情报科学 ›› 2025, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (4): 72-79.

• 理论研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

学术论文代表作评价全信息模型构建研究

  

  • 出版日期:2025-04-05 发布日期:2025-08-28

  • Online:2025-04-05 Published:2025-08-28

摘要: 【目的/意义】为有效落实代表作评价制度和提升学术论文代表作评价结果的精准性,针对传统评价模式存 在的评价信息失“全”和过程控制失“准”的问题,提出学术论文代表作评价全信息模型,构建一种学术共同体代表 作精准评价的基础理论。【方法/过程】分析学术论文代表作评价过程及其机理,提炼影响学术论文代表作评价结果 精准性的关键问题,基于全信息及其获取,构建学术论文代表作评价全信息模型及其应用的过程控制。【结果/结 论】全信息模型为学术论文代表作的精准评价提供了一个理论框架,有利于完整发挥评价信息效用、规范评价流 程、制约评价失真行为、有效实现精准评价。未来需要注重在人文上保证信源质量、在技术上保证编码水平、在环 境上保证信道畅通以及在标准上解决解码误差。【创新/局限】学术论文代表作评价全信息模型为代表作评价实践 活动提供指导,但模型尚未实证检验。

Abstract: 【Purpose/significance】In order to effectively implement the representative work evaluation system and improve the accu⁃ racy of academic paper representative work evaluation results, and to address the problems of incomplete evaluation information and inaccurate process control in traditional evaluation models, a comprehensive information model for academic paper representative work evaluation is proposed, and a basic theory for precise evaluation of academic community representative work is constructed. 【Method/process】Analyze the evaluation process and mechanism of academic paper representative works, extract key issues that af⁃ fect the accuracy of academic paper representative work evaluation results, and based on comprehensive information and its acquisi⁃ tion, construct a comprehensive information model for academic paper representative work evaluation and its application process con⁃ trol.【Result/conclusion】The comprehensive information model provides a theoretical framework for the accurate evaluation of repre⁃ sentative works in academic papers, which is conducive to fully utilizing the utility of evaluation information, standardizing evaluation processes, restricting evaluation distortion behavior, and effectively achieving accurate evaluation. In the future, it is necessary to fo⁃ cus on ensuring the quality of information sources in terms of humanities, coding level in terms of technology, channel smoothness in terms of environment, and solving decoding errors in terms of standards.【Innovation/limitation】The comprehensive information model for evaluating academic representative works provides guidance for practical activities of representative work evaluation, but the model has not been empirically tested.