
The invitation to open this session set me thinking about the development of numerical procedures of classification and ordination. Their technical development has been reviewed by various authors from various viewpoints, e.g. Cormack (1971), Orloci (1975, 1978), Dale (1975), Goodall (1970), Greig-Smith (1954, 1964, 1980), Whittaker (1967, 1973). I do not intend to discuss this in more than broad terms, but there is another aspect that has received less attention. This concerns the influences and constraints which have affected the development of numerical methods and their acceptance by phytosociologists. Their acceptance is particularly important; numerical methods are tools and unless they are used in the investigation of real ecological problems we are wasting our time in developing them.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 33 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
