A Comparison Study of Measures to Quantify the Evolution of Prolific Research Teams
Scientific research teams play an increasingly significant role in scientific activities. To better understand the dynamic evolution process of research teams, we explored measures that quantify the evolution of prolific research teams. We collected our data from the Web of Science in the field of a...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Data and information management 2021-01, Vol.5 (1), p.56-64 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 64 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 56 |
| container_title | Data and information management |
| container_volume | 5 |
| creator | Zou, Bentao Wang, Yuefen |
| description | Scientific research teams play an increasingly significant role in scientific activities. To better understand the dynamic evolution process of research teams, we explored measures that quantify the evolution of prolific research teams. We collected our data from the Web of Science in the field of artificial intelligence, and applied the label propagation algorithm to identify research teams in the co-authorship network. The Top 1‰ prolific teams were selected as our research object, whose node stability and two types of edge stabilities were measured. The results show that prolific teams are much more stable during the evolution process, in terms of both member and membership stability. The measure of stability has varying degrees of impact on teams with different sizes, and small-sized teams get considerably different stability results by different measures. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.2478/dim-2020-0028 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2467357890</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2467357890</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2256-f9898d50dd5edb5854f8ce16013876c0ae03df4ac8acba1a5e7526a6fedd61853</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkD1PwzAQhi0EElXpyG6JOWA7seOMVVU-pCI-WmbLtc80VVIXOwHl3-OqSDAw3Ts8957uQeiSkmtWlPLG1m3GCCMZIUyeoBHjRZ5VjNPTP_kcTWLckoSQiuQVHaHlFM98u9ehjn6Hl11vB-wdfgQd-wARdx6_9HrX1W7A3Qbw_NM3fVcnNlHPwTe1qw1-hQg6mA1egW7jBTpzuokw-Zlj9HY7X83us8XT3cNsusgMY1xkrpKVtJxYy8GuueSFkwaoIDSXpTBEA8mtK7SR2qw11RxKzoQWDqwVVPJ8jK6OvfvgP3qIndr6PuzSScUKUea8lOnLMcqOlAk-xgBO7UPd6jAoStRBnUrq1EGdOqhLfHXkv3TTQbDwHvohhd_yf_c45SL_BgQRdDk</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2467357890</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A Comparison Study of Measures to Quantify the Evolution of Prolific Research Teams</title><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Zou, Bentao ; Wang, Yuefen</creator><creatorcontrib>Zou, Bentao ; Wang, Yuefen</creatorcontrib><description>Scientific research teams play an increasingly significant role in scientific activities. To better understand the dynamic evolution process of research teams, we explored measures that quantify the evolution of prolific research teams. We collected our data from the Web of Science in the field of artificial intelligence, and applied the label propagation algorithm to identify research teams in the co-authorship network. The Top 1‰ prolific teams were selected as our research object, whose node stability and two types of edge stabilities were measured. The results show that prolific teams are much more stable during the evolution process, in terms of both member and membership stability. The measure of stability has varying degrees of impact on teams with different sizes, and small-sized teams get considerably different stability results by different measures.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2543-9251</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2543-9251</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.2478/dim-2020-0028</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Warsaw: Sciendo</publisher><subject>Algorithms ; Artificial intelligence ; Authoring ; comparison study ; Evolution ; evolution analysis ; prolific research teams ; Stability</subject><ispartof>Data and information management, 2021-01, Vol.5 (1), p.56-64</ispartof><rights>2021. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0 (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2256-f9898d50dd5edb5854f8ce16013876c0ae03df4ac8acba1a5e7526a6fedd61853</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2467357890?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,864,27924,27925,64385,64389,72469</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Zou, Bentao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Yuefen</creatorcontrib><title>A Comparison Study of Measures to Quantify the Evolution of Prolific Research Teams</title><title>Data and information management</title><description>Scientific research teams play an increasingly significant role in scientific activities. To better understand the dynamic evolution process of research teams, we explored measures that quantify the evolution of prolific research teams. We collected our data from the Web of Science in the field of artificial intelligence, and applied the label propagation algorithm to identify research teams in the co-authorship network. The Top 1‰ prolific teams were selected as our research object, whose node stability and two types of edge stabilities were measured. The results show that prolific teams are much more stable during the evolution process, in terms of both member and membership stability. The measure of stability has varying degrees of impact on teams with different sizes, and small-sized teams get considerably different stability results by different measures.