Tag Archives: publications

Science of Science

Scholarometer

Scholarometer is a social tool to facilitate citation analysis and help evaluate the impact of an author’s publications. One of the promises of Web Science is to leverage the wisdom of the crowds to give rise to emergent, bottom-up semantics, by making it easy for users to express relationships between arbitrary kinds of objects. Rather than starting with an ontology that determines the kinds of objects and relationships to be described and reasoned about, the idea is to give users the freedom to annotate arbitrary objects with arbitrary predicates, along with incentives for such annotations. Social tagging systems for images are one example, where the motivation can stem from the wish to organize and share one’s photos or from entertaining games to guess one another’s tags. The Scholarometer project explores a similar approach in the domain of scholarly publications. Scholarometer provides a service to scholars by computing citation-based impact measures. This motivates users to provide disciplinary annotations for authors, which in turn can be used to compute measures that allow to compare authors’ impact across disciplinary boundaries. This crowdsourcing approach can lead to emergent semantic networks to study interdisciplinary annotations and trends. To learn more please visit http://scholarometer.indiana.edu/about.html

Impact metrics

We proposed a method to quantify the disciplinary bias of any scholarly impact metric, and used this method to evaluate a number of established scholarly impact metrics. We introduced a simple universal metric that allows to compare the impact of scholars across scientific disciplines. This metric is now publicly available for scholars via Scholarometer.

We also developed a method to decouple the roles of quantity and quality of publications to explain how a certain level of impact is achieved. The method is based on the generation of a statistical baseline specifically tailored on the academic profile of each researcher. As an illustration, we used it to capture the quality of the work of Nobel laureates irrespective of number of publications, academic age, and discipline, even when traditional metrics indicate low impact in absolute terms. We further applied the methodology to almost a million scholars and over six thousand journals to measure the impact that cannot be explained by the volume of publications alone.

Emergence of fields

The birth and decline of disciplines are critical to science and society. How do scientific disciplines emerge? We developed an agent-based model in which the evolution of disciplines is guided mainly by social interactions among agents representing scientists. Disciplines emerge from splitting and merging of social communities in a collaboration network. We find that this social model can account for a number of stylized facts about the relationships between disciplines, scholars, and publications. These results provide strong quantitative support for the key role of social interactions in shaping the dynamics of science. While several “science of science” theories exist, this is the first account for the emergence of disciplines that is validated on the basis of empirical data.

We are currently exploring signals from coauthorship and citation networks to predict the emergence and decline of scientific fields.

Team members

Fil Menczer, PI
Fil Menczer
Sandro Flammini
Sandro Flammini
Stasa Milojevic
Stasa Milojevic
Santo Fortunato
Santo Fortunato
Aditya Tandon
Aditya Tandon
Diego R. Amancio
Diego R. Amancio
Filipi N. Silva
Filipi N. Silva
Wen Chen
Wen Chen
Filippo Radicchi
Filippo Radicchi
Jasleen Kaur
Jasleen Kaur
Mohsen JafariAsbagh
Mohsen JafariAsbagh
Snehal Patil
Snehal Patil
Xiaoling Sun
Xiaoling Sun
Lino Possamai
Lino Possamai
Diep Hoang
Diep Hoang

Project Publications:

Support

Our work on the emergence of fields is supported by US Navy grant N00174-17-1-0007.

Abolish Conference Proceedings

cacm_nov09The November 2009 issue of CACM published my letter to the editor entitled Abolish Conference Proceedings (Digital Edition). Here is the published text (which was edited for brevity from my longer letter).

As program chair of an ACM conference (Hypertext 2009), I agree with both Lance Fortnow’s Viewpoint “Time for Computer Science to Grow Up” (Aug. 2009) and Moshe Vardi’s Editor’s Letter “Conferences vs. Journals in Computing Research” (May 2009). Moreover, as an interdisciplinary researcher, I experience firsthand how conference-driven publication practices hurt CS in terms of potential interdisciplinary collaboration, reach, and visibility.

That’s why I propose the abolition of conference proceedings altogether. Submissions should instead go to journals, which would receive more and better ones, with refereeing resources shifting naturally from conferences to journals. As a result, journals would improve their quality and speed up their processes. With the CS community’s full attention, the review process would be more rigorous and timely. Deadlines would no longer be so concentrated, and scientists would submit better work, revise as needed, and profit immediately from reviewer feedback; the same referee would judge improvements to a particular submission.

In many cases where conferences and journals are aligned, presentations could be invited from among the best papers published in the previous year. For newer areas and groundbreaking work, a conference or workshop could still accept submissions but would not publish proceedings. Publishing would be the job of journals.

ACM should shepherd such a transition as publisher of both the proceedings of most top computing conferences and of many top computing journals.

After writing my letter to the editor, it was brought to my attention that there already exists a model for the approach I proposed, envisioned by the VLDB Endowment as a transition from the VLDB conference proceedings to the PVLDB journal and ultimately to a Journal of Data Management Research.

Publications

nan word cloudBack to NaN

The documents distributed here have been self-archived as a means to ensure timely dissemination of scholarly and technical work on a noncommercial basis (see Open Access Initiative). Copyright and all rights therein are maintained by the publishers and/or the authors, notwithstanding that they have offered their works here electronically. It is understood that all persons copying this information will adhere to the terms and constraints invoked by each author’s copyright. Many electronic versions are draft preprints of published papers; the published versions should be considered definitive.

See also Fil’s Google Scholar profile