My comrade-at-arms Helene Bosc is also referred to the foregoing exchange with Andrew Odlyzko about the right way to estimate P.
------------------ List-Post: [email protected] List-Post: [email protected] Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 12:44:31 +0100 To: September 1998 American Scientist Forum <[email protected]> From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> At 03:33 15/01/01 +0000, vous avez =E9crit: >It would be very helpful if those of you who have access to the data >could reply to the following 3 questions: > >(1) How many refereed journals does your library subscribe to? (By >"subscribe," I mean either Subscription (S) or License (L), on-paper or >on-line, or both.) 94 periodicals in our library >(2) What proportion is that, of the total number of refereed journals >that are published (anywhere) that could conceivably be relevant to the >researchers (in all fields) at your institution? Suppressed periodicals (interesting, but not enought money to continue to=20 purchase them) since 1991: 59 periodicals + 1 that we have never been able= =20 to purchase =3D Brain Research + about 20 others essentially in= neurosciences=20 and behaviour (often asked in photocopies) =3D about 80 periodicals missing Ideal number 174 periodicals. Proportion 55% >(3) If we now add in your total potential annual budget for >Pay-Per-View (P), in addition to the prior annual figures for S and L: >What proportion of all the published papers in all the refereed >journals of potential relevance to your researchers can you afford to >purchase through Pay-Per-View? We don't practice pay-per-view but we buy photocopies. We can buy without=20 restriction every copy that the researchers ask. I am not sure that I have well understood your question. Helene Bosc Bibliotheque Unite Physiologie de la Reproduction et des Comportements UMR 6073 INRA-CNRS-Universite F. Rabelais 37380 Nouzilly France http://www.tours.inra.fr/ TEL : 02 47 42 78 00 FAX : 02 47 42 77 43 e-mail: [email protected]