</description><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>Artificial intelligence</subject><subject>Authoring</subject><subject>comparison study</subject><subject>Evolution</subject><subject>evolution analysis</subject><subject>prolific research teams</subject><subject>Stability</subject><issn>2543-9251</issn><issn>2543-9251</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNptkD1PwzAQhi0EElXpyG6JOWA7seOMVVU-pCI-WmbLtc80VVIXOwHl3-OqSDAw3Ts8957uQeiSkmtWlPLG1m3GCCMZIUyeoBHjRZ5VjNPTP_kcTWLckoSQiuQVHaHlFM98u9ehjn6Hl11vB-wdfgQd-wARdx6_9HrX1W7A3Qbw_NM3fVcnNlHPwTe1qw1-hQg6mA1egW7jBTpzuokw-Zlj9HY7X83us8XT3cNsusgMY1xkrpKVtJxYy8GuueSFkwaoIDSXpTBEA8mtK7SR2qw11RxKzoQWDqwVVPJ8jK6OvfvgP3qIndr6PuzSScUKUea8lOnLMcqOlAk-xgBO7UPd6jAoStRBnUrq1EGdOqhLfHXkv3TTQbDwHvohhd_yf_c45SL_BgQRdDk</recordid><startdate>20210101</startdate><enddate>20210101</enddate><creator>Zou, Bentao</creator><creator>Wang, Yuefen</creator><general>Sciendo</general><general>Elsevier Limited</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8AL</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CNYFK</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>K7-</scope><scope>M0N</scope><scope>M1O</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20210101</creationdate><title>A Comparison Study of Measures to Quantify the Evolution of Prolific Research Teams</title><author>Zou, Bentao ; Wang, Yuefen</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2256-f9898d50dd5edb5854f8ce16013876c0ae03df4ac8acba1a5e7526a6fedd61853</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>Artificial intelligence</topic><topic>Authoring</topic><topic>comparison study</topic><topic>Evolution</topic><topic>evolution analysis</topic><topic>prolific research teams</topic><topic>Stability</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Zou, Bentao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Yuefen</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Computing Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Library & Information Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Computer Science Database</collection><collection>Computing Database</collection><collection>Library Science Database</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Access via ProQuest (Open Access)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Data and information management</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Zou, Bentao</au><au>Wang, Yuefen</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A Comparison Study of Measures to Quantify the Evolution of Prolific Research Teams</atitle><jtitle>Data and information management</jtitle><date>2021-01-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>5</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>56</spage><epage>64</epage><pages>56-64</pages><issn>2543-9251</issn><eissn>2543-9251</eissn><abstract>Scientific research teams play an increasingly significant role in scientific activities. To better understand the dynamic evolution process of research teams, we explored measures that quantify the evolution of prolific research teams. We collected our data from the Web of Science in the field of artificial intelligence, and applied the label propagation algorithm to identify research teams in the co-authorship network. The Top 1‰ prolific teams were selected as our research object, whose node stability and two types of edge stabilities were measured. The results show that prolific teams are much more stable during the evolution process, in terms of both member and membership stability. The measure of stability has varying degrees of impact on teams with different sizes, and small-sized teams get considerably different stability results by different measures.</abstract><cop>Warsaw</cop><pub>Sciendo</pub><doi>10.2478/dim-2020-0028</doi><tpages>9</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 2543-9251 |
| ispartof | Data and information management, 2021-01, Vol.5 (1), p.56-64 |
| issn | 2543-9251 2543-9251 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2467357890 |
| source | DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; ProQuest Central UK/Ireland; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
| subjects | Algorithms Artificial intelligence Authoring comparison study Evolution evolution analysis prolific research teams Stability |
| title | A Comparison Study of Measures to Quantify the Evolution of Prolific Research Teams |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-20T07%3A09%3A26IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20Comparison%20Study%20of%20Measures%20to%20Quantify%20the%20Evolution%20of%20Prolific%20Research%20Teams&rft.jtitle=Data%20and%20information%20management&rft.au=Zou,%20Bentao&rft.date=2021-01-01&rft.volume=5&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=56&rft.epage=64&rft.pages=56-64&rft.issn=2543-9251&rft.eissn=2543-9251&rft_id=info:doi/10.2478/dim-2020-0028&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2467357890%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2467357890&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |