Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Cocitation Networks and Random Walk
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Cocitation Networks and Random Walk

1,777
views

Published on

How to manage a Research assessment exercise (scientific publications) with Random Walk protocols and Cocitation networks

How to manage a Research assessment exercise (scientific publications) with Random Walk protocols and Cocitation networks

Published in: Education, Technology

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,777
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
24
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Academic online resources: : assessment & usage Researchers, field activists in the context of Bibliometric analyses Univ. LILLE (France) 26/27 NOV 2009 Manuel Durand-Barthez / URFIST Paris
  • 2. Problematics
    • Issued from a basic model:
    • Web of Science (ISI)
    • Dominating classical Model :
      • (Social) Science Citation Index
      • Journal Citation Reports (JCR)
  • 3. Two types of alternative approaches
    • Starting from Journals
      • Corpus of the Journal Citation Reports DB (JCR) => Eigenfactor
      • Corpus of the Scopus DB (Elsevier)
      • SJR (Scimago Journal Rank)
    • Starting from Articles
      • Links generated by Citebase and CiteseerX
      • Numerous variants of the H-Index suggested by Harzing Publish or Perish
  • 4. Two link-structured analysis models
    • « Two important types of techniques in link-structure analysis are co-citation based schemes, and random-walk based schemes » (Lempel ; Soffer, 2002)
      • Co-citation
      • Random Walk
  • 5. Profile of the ISI Model
    • Scope type: starting from Journals
      • Serials as Document type including Articles
      • Journal Citation Reports and its Impact Factors
  • 6. Profile of the ISI Model Approximate Definition
    • Citation count is raw, « first ring » type
    • Encompasses equally all citing publications issued from the global corpus of the Journal Citation Reports
    • Whatever their intrinsic « quality » (?) and their disciplinary origin may be
  • 7. Beyond the first ring
    • Execution of the Weighted Page Rank , Lawrence Page’s algorithm adapted to Google
    • Simulating the steps of a researcher browsing the references cited by an article, consulting forwards other articles
    • Random Walk protocol
  • 8. Eigenfactor and SJR
    • Eigenfactor of C.Bergstrom applied to JCR + Scimago Journal Rank (SJR)
    • Iterative execution of the Page Rank
    • Cartography of subject areas, traceability of the links
    • Sequencing and linking between disciplines (STM / Soc Sci)
  • 9. Eigenfactor and SJR
    • Extended analysis, from 3 up to 5 years
    • Automatic adjustment of means of citations inherent to each discipline
    • Inspired by the distinction Popular vs. Prestigious journals of the Bollen’s « Journal Status »
  • 10. Preeminence of classical Journals
    • Eigenfactor and SJR apply to corpuses giving priority to classical journals implying a subscription or a strong embargo
    • On the contrary, co-citation networks conceptors refer to Open Access corpuses
  • 11. Impact of OAI type Publications
    • Citebase (Univ. Southampton, S.Harnad & T.Brody) and CiteseerX (Univ. Pennsylvania) suggest three citations levels:
      • References cited by a « parent » article
      • Shared references
      • References citing simultaneously the « parent » item and other items
  • 12. Aftermath of co-citations
    • Cartography of Subject Areas
    • Amplification and optimal visibility generated by Open Access
    • Disciplinary interlinking
  • 13. Aftermath of co-citations
    • Thin granularity, nominative, at least at the Lab level
    • Setting aside the popularity of Journals, which are just globally anonymous document types
    • Focusing on the actors of the research
  • 14. Aftermath of co-citations
    • Author, circumscribed in a Lab team, at a period p
    • Lab team which may be included in one or several communities, appearing through graphs or maps
    • Analogy with the Research Front Maps of ISI’s ScienceWatch
  • 15. Data about Research « actors »
    • Moderate the raw effects of the basic H-Index. See chiefly Harzing’s suggestions:
      • Consider articles positioned under the H level, i mprove on the H-index by giving more weight to recent articles, thus rewarding academics who maintain a steady level of activity.
      • Adjust the H according to the number of authors contributing to an article
  • 16. Weighting factors
    • According to disciplines, variation of
      • The mean citation rate
      • The mean annual number of publications
    • Unawareness of the effective contribution of each author to a publication
  • 17. Combination of both models
    • Random walk
    • +
    • Co-citation
      • How to adapt an H to a Hub , a cluster of authors and publications ?
      • How to dispatch that new H on a scale adapted to each author who contributes to its calculation ?
  • 18. By way of conclusion: an hypothesis
    • To be assessed:
      • Inside a node of international and transdisciplinary co-citations
      • Making reference to the OAI net of articles as such
      • And not to closed corpuses of journals
  • 19. I.F., H and… Copernic
    • Instead of beeing assessed
      • In the precinct of a research unit or of an institution
      • In relation to a journal as such
    • Combine both alternative models
    • For a copernician ®evolution of evaluation