No Arabic abstract
Using a large database (~ 215 000 records) of relevant articles, we empirically study the complex systems field and its claims to find universal principles applying to systems in general. The study of references shared by the papers allows us to obtain a global point of view on the structure of this highly interdisciplinary field. We show that its overall coherence does not arise from a universal theory but instead from computational techniques and fruitful adaptations of the idea of self-organization to specific systems. We also find that communication between different disciplines goes through specific trading zones, ie sub-communities that create an interface around specific tools (a DNA microchip) or concepts (a network).
In this essay, I attempt to provide supporting evidence as well as some balance for the thesis on `Transforming socio-economics with a new epistemology presented by Hollingworth and Mueller (2008). First, I review a personal highlight of my own scientific path that illustrates the power of interdisciplinarity as well as unity of the mathematical description of natural and social processes. I also argue against the claim that complex systems are in general `not susceptible to mathematical analysis, but must be understood by letting them evolve over time or with simulation analysis. Moreover, I present evidence of the limits of the claim that scientists working within Science II do not make predictions about the future because it is too complex. I stress the potentials for a third `Quantum Science and its associated conceptual and philosophical revolutions, and finally point out some limits of the `new theory of networks.
Although interdisciplinarity is often touted as a necessity for modern research, the evidence on the relative impact of sectorial versus to interdisciplinary science is qualitative at best. In this paper we leverage the bibliographic data set of the American Physical Society to quantify the role of interdisciplinarity in physics, and that of talent and luck in achieving success in scientific careers. We analyze a period of 30 years (1980-2009) tagging papers and their authors by means of the Physics and Astronomy Classification Scheme (PACS), to show that some degree of interdisciplinarity is quite helpful to reach success, measured as a proxy of either the number of articles or the citations score. We also propose an agent-based model of the publication-reputation-citation dynamics reproduces the trends observed in the APS data set. On the one hand, the results highlight the crucial role of randomness and serendipity in real scientific research; on the other, they shed light on a counter-intuitive effect indicating that the most talented authors are not necessarily the most successful ones.
In this study, we combine bibliometric techniques with a machine learning algorithm, the sequential Information Bottleneck, to assess the interdisciplinarity of research produced by the University of Hawaii NASA Astrobiology Institute (UHNAI). In particular, we cluster abstract data to evaluate Thomson Reuters Web of Knowledge subject categories as descriptive labels for astrobiology documents, assess individual researcher interdisciplinarity, and determine where collaboration opportunities might occur. We find that the majority of the UHNAI team is engaged in interdisciplinary research, and suggest that our method could be applied to additional NASA Astrobiology Institute teams in particular, or other interdisciplinary research teams more broadly, to identify and facilitate collaboration opportunities.
A comparative study is done of interdisciplinary citations in 2013 between physics, chemistry, and molecular biology, in Brazil, South Korea, Turkey, and USA. Several surprising conclusions emerge from our tabular and graphical analysis: The cross-science citation rates are in general strikingly similar, between Brazil, South Korea, Turkey, and USA. One apparent exception is the comparatively more tenuous relation between molecular biology and physics in Brazil and USA. Other slight exceptions are the higher amount of citing of physicists by chemists in South Korea, of chemists by molecular biologists in Turkey, and of molecular biologists by chemists in Brazil and USA. Chemists are, by a sizable margin, the most cross-science citing scientists in this group of three sciences. Physicist are, again by a sizable margin, the least cross-science citing scientists in this group of three sciences. In all four countries, the strongest cross-science citation is from chemistry to physics and the weakest cross-science citation is from physics to molecular biology. Our findings are consistent with a V-shaped backbone connectivity, as opposed to a Delta connectivity, as also found in a previous study of earlier citation years.
John Desmond Bernal (1901-1970) was one of the most eminent scientists in molecular biology, and also regarded as the founding father of the Science of Science. His book The Social Function of Science laid the theoretical foundations for the discipline. In this article, we summarize four chief characteristics of his ideas in the Science of Science: the socio-historical perspective, theoretical models, qualitative and quantitative approaches, and studies of science planning and policy. China has constantly reformed its scientific and technological system based on research evidence of the Science of Science. Therefore, we analyze the impact of Bernal Science-of-Science thoughts on the development of Science of Science in China, and discuss how they might be usefully taken still further in quantitative studies of science.