-
Ding, Y.; Yan, E.: Scholarly network similarities : how bibliographic coupling networks, citation networks, cocitation networks, topical networks, coauthorship networks, and coword networks relate to each other (2012)
0.06
0.05695582 = product of:
0.17086746 = sum of:
0.17086746 = product of:
0.34173492 = sum of:
0.34173492 = weight(_text_:networks in 274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.34173492 = score(doc=274,freq=48.0), product of:
0.22247115 = queryWeight, product of:
4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
0.047034867 = queryNorm
1.5360864 = fieldWeight in 274, product of:
6.928203 = tf(freq=48.0), with freq of:
48.0 = termFreq=48.0
4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=274)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- This study explores the similarity among six types of scholarly networks aggregated at the institution level, including bibliographic coupling networks, citation networks, cocitation networks, topical networks, coauthorship networks, and coword networks. Cosine distance is chosen to measure the similarities among the six networks. The authors found that topical networks and coauthorship networks have the lowest similarity; cocitation networks and citation networks have high similarity; bibliographic coupling networks and cocitation networks have high similarity; and coword networks and topical networks have high similarity. In addition, through multidimensional scaling, two dimensions can be identified among the six networks: Dimension 1 can be interpreted as citation-based versus noncitation-based, and Dimension 2 can be interpreted as social versus cognitive. The authors recommend the use of hybrid or heterogeneous networks to study research interaction and scholarly communications.
-
Yan, E.; Ding, Y.; Sugimoto, C.R.: P-Rank: an indicator measuring prestige in heterogeneous scholarly networks (2011)
0.03
0.025996659 = product of:
0.07798997 = sum of:
0.07798997 = product of:
0.15597995 = sum of:
0.15597995 = weight(_text_:networks in 4349) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.15597995 = score(doc=4349,freq=10.0), product of:
0.22247115 = queryWeight, product of:
4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
0.047034867 = queryNorm
0.70112437 = fieldWeight in 4349, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4349)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Ranking scientific productivity and prestige are often limited to homogeneous networks. These networks are unable to account for the multiple factors that constitute the scholarly communication and reward system. This study proposes a new informetric indicator, P-Rank, for measuring prestige in heterogeneous scholarly networks containing articles, authors, and journals. P-Rank differentiates the weight of each citation based on its citing papers, citing journals, and citing authors. Articles from 16 representative library and information science journals are selected as the dataset. Principle Component Analysis is conducted to examine the relationship between P-Rank and other bibliometric indicators. We also compare the correlation and rank variances between citation counts and P-Rank scores. This work provides a new approach to examining prestige in scholarly communication networks in a more comprehensive and nuanced way.
-
Yan, E.; Yu, Q.: Using path-based approaches to examine the dynamic structure of discipline-level citation networks (2016)
0.02
0.020136926 = product of:
0.060410775 = sum of:
0.060410775 = product of:
0.12082155 = sum of:
0.12082155 = weight(_text_:networks in 3053) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.12082155 = score(doc=3053,freq=6.0), product of:
0.22247115 = queryWeight, product of:
4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
0.047034867 = queryNorm
0.5430886 = fieldWeight in 3053, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3053)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- The objective of this paper is to identify the dynamic structure of several time-dependent, discipline-level citation networks through a path-based method. A network data set is prepared that comprises 27 subjects and their citations aggregated from more than 27,000 journals and proceedings indexed in the Scopus database. A maximum spanning tree method is employed to extract paths in the weighted, directed, and cyclic networks. This paper finds that subjects such as Medicine, Biochemistry, Chemistry, Materials Science, Physics, and Social Sciences are the ones with multiple branches in the spanning tree. This paper also finds that most paths connect science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields; 2 critical paths connecting STEM and non-STEM fields are the one from Mathematics to Decision Sciences and the one from Medicine to Social Sciences.
