Academic journal
An academic journal is a peer-reviewed periodical in which scholarship relating to a particular academic discipline is published. Academic journals serve as forums for the introduction and presentation for scrutiny of new research, and the critique of existing research.[1] Content typically takes the form of articles presenting original research, review articles, and book reviews.
The term academic journal applies to scholarly publications in all fields; this article discusses the aspects common to all academic field journals. Scientific journals and journals of the quantitative social sciences vary in form and function from journals of the humanities and qualitative social sciences; their specific aspects are separately discussed.
Contents |
Scholarly articles[edit]
There are two kinds of article or paper submissions in academia: solicited, where an individual has been invited to submit work either through direct contact or through a general submissions call, and unsolicited, where an individual submits a work for potential publication without directly being asked to do so.[2] Upon receipt of a submitted article, editors at the journal determine whether to reject the submission outright or begin the process of peer review. In the latter case, the submission becomes subject to review by outside scholars of the editor's choosing who typically remain anonymous. The number of these peer reviewers (or "referees") varies according to each journal's editorial practice — typically, no fewer than two, though sometimes three or more, experts in the subject matter of the article produce reports upon the content, style, and other factors, which inform the editors' publication decisions. Though these reports are generally confidential, some journals and publishers also practice public peer review. The editors either choose to reject the article, ask for a revision and resubmission, or accept the article for publication. Even accepted articles are often subjected to further (sometimes considerable) editing by journal editorial staff before they appear in print. The peer review can take from several weeks to several months.[3]
Reviewing[edit]
Review articles[edit]
Review articles, also called "reviews of progress," are checks on the research published in journals. Some journals are devoted entirely to review articles, others contain a few in each issue, but most do not publish review articles. Such reviews often cover the research from the preceding year, some for longer or shorter terms; some are devoted to specific topics, some to general surveys. Some journals are enumerative, listing all significant articles in a given subject, others are selective, including only what they think worthwhile. Yet others are evaluative, judging the state of progress in the subject field. Some journals are published in series, each covering a complete subject field year, or covering specific fields through several years. Unlike original research articles, review articles tend to be solicited submissions, sometimes planned years in advance. They are typically relied upon by students beginning a study in a given field, or for current awareness of those already in the field.[4]
Book reviews[edit]
Book reviews of scholarly books are checks upon the research books published by scholars; unlike articles, book reviews tend to be solicited. Journals typically have a separate book review editor determining which new books to review and by whom. If an outside scholar accepts the book review editor's request for a book review, he or she generally receives a free copy of the book from the journal in exchange for a timely review. Publishers send books to book review editors in the hope that their books will be reviewed. The length and depth of research book reviews varies much from journal to journal, as does the extent of textbook and trade book review.[5]
Prestige[edit]
An academic journal's prestige is established over time, and can reflect many factors, some but not all of which are expressible quantitatively. In each academic discipline there are dominant journals that receive the largest number of submissions, and therefore can be selective in choosing their content. Yet, not only the largest journals are of excellent quality.[6]
Ranking[edit]
In the natural sciences and in the "hard" social sciences, the impact factor is a convenient proxy, measuring the number of later articles citing articles already published in the journal. There are other, possible quantitative factors, such as the overall number of citations, how quickly articles are cited, and the average "half-life" of articles, i.e. when they are no longer cited. There also is the question of whether or not any quantitative factor can reflect true prestige; natural science journals are categorized and ranked in the Science Citation Index, social science journals in the Social Sciences Citation Index.[6]
In the Anglo-American humanities, there is no tradition (as there is in the sciences) of giving impact-factors that could be used in establishing a journal's prestige. Recent moves have been made by the European Science Foundation to rectify the situation, resulting in the publication of preliminary lists for the ranking of academic journals in the Humanities.[6]
In some disciplines such as Knowledge management/Intellectual capital the lack of a well-established journal ranking system is perceived as "a major obstacle on the way to tenure, promotion and achievement recognition". [7]
The categorization of journal prestige in some subjects has been attempted, typically using letters to rank their academic world importance.
