Dear Hélène:
Thank you for your message, but I disagree with your proposal. We are
not measuring only contents but contents AND visibility in the web.
Certainly HyperHAL covers the contents of all its participants, but the
impact of these contents depends of other factors. Probably researchers
prefer to link to the paper in INRIA because of the prestige of this
institution, the affiliation of the author or the marketing of their
institutional repository.
But here is a more important aspect. If I were the president of INRIA I
will prefer people using my institutional repository instead CCSD. No
problem with the last one, they are makinng a great job and increasing
the reach of INRIA, but the papers deposited are a very important (the
most important?) asset of INRIA.
Regarding the other comments we are going to correct those with mistakes
but it is very difficult for us to realize that Virginia Tech University
is "faking" its institutional repository with contents authored by
external scholars.
Best regards,
El 07/07/2010 23:03, Hélène.Bosc escribió:
> Isidro,
> Thank you for your Ranking Web of World Repositories and for informing
> us about the best quality repositories!
>
>
> Being French, I am delighted to see HAL so well ranked and I take this
> opportunity to congratulate Franck Laloe for having set up such a good
> national repository as well as the CCSD team for continuing to
> maintain and improve it.
>
> Nevertheless, there is a problem in your ranking that I have already
> had occasion to point out to you in private messages.
> May I remind you that:
>
> Correction for the top 800 ranking:
>
>
> The ranking should either index HyperHAL alone, or index both
> HAL/INRIA and HAL/SHS, but not all three repositories at the same
> time: HyperHAL includes both HAL/INRIA and HAL/SHS .
>
> Correction for the ranking of institutional repositories:
>
>
> Not only does HyperHAL (#1) include both HAL/INRIA (#3) and HAL/SHS
> (#5), as noted above, but HyperHAL is a multidisciplinary repository,
> intended to collect all French research output, across all
> institutions. Hence it should not be classified and ranked against
> individual institutional repositories but as a national, central
> repository. Indeed, even HAL/SHS is multi-institutional in the usual
> sense of the word: single universities or research institutions. The
> classification is perhaps being misled by the polysemous use of the
> word "institution."
>
>
> Not to seem to be biassed against my homeland, I would also point out
> that, among the top 10 of the top 800 "institutional repositories,"
> CERN (#2) is to a certain extent hosting multi-institutional output
> too, and is hence not strictly comparable to true single-institution
> repositories. In addition, "California Institute of Technology Online
> Archive of California" (#9) is misnamed -- it is the Online Archive of
> California http://www.oac.cdlib.org/ (CDLIB, not CalTech) and as such
> it too is multi-institutional. And Digital Library and Archives
> Virginia Tech University (#4) may also be anomalous, as it includes
> the archives of electronic journals with multi-institutional content.
> Most of the multi-institutional anomalies in the "Top 800
> Institutional" seem to be among the top 10 -- as one would expect if
> multiple institutional content is inflating the apparent size of a
> repository. Beyond the top 10 or so, the repositories look to be
> mostly true institutional ones.
>
>
> I hope that this will help in improving the next release of your
> increasingly useful ranking!
>
>
> Best wishes
> Hélène Bosc
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stevan Harnad"
> <harnad_at_ECS.SOTON.AC.UK>
> To: <AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2010 6:07 PM
> Subject: Fwd: Ranking Web of Repositories: July 2010 Edition
>
>
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: "Isidro F. Aguillo" <isidro.aguillo_at_CCHS.CSIC.ES>
> Date: July 6, 2010 11:13:58 AM EDT
> To: SIGMETRICS_at_listserv.utk.edu
> Subject: [SIGMETRICS] Ranking Web of Repositories: July 2010 Edition
>
> Ranking Web of Repositories: July 2010 Edition
>
> The second edition of 2010 Ranking Web of Repositories has been
> published the same day OR2010 started here in Madrid. The ranking is
> available from the following URL:
>
> http://repositories.webometrics.info/
>
> The main novelty is the substantial increase in the number of
> repositories analyzed (close to 1000). The Top 800 are ranked
> according to their web presence and visibility. As usual thematic
> repositories (CiteSeer, RePEc, Arxiv) leads the Ranking, but the
> French research institutes (CNRS, INRIA, SHS) using HAL are very
> close. Two issues have changed from previous editions from a
> methodologicall point of view:, the use of Bing's engine data has been
> discarded due to irregularities in the figures obtained and MS Excel
> files has been excluded again.
>
> At the end of July the new edition of the Rankings of universities,
> research centers and hospitals will be published.
>
> Comments, suggestions and additional information are greatly appreciated.
>
--
===========================
Isidro F. Aguillo, HonPhD
Cybermetrics Lab (3C1)
IPP-CCHS-CSIC
Albasanz, 26-28
28037 Madrid. Spain
Editor of the Rankings Web
===========================
Received on Thu Jul 08 2010 - 13:12:11 BST