The academic social network

Scientometrics

Volumn 101, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 203-239

  Fu, Tom Z J ^a   Song, Qianqian ^b   Chiu, Dah Ming ^b  

^a Singapore Pte Ltd   (Singapore)

^b CHINESE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

Academic social network; Influence; Ranking

Indexed keywords

EID: 84939872927     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: 15882861     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-014-1356-x     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Anagnostopoulos, A., Kumar, R.,&Mahdian, M. (2008). Influence and correlation in social networks. In Proceedings of the 14th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining (pp. 7–15).
2. ARWU. (2012). The academic ranking of world universities (arwu by sjtu) 2012 in computer science. http://www.shanghairanking.com/SubjectCS2012.html.
3. Bakshy, E., Karrer, B., & Adamic, L. A. (2009). Social influence and the diffusion of user-created content. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM conference on electronic commerce (EC) (pp. 325–334).
4. Ball, P. (2005). Index aims for fair ranking of scientists. Nature, 436, 900.
5. Barabási, A. L., & Albert, R. (1999). Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science, 286, 509–512.
6. Bergstrom, C. (2007). Eigenfactor: Measuring the value and prestige of scholarly journals. College and Research Libraries News, 68(5), 314–316.
7. Bollen, J., Rodriquez, M. A., & Van de Sompel, H. (2006). Journal status. Scientometrics, 69(3), 669–687.
8. Brin, S., & Page, L. (1998). The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual web search engine. In Proceedings of the 7th international conference on Would Wide Web (WWW).
9. Budalakoti, S., & Bekkerman, R. (2012). Bimodal invitation-navigation fair bets model for authority identification in a social network. In Proceedings of the 21st international conference on World Wide Web, ACM (pp 709–718).
10. Chen, P., Xie, H., Maslov, S., & Redner, S. (2007). Finding scientific gems with google’s pagerank algorithm. Journal of Informetrics, 1(1), 8–15.
11. Chin, W. S., Juan, Y. C., Zhuang, Y., Wu, F., Tung, H. Y., Yu, T., et al. (2013). Effective string processing and matching for author disambiguation. In Proceedings of the 2013 KDD Cup 2013 workshop (p 7). ACM.
12. Chiu, D. M., & Fu, T. Z. J. (2010). “Publish or Perish” in the Internet Age: a study of publication statistics in computer networking research. ACM Sigcomm Computer Communication Review (CCR), 40(1), 34–43.
13. Crandall, D., Cosley, D., Huttenlocher, D., Kleinberg, J., & Suri, S. (2008). Feedback effects between similarity and social influence in online communities. In Proceedings of the 14th ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining (pp. 160–168).
14. Ding, Y., Yan, E., Frazho, A., & Caverlee, J. (2009). Pagerank for ranking authors in co-citation networks. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(11), 2229–2243.
15. Easley, D. A., & Kleinberg, J. M. (2010). Networks, crowds, and markets—reasoning about a highly connected world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
16. Egghe, L. (2006). An improvement of the H-index: The G-index. ISSI Newsletter, 2(1), 8–9.
17. Garfield, E. (1972). Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation. Science, 178(60), 471–479.
18. Getoor, L., & Machanavajjhala, A. (2012). Entity resolution: Theory, practice & open challenges. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment, 5(12), 2018–2019.
19. Giles, C. L., Bollacker, K. D., & Lawrence, S. (1998). Citeseer: An automatic citation indexing system. In Proceedings of the third ACM conference on digital libraries (pp. 89–98).
20. González-Pereira, B., Guerrero Bote, V. P., & Moya-Anegón, F. (2009). The SJR indicator: A new indicator of journals’ scientific prestige. arXiv:0912.4141v1.
21. Harzing, A. W. (2008). Reflections on the h-index. http://www.harzing.com/pop_hindex.htm/.
22. Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102, 16569–16572.
23. Jeong, H., Néda, Z., & Barabási, A. L. (2003). Measuring preferential attachment in evolving networks. Europhysics Letters, 61, 567–572.
24. Kleinberg, J. M. (1999). Authoritative sources in a hyperlinked environment. Journal of ACM, 48, 604–632.
25. Langville, A. N., & Meyer, C. D. (2009). Google’s PageRank and Beyond: The Science of Search Engine Rankings. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
26. Ley, M. (2009). Dblp: Some lessons learned. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment, 2(2), 1493–1500.