We can distinguish three categories of techniques to assess journal quality and develop journal rankings:[8]
- stated preference;
- revealed preference; and
- publication power approaches[9]
Publishing[edit]
Many academic journals are subsidized by universities or professional organizations, and do not exist to make a profit; however they often accept advertising, page and image charges from authors to pay for production costs. On the other hand, some journals are produced by commercial publishers who do make a profit by charging subscriptions to individuals and libraries. They may also sell all of their journals in discipline-specific collections or a variety of other packages.[10]
Journal editors tend to have other professional responsibilities, most often as teaching professors. In the case of the largest journals, there are paid staff assisting in the editing. The production of the journals is almost always done by publisher-paid staff. Humanities and social science academic journals are usually subsidized by universities or professional organization.[11]
New developments[edit]
The Internet has revolutionized the production of, and access to, academic journals, with their contents available online via services subscribed to by academic libraries. Individual articles are subject-indexed in databases such as Google Scholar. Some of the smallest, most specialized journals are prepared in-house, by an academic department, and published only online — such form of publication has sometimes been in the blog format. Currently, there is a movement in higher education encouraging open access, either via self archiving, whereby the author deposits a paper in a repository where it can be searched for and read, or via publishing it in a free open access journal, which does not charge for subscriptions, being either subsidized or financed with author page charges. However, to date, open access has affected science journals more than humanities journals. Commercial publishers are now experimenting with open access models, but are trying to protect their subscription revenues.[12]
See also[edit]
References[edit]
- ^ Gary Blake and Robert W. Bly, The Elements of Technical Writing, pg. 113. New York: Macmillan Publishers, 1993. ISBN 0020130856
- ^ Gwen Meyer Gregory (2005). The successful academic librarian: winning strategies from library leaders. Information Today. pp. 36–37.
- ^ Michèle Lamont (2009). How professors think: inside the curious world of academic judgment. Harvard University Press. pp. 1–14.
- ^ Deborah E. De Lange (2011). Research Companion to Green International Management Studies: A Guide for Future Research, Collaboration and Review Writing. Edward Elgar Publishing. pp. 1–5.
- ^ Rita James Simon and Linda Mahan (October 1969). "A Note on the Role of Book Review Editor as Decision Maker". The Library Quarterly. p. 353-356.
- ^ a b c Rowena Murray (2009). Writing for Academic Journals. McGraw-Hill International. pp. 42–45.
- ^ Nick Bontis (2009). "A follow-up ranking of academic journals". Journal of Knowledge Management. p. 17.
- ^ Lowry, P.B.; Humphreys, S.; Malwitz, J.; Nix, J. (2007). "A scientometric study of the perceived quality of business and technical communication journals". IEEE Transactions of Professional Communication.
- ^ Alexander Serenko and Changquan Jiao (2011). "Investigating Information Systems Research in Canada". June 11, 2011. p. ff.
- ^ Bergstrom, Theodore C. (2001). "Free Labor for Costly Journals?". Journal of Economic Perspectives 15 (3): 183–198. doi:10.1257/jep.15.4.183.
- ^ Robert A. Day and Barbara Gastel (2011). How to Write and Publish a Scientific Paper. ABC-CLIO. pp. 122–124.
- ^ James Hendler (2007). "Reinventing Academic Publishing-Part 1". IEEE Intelligent Systems. p. 2-3.
Further reading[edit]
- Bakkalbasi, N; Bauer, K; Glover, J; Wang, L (Jun 2006). "Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science" (Free full text). Biomedical digital libraries 3: 7. doi:10.1186/1742-5581-3-7. PMC 1533854. PMID 16805916.
- Bontis, Nick; Serenko, A. (2009). "A follow-up ranking of academic journals". Journal of Knowledge Management 13 (1): 16–26. doi:10.1108/13673270910931134.
- Deis & Goodman. "Update on Scopus and Web of Science Charleston Advisor
- Hendler, James (2007). "Reinventing Academic Publishing -Part 1". IEEE Intelligent Systems 22 (5). doi:10.1109/MIS.2007.93.
- Lowry, P.B.; Humphreys, S.; Malwitz, J.; Nix, J. (2007). "A scientometric study of the perceived quality of business and technical communication journals". IEEE Transactions of Professional Communication 50 (4): 352–78. doi:10.1109/TPC.2007.908733.
- Waller, A.C. Editorial Peer Review Its Strengths and Weaknesses ASIST monograph series. Information Today, 2001. ISBN 1-57387-100-1.
- Serenko, Alexander; Jiao, C. (2011). "Investigating information systems research in Canada". Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences. in-press. doi:10.1002/CJAS.214.
External links[edit]
 | Wikisource has original text related to this article: |
- ERIH 'Initial' lists, European Science Foundation
- JournalSeek - A Searchable Database of Online Scholarly Journals
- Master Journal List (Thomson Reuters), a list of selected, and notable academic journals in the arts, humanities, sciences, and social sciences.
