اشترك بالحزمة الذهبية واحصل على وصول غير محدود شمرا أكاديميا
تسجيل مستخدم جديدFunding shapes the anatomy of scientific research
111
0
0.0
(
0
)
اسأل ChatGPT حول البحث
ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
Research projects are primarily collaborative in nature through internal and external partnerships, but what role does funding play in their formation? Here, we examined over 43,000 funded projects in the past three decades, enabling us to characterise changes in the funding landscape and their impacts on the underlying collaboration patterns. We observed rising inequality in the distribution of funding and its effect was most noticeable at the institutional level in which the leading universities diversified their collaborations and increasingly became the knowledge brokers. Furthermore, these universities formed a cohesive core through their close ties, and such reliance appeared to be a key for their research success, with the elites in the core over-attracting resources but in turn rewarding in both research breadth and depth. Our results reveal how collaboration networks undergo previously unknown adaptive organisation in response to external driving forces, which can have far-reaching implications for future policy.
قيم البحث
اقرأ أيضاً
The quest for historically impactful science and technology provides invaluable insight into the innovation dynamics of human society, yet many studies are limited to qualitative and small-scale approaches. Here, we investigate scientific evolution t
hrough systematic analysis of a massive corpus of digitized English texts between 1800 and 2008. Our analysis reveals great predictability for long-prevailing scientific concepts based on the levels of their prior usage. Interestingly, once a threshold of early adoption rates is passed even slightly, scientific concepts can exhibit sudden leaps in their eventual lifetimes. We developed a mechanistic model to account for such results, indicating that slowly-but-commonly adopted science and technology surprisingly tend to have higher innate strength than fast-and-commonly adopted ones. The model prediction for disciplines other than science was also well verified. Our approach sheds light on unbiased and quantitative analysis of scientific evolution in society, and may provide a useful basis for policy-making.
In this paper we apply techniques of complex network analysis to data sources representing public funding programs and discuss the importance of the considered indicators for program evaluation. Starting from the Open Data repository of the 2007-2013
Italian Program Programma Operativo Nazionale Ricerca e Competitivit`a (PON R&C), we build a set of data models and perform network analysis over them. We discuss the obtained experimental results outlining interesting new perspectives that emerge from the application of the proposed methods to the socio-economical evaluation of funded programs.
The study of citation networks is of interest to the scientific community. However, the underlying mechanism driving individual citation behavior remains imperfectly understood, despite the recent proliferation of quantitative research methods. Tradi
tional network models normally use graph theory to consider articles as nodes and citations as pairwise relationships between them. In this paper, we propose an alternative evolutionary model based on hypergraph theory in which one hyperedge can have an arbitrary number of nodes, combined with an aging effect to reflect the temporal dynamics of scientific citation behavior. Both theoretical approximate solution and simulation analysis of the model are developed and validated using two benchmark datasets from different disciplines, i.e. publications of the American Physical Society (APS) and the Digital Bibliography & Library Project (DBLP). Further analysis indicates that the attraction of early publications will decay exponentially. Moreover, the experimental results show that the aging effect indeed has a significant influence on the description of collective citation patterns. Shedding light on the complex dynamics driving these mechanisms facilitates the understanding of the laws governing scientific evolution and the quantitative evaluation of scientific outputs.
One can point to a variety of historical milestones for gender equality in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics), however, practical effects are incremental and ongoing. It is important to quantify gender differences in subdomains
of scientific work in order to detect potential biases and monitor progress. In this work, we study the relevance of gender in scientific collaboration patterns in the Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences (INFORMS), a professional society with sixteen peer-reviewed journals. Using their publication data from 1952 to 2016, we constructed a large temporal bipartite network between authors and publications, and augmented the author nodes with gender labels. We characterized differences in several basic statistics of this network over time, highlighting how they have changed with respect to relevant historical events. We find a steady increase in participation by women (e.g., fraction of authorships by women and of new women authors) starting around 1980. However, women still comprise less than 25% of the INFORMS society and an even smaller fraction of authors with many publications. Moreover, we describe a methodology for quantifying the structural role of an authorship with respect to the overall connectivity of the network, using it to measure subtle differences between authorships by women and by men. Specifically, as measures of structural importance of an authorship, we use effective resistance and contraction importance, two measures related to diffusion throughout a network. As a null model, we propose a degree-preserving temporal and geometric network model with emergent communities. Our results suggest the presence of systematic differences between the collaboration patterns of men and women that cannot be explained by only local statistics.
In this work we dig into the process of scientific discovery by looking at a yet unexploited source of information: Polymath projects. Polymath projects are an original attempt to collectively solve mathematical problems in an online collaborative en
vironment. To investigate the Polymath experiment, we analyze all the posts related to the projects that arrived to a peer reviewed publication with a particular attention to the organization of labor and the innovations originating from the author contributions. We observe that a significant presence of sporadic contributor boosts the productivity of the most active users and that productivity, in terms of number of posts, grows super-linearly with the number of contributors. When it comes to innovation in large scale collaborations, there is no exact rule determining, a priori, who the main innovators will be. Sometimes, serendipitous interactions by sporadic contributors can have a large impact on the discovery process and a single post by an occasional participant can steer the work into a new direction.
سجل دخول لتتمكن من نشر تعليقات
التعليقات
جاري جلب التعليقات
سجل دخول لتتمكن من متابعة معايير البحث التي قمت باختيارها