-
Li, D.; Ding, Y.; Sugimoto, C.; He, B.; Tang, J.; Yan, E.; Lin, N.; Qin, Z.; Dong, T.: Modeling topic and community structure in social tagging : the TTR-LDA-Community model (2011)
0.02
0.016780771 = product of:
0.050342314 = sum of:
0.050342314 = product of:
0.10068463 = sum of:
0.10068463 = weight(_text_:networks in 4759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10068463 = score(doc=4759,freq=6.0), product of:
0.22247115 = queryWeight, product of:
4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
0.047034867 = queryNorm
0.45257387 = fieldWeight in 4759, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4759)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- The presence of social networks in complex systems has made networks and community structure a focal point of study in many domains. Previous studies have focused on the structural emergence and growth of communities and on the topics displayed within the network. However, few scholars have closely examined the relationship between the thematic and structural properties of networks. Therefore, this article proposes the Tagger Tag Resource-Latent Dirichlet Allocation-Community model (TTR-LDA-Community model), which combines the Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) model with the Girvan-Newman community detection algorithm through an inference mechanism. Using social tagging data from Delicious, this article demonstrates the clustering of active taggers into communities, the topic distributions within communities, and the ranking of taggers, tags, and resources within these communities. The data analysis evaluates patterns in community structure and topical affiliations diachronically. The article evaluates the effectiveness of community detection and the inference mechanism embedded in the model and finds that the TTR-LDA-Community model outperforms other traditional models in tag prediction. This has implications for scholars in domains interested in community detection, profiling, and recommender systems.
-
Yan, E.; Sugimoto, C.R.: Institutional interactions : exploring social, cognitive, and geographic relationships between institutions as demonstrated through citation networks (2011)
0.02
0.01644173 = product of:
0.04932519 = sum of:
0.04932519 = product of:
0.09865038 = sum of:
0.09865038 = weight(_text_:networks in 4627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09865038 = score(doc=4627,freq=4.0), product of:
0.22247115 = queryWeight, product of:
4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
0.047034867 = queryNorm
0.44343 = fieldWeight in 4627, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4627)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- The objective of this research is to examine the interaction of institutions, based on their citation and collaboration networks. The domain of library and information science is examined, using data from 1965-2010. A linear model is formulated to explore the factors that are associated with institutional citation behaviors, using the number of citations as the dependent variable, and the number of collaborations, physical distance, and topical distance as independent variables. It is found that institutional citation behaviors are associated with social, topical, and geographical factors. Dynamically, the number of citations is becoming more associated with collaboration intensity and less dependent on the country boundary and/or physical distance. This research is informative for scientometricians and policy makers.
-
Yan, E.; Ding, Y.: Applying centrality measures to impact analysis : a coauthorship network analysis (2009)
0.01
0.013563735 = product of:
0.040691204 = sum of:
0.040691204 = product of:
0.08138241 = sum of:
0.08138241 = weight(_text_:networks in 3083) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08138241 = score(doc=3083,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22247115 = queryWeight, product of:
4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
0.047034867 = queryNorm
0.36581108 = fieldWeight in 3083, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3083)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Many studies on coauthorship networks focus on network topology and network statistical mechanics. This article takes a different approach by studying micro-level network properties with the aim of applying centrality measures to impact analysis. Using coauthorship data from 16 journals in the field of library and information science (LIS) with a time span of 20 years (1988-2007), we construct an evolving coauthorship network and calculate four centrality measures (closeness centrality, betweenness centrality, degree centrality, and PageRank) for authors in this network. We find that the four centrality measures are significantly correlated with citation counts. We also discuss the usability of centrality measures in author ranking and suggest that centrality measures can be useful indicators for impact analysis.
-
Ding, Y.; Yan, E.; Frazho, A.; Caverlee, J.: PageRank for ranking authors in co-citation networks (2009)
0.01
0.011626059 = product of:
0.034878176 = sum of:
0.034878176 = product of:
0.06975635 = sum of:
0.06975635 = weight(_text_:networks in 3161) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06975635 = score(doc=3161,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22247115 = queryWeight, product of:
4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
0.047034867 = queryNorm
0.31355235 = fieldWeight in 3161, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3161)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
-
Yan, E.: Disciplinary knowledge production and diffusion in science (2016)
0.01
0.011626059 = product of:
0.034878176 = sum of:
0.034878176 = product of:
0.06975635 = sum of:
0.06975635 = weight(_text_:networks in 3092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06975635 = score(doc=3092,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22247115 = queryWeight, product of:
4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
0.047034867 = queryNorm
0.31355235 = fieldWeight in 3092, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3092)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- This study examines patterns of dynamic disciplinary knowledge production and diffusion. It uses a citation data set of Scopus-indexed journals and proceedings. The journal-level citation data set is aggregated into 27 subject areas and these subjects are selected as the unit of analysis. A 3-step approach is employed: the first step examines disciplines' citation characteristics through scientific trading dimensions; the second step analyzes citation flows between pairs of disciplines; and the third step uses egocentric citation networks to assess individual disciplines' citation flow diversity through Shannon entropy. The results show that measured by scientific impact, the subjects of Chemical Engineering, Energy, and Environmental Science have the fastest growth. Furthermore, most subjects are carrying out more diversified knowledge trading practices by importing higher volumes of knowledge from a greater number of subjects. The study also finds that the growth rates of disciplinary citations align with the growth rates of global research and development (R&D) expenditures, thus providing evidence to support the impact of R&D expenditures on knowledge production.
