles, and More The CYE Editors Citation: The Editors (2005). “The CYE Journal by the Numbers: Exponential Growth, the Most Popular Articles, and More.” Children, Youth and Environments 15(2): i-viii. Sherry Bartlett offers a thoughtful and stimulating introduction to the papers in this issue, which is dedicated to aspects of children, youth and local governance. Our brief comments here do not address the substance of this topic but describe more prosaic aspects of the CYE journal during the last year. Specifically, we want to share with our readers some numbers concerning access to and use of the journal, outline our plans for future issues, and welcome several new members of the Editorial Advisory Board. The Urchin Traffic Monitor program we have been using since August 2004 to analyze visits on the CYE journal website produces information on the number and date of accesses. It also tells us which countries visitors to the site come from and which pages they access most. The data available for the last 15 months show several interesting results. Accesses to the Journal: Number and Origin First, as illustrated in the chart in Figure 1, the number of journal accesses shows a trend of steady growth. The number of accesses has increased by 500 percent from about 3,000 per month in August 2004 to more than 16,000 in October 2005. On an average day, there are now more than 500 independent visits.1 The CYE Journal by the Numbers: Exponential Growth, the Most Popular Articles, and More ii Figure 1. CYE journal accesses, August 2004- October 2005 CYE Journal Accesses, Aug. 2004 - Oct. 2005 18000 16000 14000 12000 Number of independent accesses by month 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 Month-Year Not only has the number of journal accesses greatly increased, but readers are also coming from more countries now than ever before. The latest count, on November 1, 2005, showed visits from 131 countries, territories and island groups (see Table 1).2 As expected, high-income and Anglophone countries generate the most visits. What comes as a surprise, though, is the strong presence of many low-income countries. While access to the Internet has improved in the developing regions of the world, serious constraints remain in many places. The number of accesses by readers from these regions provides testimony to relevant article content and indicates that the journal serves a need that goes well beyond more affluent English-speaking nations. In this light, we seek to maintain and, if possible, further widen the international reach of the CYE Editorial Advisory Board (see below). Figure 2. Origin of visits to CYE journal web site Origin of Visits to CYE Journal Web Site (in order of frequency) 1 USA 45 Peru 89 Ecuador 2 United Kingdom 46 Romania 90 Zambia 3 Australia 47 Russian Federation 91 Georgia 4 Canada 48 Pakistan 92 Namibia 5 Netherlands 49 Bahrain 93 United Arab Emirates 6 South Africa 50 Vietnam 94 Nicaragua 7 Germany 51 Jordan 95 Kuwait The CYE Journal by the Numbers: Exponential Growth, the Most Popular Articles, and Moreiii 8 Belgium 52 China 96 Bahamas 9 Singapore 53 Trinidad and Tobago 97 Lesotho 10 Italy 54 Chile 98 Kazakhstan 11 Japan 55 Lithuania 99 Bermuda 12 New Zealand 56 Cyprus 100 Christmas Island 13 India 57 Slovak Republic 101 Bolivia 14 Sweden 58 Fiji 102 Macedonia 15 Norway 59 Morocco 103 Nigeria 16 Turkey 60 Lebanon 104 Belarus 17 Finland 61 Croatia 105 Madagascar 18 Israel 62 Zimbabwe 106 Bosnia-Herzegovina 19 Portugal 63 Tanzania 107 Sri Lanka 20 Denmark 64 Slovenia 108 Ghana 21 Switzerland 65 Yugoslavia 109 Niue 22 France 66 Ukraine 110 Dominica 23 Mexico 67 Iran 111 Algeria 24 Malaysia 68 Ethiopia 112 Virgin Islands 25 Greece 69 Botswana 113 Cook Islands 26 Philippines 70 Dominican Republic 114 Kyrgyz Republic 27 Brazil 71 Latvia 115 Uganda 28 Indonesia 72 Kenya 116 Syria 29 Ireland 73 Brunei Darussalam 117 Burkina Faso 30 Thailand 74 Mozambique 118 Mongolia 31 Poland 75 Costa Rica 119 El Salvador 32 Austria 76 Mauritius 120 Bhutan 33...
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».