<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/1.5.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: PageRank for physicists</title>
	<link>http://bit-player.org/2006/pagerank-for-physicists</link>
	<description>An amateur's outlook on computation and mathematics.</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 05:20:41 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.2</generator>

	<item>
 		<title>Comment on PageRank for physicists by: Neil</title>
		<link>http://bit-player.org/2006/pagerank-for-physicists#comment-97</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Apr 2006 01:48:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://bit-player.org/2006/pagerank-for-physicists#comment-97</guid>
					<description>How do we know the context?  For example, the citing paper could have used the citation in a sentence like, &quot;Smith and Smith 1983 tried this, but their methodology was seriously flawed&quot;.  I think this needs to be added to co-citation analysis of this variety.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>How do we know the context?  For example, the citing paper could have used the citation in a sentence like, &#8220;Smith and Smith 1983 tried this, but their methodology was seriously flawed&#8221;.  I think this needs to be added to co-citation analysis of this variety.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
