Search (8 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Yan, E."
  1. Ding, Y.; Yan, E.; Frazho, A.; Caverlee, J.: PageRank for ranking authors in co-citation networks (2009) 0.01
    0.01222006 = product of:
      0.07332036 = sum of:
        0.07332036 = weight(_text_:relationship in 3161) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07332036 = score(doc=3161,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2292412 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047513504 = queryNorm
            0.31983936 = fieldWeight in 3161, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3161)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    This paper studies how varied damping factors in the PageRank algorithm influence the ranking of authors and proposes weighted PageRank algorithms. We selected the 108 most highly cited authors in the information retrieval (IR) area from the 1970s to 2008 to form the author co-citation network. We calculated the ranks of these 108 authors based on PageRank with the damping factor ranging from 0.05 to 0.95. In order to test the relationship between different measures, we compared PageRank and weighted PageRank results with the citation ranking, h-index, and centrality measures. We found that in our author co-citation network, citation rank is highly correlated with PageRank with different damping factors and also with different weighted PageRank algorithms; citation rank and PageRank are not significantly correlated with centrality measures; and h-index rank does not significantly correlate with centrality measures but does significantly correlate with other measures. The key factors that have impact on the PageRank of authors in the author co-citation network are being co-cited with important authors.
  2. Yan, E.; Ding, Y.; Sugimoto, C.R.: P-Rank: an indicator measuring prestige in heterogeneous scholarly networks (2011) 0.01
    0.01222006 = product of:
      0.07332036 = sum of:
        0.07332036 = weight(_text_:relationship in 4349) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07332036 = score(doc=4349,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2292412 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047513504 = queryNorm
            0.31983936 = fieldWeight in 4349, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4349)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    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.
  3. Yan, E.: Research dynamics, impact, and dissemination : a topic-level analysis (2015) 0.01
    0.01222006 = product of:
      0.07332036 = sum of:
        0.07332036 = weight(_text_:relationship in 2272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07332036 = score(doc=2272,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2292412 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047513504 = queryNorm
            0.31983936 = fieldWeight in 2272, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2272)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    In informetrics, journals have been used as a standard unit to analyze research impact, productivity, and scholarship. The increasing practice of interdisciplinary research challenges the effectiveness of journal-based assessments. The aim of this article is to highlight topics as a valuable unit of analysis. A set of topic-based approaches is applied to a data set on library and information science publications. Results show that topic-based approaches are capable of revealing the research dynamics, impact, and dissemination of the selected data set. The article also identifies a nonsignificant relationship between topic popularity and impact and argues for the need to use both variables in describing topic characteristics. Additionally, a flow map illustrates critical topic-level knowledge dissemination channels.
  4. Wu, C.; Yan, E.; Zhu, Y.; Li, K.: Gender imbalance in the productivity of funded projects : a study of the outputs of National Institutes of Health R01 grants (2021) 0.01
    0.01222006 = product of:
      0.07332036 = sum of:
        0.07332036 = weight(_text_:relationship in 391) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07332036 = score(doc=391,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2292412 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047513504 = queryNorm
            0.31983936 = fieldWeight in 391, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=391)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    This study examines the relationship between team's gender composition and outputs of funded projects using a large data set of National Institutes of Health (NIH) R01 grants and their associated publications between 1990 and 2017. This study finds that while the women investigators' presence in NIH grants is generally low, higher women investigator presence is on average related to slightly lower number of publications. This study finds empirically that women investigators elect to work in fields in which fewer publications per million-dollar funding is the norm. For fields where women investigators are relatively well represented, they are as productive as men. The overall lower productivity of women investigators may be attributed to the low representation of women in high productivity fields dominated by men investigators. The findings shed light on possible reasons for gender disparity in grant productivity.
  5. 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) 0.01
    0.010183383 = product of:
      0.061100297 = sum of:
        0.061100297 = weight(_text_:relationship in 4759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.061100297 = score(doc=4759,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2292412 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047513504 = queryNorm
            0.26653278 = fieldWeight in 4759, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4759)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    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.
  6. Pan, X.; Yan, E.; Hua, W.: Science communication and dissemination in different cultures : an analysis of the audience for TED videos in China and abroad (2016) 0.01
    0.010183383 = product of:
      0.061100297 = sum of:
        0.061100297 = weight(_text_:relationship in 2938) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.061100297 = score(doc=2938,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2292412 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047513504 = queryNorm
            0.26653278 = fieldWeight in 2938, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.824759 = idf(docFreq=964, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2938)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    Disseminated across the world in more than 100 languages and viewed over 1 billion times, TED Talks is a successful example of web-based science communication. This study investigates the impact of TED Talks videos on YouKu, a Chinese video portal, and YouTube using 6 measures of impact: number of views; likes; dislikes; comments; bookmarks; and shares. In particular, we study the relationship between the topicality and impact of these videos. Findings demonstrate that topics vary greatly in terms of their impact: Topics on entertainment and psychology/philosophy receive more views and likes, whereas design/art and astronomy/biology/oceanography attract fewer comments and bookmarks. Moreover, we identify several topical differences between YouKu and YouTube users. Topics on global issues and technology are more popular on YouKu, whereas topics on entertainment and psychology/philosophy are more popular on YouTube. By analyzing the popularity distribution of videos and the audience characteristics of YouKu, we find that women are more interested in topics on education and psychology/philosophy, whereas men favor topics on technology and astronomy/biology/oceanography.
  7. Yan, E.: Finding knowledge paths among scientific disciplines (2014) 0.01
    0.007586577 = product of:
      0.04551946 = sum of:
        0.04551946 = weight(_text_:22 in 1534) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04551946 = score(doc=1534,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16638419 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047513504 = 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)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Date
    26.10.2014 20:22:22
  8. Zheng, X.; Chen, J.; Yan, E.; Ni, C.: Gender and country biases in Wikipedia citations to scholarly publications (2023) 0.01
    0.0064374236 = product of:
      0.03862454 = sum of:
        0.03862454 = weight(_text_:22 in 886) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03862454 = score(doc=886,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16638419 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047513504 = 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)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Date
    22. 1.2023 18:53:32