Evaluate the Egocentric Citation Network of "Aerospace Engineering" and "Nuclear Technology"

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Knowledge and Information Science, Faculty of Education and Psychology, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran.

2 Associate Professor, Department of Knowledge and Information Science, Faculty of Education and Psychology, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran.

3 Assistant Professor, Information Management Department, Islamic World Science & Technology Monitoring and Citation Institute (ISC), Shiraz, Iran.

4 AAssistant Professor, Department of Knowledge and Information Science, Faculty of Education and Psychology, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran.

Abstract

Objective: This research aimed to measure the dependence and independence of documents in an Ego-centered citation network to evaluate the quality of scientific outputs in two subject areas "aerospace engineering" and "nuclear technology."
Methodology: The present study is applied research and belongs to the category of scientometrics research. In the first step, the required data for creating ego-centric citation networks were extracted and stored from the Web of Science Core Collection (WOSCC) through web scraping (automated data extraction from websites) using the Mimfa Scraper (a software for automated data extraction) and the JavaScript programming language. Afterward, algorithm coding was performed in the MiMFa RAVAR DataLab, and the programming language C# was utilized to answer the research question.
Findings: The research findings showed that the study conducted by Allison (2016) with 1535 citations is the most cited document in the field of nuclear technology and ranks first in terms of absolute dependence index. In comparison to the number of references in Allison's paper, 80 percent of the alters in Li's research (2018), the second most cited paper in terms of the absolute dependence index (512 citations), cited ego-related references (58 references); however, this percentage is 46 percent in Allison's paper. A study conducted by Shin has obtained the highest absolute independence index (2015 citations) compared to other highly cited articles in the field of nuclear technology. Leppanen's study (2015) ranks first in terms of the relative independence index with a score of 98 percent compared to other highly cited documents in the field of nuclear technology. Ricker (2015), along with 57 co-authors, has the highest number of citations (1542 citations) in aerospace engineering. Among these citations, 647 alters have cited the documents cited by the ego and obtained the highest absolute dependence index score. Wang's research (2020), with 52 citations, is the first paper to rank the relative independence index in the field of aerospace engineering.
Conclusion: The results indicate that the level of relative dependence was higher than independence in both subject areas. Moreover, as the number of citations increases, both absolute dependence and independence increase; however, relative dependence decreases. Additionally, in recent years, the absolute dependence and independence indices have lower values than older years. However, the relative dependence index positively correlates with the year of publication. Moreover, the relative independence index positively correlates with the number of citations; its value has increased in recent years and the number of ego sources does not directly correlate with the increase in the dependence index.

Keywords

References

Aksnes, D. W., & Taxt, R. E. (2004). Peer reviews and bibliometric indicators: a comparative study at a Norwegian university. Research Evaluation, 13(1), 33-41.
Allison, J., Amako, K., Apostolakis, J., Arce, P., Asai, M., Aso, T. Bagli, E., Bagulya, A., Banerjee, S.,  ... & Yoshida, H. (2016). Recent developments in Geant 4. Nuclear instruments and methods in physics research section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment, Illawarra Health and Medical Research Institute, 835, 186-225.
An, W., Beauvile, R., & Rosche, B. (2022). Causal network analysis. Annual Review of Sociology, 48, 23-41.
Arnold, O., Bilheux, J. C., Borreguero, J. M., Buts, A., Campbell, S. I., Chapon, L., ... & Zikovsky, J. (2014). Mantid—Data analysis and visualization package for neutron scattering and μ SR experiments. Nuclear instruments and methods in physics research section a: accelerators, spectrometers, detectors and associated equipment, 764, 156-166.
Bellanca, L. (2009). Measuring interdisciplinary research: analysis of co-authorship for research staff at the University of York. Bioscience Horizons, 2(2), 98-112.
Bollen, J., Van de Sompel, H., Hagberg, A., & Chute, R. (2009). A principal component analysis of 39 scientific impact measures. PloS one, 4(6), e6022.
Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H. D. (2008). What do citation count measure? A review of studies on citing behavior. Journal of Documentation, 64(1), 45-80.
Bornmann, L., Devarakonda, S., Tekles, A., & Chacko, G. (2020). Is disruption index indicators convergently valid? The comparison of several indicator variants with assessments by peers. Quantitative Science Studies, 1(3), 1242-1259.
Bornmann, L., & Tekles, A. (2019a). Disruption index depends on length of citation window. El profesional de la información, 28(2), 1-2.
Bornmann, L., & Tekles, A. (2019b). Disruptive papers published in Scientometrics. Scientometrics, 120(1), 331-336.
Brachet, J. C., Idarraga-Trujillo, I., Le Flem, M., Le Saux, M., Vandenberghe, V., Urvoy, S., ... & Sanchette, F. (2019). Early studies on Cr-Coated Zircaloy-4 as enhanced accident tolerant nuclear fuel claddings for light water reactors. Journal of Nuclear Materials, 517, 268-285.
Bridle, H., Vrieling, A., Cardillo, M., Araya, Y., & Hinojosa, L. (2013). Preparing for an interdisciplinary future: A perspective from early-career researchers. Futures, 53, 22-32.
Bu, Y., Waltman, L., & Huang, Y. (2019). A multidimensional framework for characterizing the citation impact of scientific publications. Quantitative science studies, 2(1), 155-183.
Cesaretti, G., Dini, E., De Kestelier, X., Colla, V., & Pambaguian, L. (2014). Building components for an outpost on the Lunar soil by means of a novel 3D printing technology. Acta Astronautica, 93, 430-450.
Chakraborty, T., Joshi, A., Paul, P. S., & Bhatia, S. (2021). Wider, or deeper! On predicting future of scientific articles by influence dispersion tree. Predicting the Dynamics of Research Impact, 151-176.
Chen, H., Zhang, Y., Kalra, M. K., Lin, F., Chen, Y., Liao, P., ... & Wang, G. (2017). Low-dose CT with a residual encoder-decoder convolutional neural network. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, 36(12), 2524-2535.
Chen, Z. Y., Meng, Y., Wang, R. Y., & Chen, T. (2022). Systematic fuzzy Navier–Stokes equations for aerospace vehicles. Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology, 94(3), 351-359.
Cole, S., & Cole, J. R. (1968). Visibility and the structural bases of awareness of scientific research. American Sociological Review, 33(3), 397-413.
Cronin, B. (2005). The hand of science: Academic writing and its rewards. Scarecrow Press.
Davoudi, S., & Pendlebury, J. (2010). Centenary paper: The evolution of planning as an academic discipline. Town Planning Review, 81(6), 613-646.
Del Portillo, I., Cameron, B. G., & Crawley, E. F. (2019). A technical comparison of three low earth orbit satellite constellation systems to provide global broadband. Acta Astronautica, 159, 123-135.
Funk, R. J., & Owen-Smith, J. (2017). A dynamic network measure of technological change. Management Science, 63(3), 791-817.
Golosovsky, M. (2019). Citation Analysis and Dynamics of Citation Networks. Springer International Publishing.
Hagstrom, W. O. (1971). Inputs, outputs, and the prestige of university science departments. Sociology of Education, 44(4), 375-397.
Halgin, D. S., & Borgatti, S. P. (2012). An introduction to personal network analysis and tie churn statistics using E-NET. Connections, 32(1), 37-48.
Leppänen, J., Pusa, M., Viitanen, T., Valtavirta, V., & Kaltiaisenaho, T. (2015). The Serpent Monte Carlo code: Status, development and applications in 2013. Annals of Nuclear Energy, 82, 142-150.
Li, X., Chen, H., Qi, X., Dou, Q., Fu, C. W., & Heng, P. A. (2018). H-DenseUNet: hybrid densely connected UNet for liver and tumor segmentation from CT volumes. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, 37(12), 2663-2674.
Lu, F. K., & Braun, E. M. (2014). Rotating detonation wave propulsion: experimental challenges, modeling, and engine concepts. Journal of Propulsion and Power, 30(5), 1125-1142.
Mendoza, M. (2021). Differences in citation patterns across areas, article types and age groups of researchers. Publications, 9(4), 47.
Min, C., Ding, Y., Li, J., Bu, Y., Pei, L., & Sun, J. (2018). Innovation or imitation: The diffusion of citations. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 69(10), 1271–1282.
Mingers, J., & Leydesdorff, L. (2015). A review of theory and practice in scientometrics. European Journal of Operational Research, 246(1), 1-19.
Mofid, O., & Mobayen, S. (2021). Adaptive finite-time backstepping global sliding mode tracker of quad-rotor UAVs under model uncertainty, wind perturbation, and input saturation. IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, 58(1), 140-151.
Ricker, G. R., Winn, J. N., Vanderspek, R., Latham, D. W., Bakos, G. Á., Bean, J. L., ... & Villasenor, J. (2015). Transiting exoplanet survey satellite. Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems, 1(1), id. 014003.
Roy, S., Menapace, W., Oei, S., Luijten, B., Fini, E., Saltori, C., ... & Demi, L. (2020). Deep learning for classification and localization of COVID-19 markers in point-of-care lung ultrasound. IEEE transactions on medical imaging, 39(8), 2676-2687.
Shibayama, S., & Wang, J. (2020). Measuring originality in science. Scientometrics, 122(1), 409-427.
Shin, H. C., Roth, H. R., Gao, M., Lu, L., Xu, Z., Nogues, I., ... & Summers, R. M. (2016). Deep convolutional neural networks for computer-aided detection: CNN architectures, dataset characteristics and transfer learning. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, 35(5), 1285-1298.
Smith, A. T., & Eysenck, M. (2002). The correlation between RAE ratings and citation counts in psychology. Departmental Technical Report.
Sotiras, A., Davatzikos, C., & Paragios, N. (2013). Deformable medical image registration: A survey. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, 32(7), 1153-1190.
Tajbakhsh, N., Shin, J. Y., Gurudu, S. R., Hurst, R. T., Kendall, C. B., Gotway, M. B., & Liang, J. (2016). Convolutional neural networks for medical image analysis: Full training or fine tuning? IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, 35(5), 1299-1312.
Tounsi, A., Houari, M. S. A., & Benyoucef, S. (2013). A refined trigonometric shear deformation theory for thermoelastic bending of functionally graded sandwich plates. Aerospace Science and Technology, 24(1), 209-220.
Tsuda, Y., Yoshikawa, M., Abe, M., Minamino, H., & Nakazawa, S. (2013). System design of the Hayabusa2—Asteroid sample return mission to 1999 JU3. Acta Astronautica, 91, 356-362.
Viana, F. A., Simpson, T. W., Balabanov, V., & Toropov, V. (2014). Special section on multidisciplinary design optimization: metamodeling in multidisciplinary design optimization: how far have we really come? AIAA Journal, 52(4), 670-690.
Waltman, L. (2016). A review of the literature on citation impact indicators. Journal of Informetrics, 10, 365-391.
Waltman, L., & Van Eck, N. J. (2015). Field-normalized citation impact indicators and the choice of an appropriate counting method. Journal of Informetrics, 9(4), 872-894.
Wang, D., & Xu, W. (2020). Minimum weight optimal design of truss structure with frequency response function constraint. Journal of Aerospace Engineering, 33(4), 04020028.
Wildgaard, L., Schneider, J. W., & Larsen, B. (2014). A review of the characteristics of 108 author-level bibliometric indicators. Scientometrics, 101(1), 125-158.
Wu, L., Wang, D., & Evans, J. A. (2019). Large teams develop and small teams disrupt science and technology. Nature, 566(7744), 378-382.
Wu, Q., & Yan, Z. (2019). Solo citations, duet citations, and prelude citations: New measures of the disruption of academic papers. arXiv.
Xu, J., Ding, Y., & Malic, V. (2015). Author credit for transdisciplinary collaboration. PloS One, 10(9), e0137968.
Yan, E. (2016). Disciplinary knowledge production and diffusion in science. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(9), 2223-2245.
Yang, Q., Yan, P., Zhang, Y., Yu, H., Shi, Y., Mou, X., ... & Wang, G. (2018). Low-dose CT image denoising using a generative adversarial network with Wasserstein distance and perceptual loss. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, 37(6), 1348-1357.
Ye, D., Zou, A. M., & Sun, Z. (2021). Predefined-time predefined-bounded attitude tracking control for rigid spacecraft. IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, 58(1), 464-472.
Yoshikane, F., Nozawa, T., & Tsuji, K. (2006). Comparative analysis of co-authorship networks considering authors’ roles in collaboration: differences between the theoretical and application areas. Scientometrics, 68(3), 643-655.
Zidi, M., Tounsi, A., Houari, M. S. A., & Bég, O. A. (2014). Bending analysis of FGM plates under hygro-thermo-mechanical loading using a four variable refined plate theory. Aerospace Science and Technology, 34, 24-34.
Zou, Y., Zhu, Y., Bai, Y., Wang, L., Jia, Y., Shen, W., ... & Peng, Y. (2021). Scientific objectives and payloads of Tianwen-1, China’s first Mars exploration mission. Advances in Space Research, 67(2), 812-823.
 

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics