开放获取期刊
- 网络OAJ;open access journal
-
他又说到开放获取期刊将学术价值优先于商业利益之上。
He added that open access journals prioritise academic merits over commercial interests .
-
论文分类介绍了网上免费的英文图书情报学专业信息源,包括机构及学术网站、开放获取期刊、学术会议、科研项目网站、博客及邮件组、讨论组等。
This paper discusses free access to English LIS resources in terms of institution website , open access journals , academic meeting , project , blog , Listserv et al .
-
这项研究结果发表在开放获取期刊《分子生物技术》(mBio)上。
The research was published in the open-access journal mBio .
-
研究者在开放获取期刊BMC肿瘤上的论文提示:来源于晚期或生存期短的乳腺癌标本,其GLI1是过表达的。
Researchers writing in the open access journal BMC Cancer found increased expression of GLI1 in samples taken from more advanced and less survivable tumors .
-
国外开放获取期刊全文网站的开发利用
The Development and Utilization of Foreign Open Access Journal Full-text Websites
-
开放获取期刊现状及其学术影响力评价研究
Research on the Status and Academic Influence Evaluation of Open Access Journals
-
生物医学开放获取期刊导航系统的设计与实现
Design and Implementation of Biomedicine Open Access Journals Navigation System
-
开放获取期刊数据库的评价
Evaluation of the Open Access Journal Database
-
“我预计,根据现有的开放获取期刊的数量,总体百分比每年将增加1%到1.5%,”他说。他还说,这在未来可能进一步增加。
" I would expect that the overall percentage would increase by1 – 1.5 per year based on the number of open access journals in existence ," he said , adding that this might increase further in the future .
-
该研究强烈支持建立一个本土的高质量、更加开放获取的学术期刊体系。
This study strongly supported building up an indigenous system of high-quality , mostly open access , scholarly journals .
-
一项新的研究表明,发表在开放获取的网络版期刊上的科学论文,比那些读者必须付费阅读的论文有更大的影响力和较高的引用率。
Scientific papers published in online journals that are open-access have a bigger impact and are cited more frequently than papers readers must pay for , according to a new study .
-
开放获取出版是一种新兴的网络出版形式。它有自存储和开放获取期刊两种运行模式。
Open access publishing is a burgeoning network publishing form , which includes two operating models , that is , self-archiving and open access journals .
-
开放获取出版物模式的支持者否认这样的言辞,表示现在根本没有任何证据来支持这样大惊小怪的言论,这一声明的作者们混淆了当前开放获取期刊争论中的各种观点。
Proponents of open access deny this claim , saying there is no evidence to support such alarmist statements , and that its authors have confused various strands of the open access debate .