27. Leydesdorff, L., & Bornmann, L. (2011). How fractional counting of citations affects the impact factor: Normalization in terms of differences in citation potentials among fields of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(2), 217–229.
28. Li, P., Yu, J. X., Liu, H., He, J., & Du, X. (2011). Ranking individuals and groups by influence propagation. In Advances in Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (pp. 407–419), Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.
29. Merton, R. K. (1968). The Matthew effect in science. Science, 159, 56–63.
30. Meyer, C. D. (2000). Matrix analysis and applied linear algebra. Siam.
31. Newman, M. E. J. (2001a). Clustering and preferential attachment in growing networks. Physical Review E, 64(025), 102.
32. Newman, M. E. J. (2001b). The structure of scientific collaboration networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 98(2), 404–409.
33. Newman, M. E. J. (2004a). Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 101, 5200–5205.
34. Newman, M. E. J. (2004b). Who is the best connected scientist? A study of scientific coauthorship networks. In E. Ben-Naim, H. Frauenfelder & Z. Toroczkai (eds.), Complex networks (pp. 337–370). Berlin: Springer.
35. Nie, Z., Wen, J., & Ma, W. (2007). Object-level vertical search. In: Proceedings of the 3rd biennial conference on innovative data systems research (CIDR).
36. Pinski, G., & Narin, F. (1976). Citation influence for journal aggregates of scientific publications: Theory, with application to the literature of physics. Information Processing & Management, 12(5), 297–312.
37. QS (2013) The QS world university rankings by subject 2013—computer science & information systems, http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/university-subject-rankings/2013/computer-science-and-information-systems/.
38. Radicchi, F., Fortunato, S., Markines, B., & Vespignani, A. (2009). Diffusion of scientific credits and the ranking of scientists. Physical Review E, 80(056), 103.
39. Redner, S. (1998). How popular is your paper? An empirical study of the citation distribution. The European Physical Journal B, 4, 131–134.
40. Roy, S. B., De Cock, M., Mandava, V., Savanna, S., Dalessandro, B., Perlich, C., et al. (2013). The microsoft academic search dataset and kdd cup 2013. In Proceedings of the 2013 KDD cup 2013 workshop (p 1). ACM.
41. Seglen, P. O. (1992). The skewness of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 43, 628–638.
42. Sekercioglu, C. H. (2008). Quantifying coauthors contributions. Science, 322(5900), 371.
43. de Solla Price, D. J. (1965). Networks of scientific papers. Science, 149(3683), 510–515.
44. de Solla Price, D. J. (1976). A general theory of bibliometric and other cumulative advantage process. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 27, 292–306.
45. Sun, Y., & Giles, C. L. (2007). Popularity weighted ranking for academic digital libraries. In Proceedings of the 29th European conference on information retrieval eesearch (ECIR 2007).
46. Treeratpituk, P., & Giles, C. L. (2009). Disambiguating authors in academic publications using random forests. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM/IEEE-CS joint conference on Digital libraries (pp. 39–48), ACM.
47. US-News. (2010). US News Ranking—the best graduate schools in computer science. http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-science-schools/computer-science-rankings/.
48. Walker, D., Xie, H., Yan, K.K., Maslov, S. (2007). Ranking scientific publications using a model of network traffic. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment,2007(6), P06010 UK: IOP Publishing.
49. Walter, G., Bloch, S., Hunt, G., & Fisher, K. (2003). Counting on citations: A flawed way to measure quality? Medical Journal of Australia, 178, 280–281.
50. Waltman, L., & van Eck, N. J. (2010). The relation between eigenfactor, audience factor, and influence weight. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(7), 1476–1486.
51. Yan, E., Ding, Y., & Sugimoto, C. R. (2011). P-rank: An indicator measuring prestige in heterogeneous scholarly networks. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(3), 467–477.
52. Zhou, D., Orshanskiy, S. A., Zha, H., & Giles, C. L. (2007). Co-ranking authors and documents in a heterogeneous network. In Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM).
53. Zitt, M., & Small, H. (2008). Modifying the journal impact factor by fractional citation weighting: The audience factor. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(11), 1856–1860.