- Links to electronic journals
- JURN directory of Arts & Humanities ejournals
- Academic Journals: What are They? and Academic Journals Compared to Magazines. Academic Writing. Dennis G. Jerz. Seton Hill University. 2001-08-2001.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
where
as input and results in a workflow net being constructed.
of tasks.
is the set of all tasks which occur in at least one trace
is the set of all tasks which occur trace-initially
is the set of all tasks which occur trace-terminally
first, the latter three can be constructed therefrom)
iff b directly precedes a in some trace
iff 
iff 
iff 
is the set of all pairs 
of maximal sets of tasks such that 
and 
contain any members of 
and
is a subset of 
contains one place 
for every member of 
and the output place 
is the union of the following:
![[icon]](/wiki/File:Wiki_letter_w_cropped.svg){kind=small}
, the Apriori algorithm identifies the item sets which are subsets of at least 
from item sets of length 
. Then it prunes the candidates which have an infrequent sub pattern. According to the 
. Usual set theoretic notation is employed, though note that 
is the candidate set for level ![count[c]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/a/2/8/a284e9fea0f8e3a2185d04dc91330e7c.png)
accesses a field of the data structure that represents candidate set 
, which is initially assumed to be zero. Many details are omitted below, usually the most important part of the implementation is the data structure used for storing the candidate sets, and counting their frequencies.
![count[c] \gets count[c]+1](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/0/6/8/06877396723fd139a75e2c0eb74db9f9.png)
![L_k \gets \{ c |c \in C_k \and ~ count[c] \geq \epsilon \}](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/c/0/7/c074e501c8d3df66a7899d6bbb652e1e.png)
of its proper subsets.
_logo.svg){kind=logo}
found in the sales data of a supermarket would indicate that if a customer buys onions and potatoes together, he or she is likely to also buy hamburger meat. Such information can be used as the basis for decisions about marketing activities such as, e.g., promotional 
be a set of 
binary attributes called items. Let 
be a set of transactions called the database. Each transaction in 
has a unique transaction ID and contains a subset of the items in 
. A rule is defined as an implication of the form 
where 
and 
. The sets of items (for short itemsets) 
and 
are called antecedent (left-hand-side or LHS) and consequent (right-hand-side or RHS) of the rule respectively.
and a small database containing the items (1 codes presence and 0 absence of an item in a transaction) is shown in the table to the right. An example rule for the supermarket could be 
meaning that if butter and bread are bought, customers also buy milk.
of an itemset 
has a support of 
since it occurs in 20% of all transactions (1 out of 5 transactions).
. For example, the rule 
has a confidence of 
in the database, which means that for 50% of the transactions containing milk and bread the rule is correct (50% of the times a customer buys milk and bread, butter is bought as well). Be careful when reading the expression: here supp(X∪Y) means "support for occurrences of transactions where X and Y both appear", not "support for occurrences of transactions where either X or Y appears", the latter interpretation arising because set union is equivalent to 
is a set of preconditions, and thus becomes more restrictive as it grows (instead of more inclusive).
, the probability of finding the RHS of the rule in transactions under the condition that these transactions also contain the LHS.
or the ratio of the observed support to that expected if X and Y were 
.
. The rule 
, and can be interpreted as the ratio of the expected frequency that X occurs without Y (that is to say, the frequency that the rule makes an incorrect prediction) if X and Y were independent divided by the observed frequency of incorrect predictions. In this example, the conviction value of 1.2 shows that the rule 
items. This is called the downward-closure property.
(excluding the empty set which is not a valid itemset). Although the size of the powerset grows exponentially in the number of items 
, which makes them too slow for large data sets. For some special cases, optimal efficient methods (of complexity 
) are known: SLINK
, and produces a hierarchical result related to that of 
is the 
, 
is the average distance of all elements in cluster 
is the distance between centroids 
and 
. Since algorithms that produce clusters with low intra-cluster distances (high intra-cluster similarity) and high inter-cluster distances (low inter-cluster similarity) will have a low Davies–Bouldin index, the clustering algorithm that produces a collection of clusters with the smallest 
represents the distance between clusters 
and 
, and 
measures the intra-cluster distance of cluster 
is the number of 
is the number of 
is the number of 
is the number of 
. Let 
is the 
is the 
, 
. In other words, 
allocates an increasing amount of weight to recall in the final F-measure.
index is the geometric mean of the 
and 
.
of 
points along with an integer 
, and pairwise distances among the points in 
. We can then define a distance function to be any function 
such that for distinct 
, we have 
if and only if 
, and 
- in other words 
must be symmetric and two points have distance zero if only if they are the same point.
that takes a distance function 
and an integer 
and returns a 
will be called its "clusters". Two clustering functions are equivalent if and only if they output the same partitioning on all values of 
to be the same function with all distances multiplied by 
.
, we have 
) be the set of all possible outputs while varying 
, there should exist a 
. By varying distances amongst points, we should be able to obtain all possible 
is a 
; and (b) for all 
. In other words, 
.
.
.
.PNG){kind=small}
bounds: An upper bound is kept on the distribution of a statistic calculated when the null hypothesis is true. Nodes are pruned when it is no longer possible to meet this cutoff.
in the same space. Each datapoint 
has a host node, namely the closest node 
.
,
.
, are connected by elastic edges. Call this set of pairs 
. Some triplets of nodes, 
, form bending ribs. Call this set of triplets 
.
,
,
and 
are the stretching and bending moduli respectively. The stretching energy is sometimes referred to as the "membrane" term, while the bending energy is referred to as the "thin plate" term.
is determined by the mechanical equilibrium of the elastic map, i.e. its location is such that it minimizes the total energy 
.
minimization of the quadratic functional 
;
_for_RNCs.png)
,
be the distance of the object 
to the k nearest neighbor. Note that the set of the k nearest neighbors includes all objects at this distance, which can in the case of a "tie" be more than k objects. We denote the set of k nearest neighbors as 
.
is the true distance of the two objects, but at least the 
of 
indicates that the object is comparable to its neighbors (and thus not an outlier). A value below 
![[0:1]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/6/c/6/6c6526273c612767dbca7ac35fc98daa.png)
.
where r is sparse. Generally speaking, n is assumed to be larger than d to allow the freedom for a sparse representation.
i)
be a sequence of states 
belonging to a finite set of possible states. Let us denote 
the sequence space, i.e. the set of all possible sequences of states.
. In the most simple approach, a set composed of only three basic operations to transform sequences is used:
is inserted in the sequence 
and
is replaced (substituted) by state 
, 
.
is associated to each operator. Given two sequences 
and 
, the idea is to measure the cost of obtaining 
be a sequence of operators such that the application of all the operators of this sequence 
where 
denotes the compound operator. To this set we associate the cost 
, that represents the total cost of the transformation. One should consider at this point that there might exist different such sequences 
is by definition nonnegative since it is the sum of positive costs, and trivially 
if and only if 
, that is there is no cost. The distance function is 
; the term indel cost usually refers to the common cost of insertion and deletion.
.
) by the formula 
, where:
is a 
, and two parameters, 
and 
:
is an error term and the subscript 
, is the difference between the value of the dependent variable predicted by the model, 
, and the true value of the dependent variable, 
.
is the 
is the mean of the 
values.
is 
. Thus X is n×p, Y is n×1, and 
, where 
is the sample size, 
is the number of observations needed to reach the desired precision if the model had only one independent variable.
.
where 
, where 
is a parameter and 
is the feasible region of parameters, which is a subset of d-dimensional 
.
. A 
as 
and 
as 
selected to suit the problem.
of images of feature vectors that occur in the data base. With this choice of a hyperplane, the points 
Note that if .svg)
, a set of n points of the form
belongs. Each 
from those having 
. Any hyperplane can be written as the set of points 
satisfying
denotes the 
the 
determines the offset of the hyperplane from the origin along the normal vector 
, so we want to minimize 
. As we also have to prevent data points from falling into the margin, we add the following constraint: for each 
of the first class
of the second.
)
)
(the factor of 1/2 being used for mathematical convenience) without changing the solution (the minimum of the original and the modified equation have the same w and b). This is a 
, the previous constrained problem can be expressed as![\min_{\mathbf{w},b } \max_{\boldsymbol{\alpha}\geq 0 } \left\{ \frac{1}{2}\|\mathbf{w}\|^2 - \sum_{i=1}^{n}{\alpha_i[y_i(\mathbf{w}\cdot \mathbf{x_i} - b)-1]} \right\}](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/c/9/1/c91514d03dd2ea611781b38ec03fea25.png)
do not matter since we must set the corresponding 
are exactly the support vectors, which lie on the margin and satisfy 
. From this one can derive that the support vectors also satisfy
. In practice, it is more robust to average over all 
support vectors:
and substituting 
, one can show that the dual of the SVM reduces to the following optimization problem:
.
can be computed thanks to the 
in the primal optimization problem. The corresponding dual is identical to the dual given above without the equality constraint
, which measure the degree of misclassification of the data 
)
![\min_{\mathbf{w},\mathbf{\xi}, b } \max_{\boldsymbol{\alpha},\boldsymbol{\beta} } \left \{ \frac{1}{2}\|\mathbf{w}\|^2 +C \sum_{i=1}^n \xi_i - \sum_{i=1}^{n}{\alpha_i[y_i(\mathbf{w}\cdot \mathbf{x_i} - b) -1 + \xi_i]} - \sum_{i=1}^{n} \beta_i \xi_i \right \}](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/2/7/d/27d4897c82071e84609de0de7a046566.png)
.
, for 
Sometimes parametrized using 
, for some (not every) 
and 
by the equation 
. The value w is also in the transformed space, with 
Dot products with w for classification can again be computed by the kernel trick, i.e. 
. However, there does not in general exist a value w' such that 
; 
. Typically, each combination of parameter choices is checked using 
)
)
