Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
1/18	
Semantometrics:	Fulltext-based	measures	
for	analysing	research	collabora<on	
Drahomira	Herrmannova	(@damirah)	
KMi,...
2/18	
Introduc<on	
•  Up	to	date	many	studies	of	scien<fic	cita<on,	
collabora<on	and	coauthorship	networks	have	
focused	o...
3/18	
Semantometrics	
•  A	set	of	metrics	for	evalua<ng	research	which	
build	on	the	premise	that	fulltext	is	needed	to	
u...
4/18	
Cross-community	<es	
•  Links	between	communi<es
5/18	
Cross-community	<es	
•  The	importance	of	cross-community	<es	
– In	cita<on	networks,	cross-community	cita<on	
paYer...
6/18	
How	to	iden<fy	cross-community	<es?	
•  From	cita<on/coauthorship	network	
– E.g.	betweeness	centrality	
•  From	ful...
7/18	
Emerging	vs.	established	research	
collabora<on	
•  Endogamy	
– In	social	sciences:	the	prac<ce	or	tendency	of	
marr...
8/18	
Interdisciplinary	vs.	intradisciplinary	
research	collabora<on	
•  Seman<c	distance	of	publica<on	authors	
– Higher	...
9/18	
Types	of	collabora<on	when	wri<ng	a	
paper	
High	endogamy	 Low	endogamy		
High	author	
distance	
Established	
interd...
10/18	
Experiment	
•  What	is	the	distribu<on	of	the	four	different	
types	of	collabora<on	in	scholarly	literature?	
•  COR...
11/18	
Dataset	sta<s<cs	
Fulltext	ar<cles	from	ORO	 4,207	
Number	of	authors	 8,473	
Average	number	of	publica<ons	per	aut...
12/18	
Endogamy	and	author	distance	distribu<on
13/18	
Endogamy	and	author	distance	vs.	number	
of	authors
14/18	
Rela<on	between	author	distance	and	
endogamy		
Established	
interdisciplinary	
collabora<on	
	
Expert	group	
	
Eme...
15/18	
Types	of	research	collabora<on
16/18	
Types	of	research	collabora<on	and	
“impact”
17/18	
Conclusions	
•  Fulltext	necessary	
•  Semantometrics	are	a	new	class	of	methods		
•  We	showed	one	method	to	recog...
18/18	
References	
•  Xiaolin	Shi,	Jure	Leskovec,	and	Daniel	A	
Mcfarland	(2010)	Ci0ng	for	High	Impact	
•  M.	E.	J.	Newman...
You’ve finished this document.
Download and read it offline.
Upcoming SlideShare
Práctica 2 Portafolio diagnóstico
Next
Upcoming SlideShare
Práctica 2 Portafolio diagnóstico
Next
Download to read offline and view in fullscreen.

Share

Semantometrics in Coauthorship Networks: Fulltext-based Approach for Analysing Patterns of Research Collaboration

Download to read offline

To date, many studies of scientific citation, collaboration and coauthorship networks have focused on the concept of cross-community ties. In this article we explore how Semantometrics can help to characterise the types of research collaboration in scholarly publication networks and the nature of the cross-community ties, and how this information can be utilised in aiding research evaluation. In contrast to the existing research evaluation metrics such as Bibliometrics, Altmetrics or Webometrics, which are based on measuring the number of interactions in the scholarly network, Semantometrics build on the premise that fulltext is needed to understand the value of publications. Using the CORE dataset as a case study, this paper looks at the relation between the semantic distance of authors and their research endogamy value. We identify four potential types of collaboration in a coauthorship network. The results suggest similar measures can be used to provide meaningful information about the nature of collaboration in scholarly publication networks.

Related Books

Free with a 30 day trial from Scribd

See all

Semantometrics in Coauthorship Networks: Fulltext-based Approach for Analysing Patterns of Research Collaboration

  1. 1. 1/18 Semantometrics: Fulltext-based measures for analysing research collabora<on Drahomira Herrmannova (@damirah) KMi, The Open University & Petr Knoth (@petrknoth) Mendeley Ltd.
  2. 2. 2/18 Introduc<on •  Up to date many studies of scien<fic cita<on, collabora<on and coauthorship networks have focused on the concept of cross-community -es. •  We explore how Semantometrics can help in understanding the nature of the cross- community <es and in characterising the types of research collabora<on in scholarly publica<on networks.
  3. 3. 3/18 Semantometrics •  A set of metrics for evalua<ng research which build on the premise that fulltext is needed to understand the value of publica<ons
  4. 4. 4/18 Cross-community <es •  Links between communi<es
  5. 5. 5/18 Cross-community <es •  The importance of cross-community <es – In cita<on networks, cross-community cita<on paYerns are characteris<c for high impact papers [Shi. et al., 2010] – Same holds true in case of cross-community scien<fic collabora<on [Newman, 2004; LambioYe and Panzarasa, 2009]
  6. 6. 6/18 How to iden<fy cross-community <es? •  From cita<on/coauthorship network – E.g. betweeness centrality •  From fulltext – Seman<c similarity •  Different types of collabora<on when wri<ng a paper – Emerging vs. established – Interdisciplinary vs. intradisciplinary – Etc.
  7. 7. 7/18 Emerging vs. established research collabora<on •  Endogamy – In social sciences: the prac<ce or tendency of marrying within a social group – In research: collabora<on within a group of authors – Higher endogamy = more frequent collabora<on endo A d A a A d a endo p x L p endo x L p p Publica<on A Set of authors d(A) Papers coauthored by authors in A L(p) Set of all subsets with at least two authors of p
  8. 8. 8/18 Interdisciplinary vs. intradisciplinary research collabora<on •  Seman<c distance of publica<on authors – Higher author distance indicates more distant communi<es – Author publica<on record considered as a single text a dist p A p A p dist a , a a A p ,a A p ,a a p Publica<on A(p) Set of authors of p
  9. 9. 9/18 Types of collabora<on when wri<ng a paper High endogamy Low endogamy High author distance Established interdisciplinary collabora<on Emerging interdisciplinary collabora<on Low author distance Expert group Emerging expert collabora<on
  10. 10. 10/18 Experiment •  What is the distribu<on of the four different types of collabora<on in scholarly literature? •  CORE (core.ac.uk) used as a dataset – Cross-discipline – Enables sampling by authors and ins<tu<ons – Selected sample •  Fulltext documents from Open Research Online repository (ORO) •  All other fulltext publica<ons of the authors from ORO found in CORE
  11. 11. 11/18 Dataset sta<s<cs Fulltext ar<cles from ORO 4,207 Number of authors 8,473 Average number of publica<ons per author 7.61 Max number of publica<ons per author 310 Average number of authors per publica<on 4.31 Max number of authors per publica<on 25 Average number of received cita<ons 0.30 Average number of collaborators 80.23 Total number of publica<ons 30,484
  12. 12. 12/18 Endogamy and author distance distribu<on
  13. 13. 13/18 Endogamy and author distance vs. number of authors
  14. 14. 14/18 Rela<on between author distance and endogamy Established interdisciplinary collabora<on Expert group Emerging interdisciplinary collabora<on Emerging expert collabora<on
  15. 15. 15/18 Types of research collabora<on
  16. 16. 16/18 Types of research collabora<on and “impact”
  17. 17. 17/18 Conclusions •  Fulltext necessary •  Semantometrics are a new class of methods •  We showed one method to recognise types of scholarly collabora<on
  18. 18. 18/18 References •  Xiaolin Shi, Jure Leskovec, and Daniel A Mcfarland (2010) Ci0ng for High Impact •  M. E. J. Newman (2004) Coauthorship networks and pa:erns of scien0fic collabora0on •  R. LambioYe and P. Panzarasa (2009) Communi0es, knowledge crea0on, and informa0on diffusion
  • nailest

    Jul. 14, 2016

To date, many studies of scientific citation, collaboration and coauthorship networks have focused on the concept of cross-community ties. In this article we explore how Semantometrics can help to characterise the types of research collaboration in scholarly publication networks and the nature of the cross-community ties, and how this information can be utilised in aiding research evaluation. In contrast to the existing research evaluation metrics such as Bibliometrics, Altmetrics or Webometrics, which are based on measuring the number of interactions in the scholarly network, Semantometrics build on the premise that fulltext is needed to understand the value of publications. Using the CORE dataset as a case study, this paper looks at the relation between the semantic distance of authors and their research endogamy value. We identify four potential types of collaboration in a coauthorship network. The results suggest similar measures can be used to provide meaningful information about the nature of collaboration in scholarly publication networks.

Views

Total views

985

On Slideshare

0

From embeds

0

Number of embeds

154

Actions

Downloads

4

Shares

0

Comments

0

Likes

1

×