-
Zhu, Y.; Yan, E.; Song, I.-Y..: ¬The use of a graph-based system to improve bibliographic information retrieval : system design, implementation, and evaluation (2017)
0.01
0.011626059 = product of:
0.034878176 = sum of:
0.034878176 = product of:
0.06975635 = sum of:
0.06975635 = weight(_text_:networks in 3356) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06975635 = score(doc=3356,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22247115 = queryWeight, product of:
4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
0.047034867 = queryNorm
0.31355235 = fieldWeight in 3356, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3356)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- In this article, we propose a graph-based interactive bibliographic information retrieval system-GIBIR. GIBIR provides an effective way to retrieve bibliographic information. The system represents bibliographic information as networks and provides a form-based query interface. Users can develop their queries interactively by referencing the system-generated graph queries. Complex queries such as "papers on information retrieval, which were cited by John's papers that had been presented in SIGIR" can be effectively answered by the system. We evaluate the proposed system by developing another relational database-based bibliographic information retrieval system with the same interface and functions. Experiment results show that the proposed system executes the same queries much faster than the relational database-based system, and on average, our system reduced the execution time by 72% (for 3-node query), 89% (for 4-node query), and 99% (for 5-node query).
-
Yan, E.; Zhu, Y.: Adding the dimension of knowledge trading to source impact assessment : approaches, indicators, and implications (2017)
0.01
0.009688382 = product of:
0.029065145 = sum of:
0.029065145 = product of:
0.05813029 = sum of:
0.05813029 = weight(_text_:networks in 3633) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05813029 = score(doc=3633,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22247115 = queryWeight, product of:
4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
0.047034867 = queryNorm
0.26129362 = fieldWeight in 3633, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3633)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- The objective of this paper is to systematically assess sources' (e.g., journals and proceedings) impact in knowledge trading. While there have been efforts at evaluating different aspects of journal impact, the dimension of knowledge trading is largely absent. To fill the gap, this study employed a set of trading-based indicators, including weighted degree centrality, Shannon entropy, and weighted betweenness centrality, to assess sources' trading impact. These indicators were applied to several time-sliced source-to-source citation networks that comprise 33,634 sources indexed in the Scopus database. The results show that several interdisciplinary sources, such as Nature, PLoS One, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, and Science, and several specialty sources, such as Lancet, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Journal of the American Chemical Society, Journal of Biological Chemistry, and New England Journal of Medicine, have demonstrated their marked importance in knowledge trading. Furthermore, this study also reveals that, overall, sources have established more trading partners, increased their trading volumes, broadened their trading areas, and diversified their trading contents over the past 15 years from 1997 to 2011. These results inform the understanding of source-level impact assessment and knowledge diffusion.
-
Yan, E.: Finding knowledge paths among scientific disciplines (2014)
0.01
0.0075101517 = product of:
0.022530455 = sum of:
0.022530455 = product of:
0.04506091 = sum of:
0.04506091 = weight(_text_:22 in 1534) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04506091 = score(doc=1534,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1647081 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047034867 = queryNorm
0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 1534, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1534)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 26.10.2014 20:22:22
-
Zheng, X.; Chen, J.; Yan, E.; Ni, C.: Gender and country biases in Wikipedia citations to scholarly publications (2023)
0.01
0.0063725756 = product of:
0.019117726 = sum of:
0.019117726 = product of:
0.038235452 = sum of:
0.038235452 = weight(_text_:22 in 886) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.038235452 = score(doc=886,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1647081 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047034867 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 886, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=886)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 22. 1.2023 18:53:32
