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. Here we explore a similar approach in the domain of scholarly publications. We describe a system called Scholarometer, which 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 for the first time measures that allow to compare authors’ impact across disciplinary boundaries. We show how 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
Xiaoling Sun, Jasleen Kaur, Stasa Milojevic, Alessandro Flammini and Filippo Menczer (2013) Social Dynamics of Science. Nature Scientific Reports 3(1069). doi:10.1038/srep01069
Xiaoling Sun, Jasleen Kaur, Lino Possamai and Filippo Menczer (2013) Ambiguous author query detection using crowdsourced digital library annotations. Information Processing & Management 2(49): p454-464. doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2012.09.001
Jasleen Kaur, Diep Thi Hoang, XIaoling Sun, Lino Possamai, Mohsen JafariAsbagh, Snehal Patil and Filippo Menczer (2012) Scholarometer: A Social Framework for Analyzing Impact across Disciplines. PLoS ONE 7(9): e43235. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0043235
Xiaoling Sun, Jasleen Kaur, Lino Possamai and Filippo Menczer (2011). Detecting Ambiguous Author Names in Crowdsourced Scholarly Data. In: Proceedings of 3rd IEEE Conference on Social Computing, Oct. 9-11th, 2011, MIT, Boston, USA.
Thi Hoang, Diep and Kaur, Jasleen and Menczer, Filippo (2010) Crowdsourcing Scholarly Data. In: Proceedings of the WebSci10: Extending the Frontiers of Society On-Line, April 26-27th, 2010, Raleigh, NC: US.
The 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.
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 my Google Scholar profile, DBLP, BibSonomy, CiteSeer, ACM, CSB, arXiv.