arXiv subjects

Jan Bachmann

Publications and source records attributed to Jan Bachmann.

8 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

How large should academic departments be?

Academic departments are the primary unit of scholarship and education at universities, and they vary vastly in their sizes. However, the consequences and natural dynamics of department size are poorly understood. Small departments face disproportionate teaching and administrative overhead per faculty member, while large ones face coordination costs and thematic incoherence. Here, we characterize and model the dynamics of academic department sizes using $14,000$ U.S.-based departments in eight academic domains. Across all domains, similar broad-tailed distributions reveal a common size range from 4 to 23 faculty members, widening across domains at its upper border. Annual size-dependent closure risks and growth rates indicate that stability is greatest in this size range: below it, small departments either close or grow quickly; within it, closure risk is low and sizes stabilize; above it, large departments can persist, with marginal attrition and minimal closure risk. An analytically tractable model of size-dependent coagulation and fragmentation, informed only by the aggregated size distribution, reproduces department dynamics across the full size range. Rescaling each domain by its most stable size reveals a common regression toward the stable range across most domains. Our results establish academic departments as organizations with natural size dynamics defined by a grow-or-close pattern for the smallest departments, and a weak pressure against unlimited growth for the largest.

physics.soc-ph↗

arXiv2026

Academic collaborations and movements towards successful careers in physics

Collaboration networks evolve throughout academic careers, yet few studies systematically examine how these network dynamics relate to long-term career success and mobility. Analysing 35,708 physicists' careers spanning at least 15 years, we use time series clustering to identify ten distinct evolution patterns of network size and clustering coefficient across career years 5 to 15. We report three key results. First, authors who begin with loosely connected networks and progressively tighten their networks while expanding network size during mid-career achieve the highest PI attainment rates, publication output, and citation impact. Second, despite different starting points, network evolution patterns associated with better outcomes converge toward moderate clustering by career year 15, suggesting an optimal balance between core team cohesion and diverse external connections. Third, mobility is positively associated with these successful network evolution patterns and remains positively associated with scientific outcomes even after controlling for network evolution patterns.

physics.soc-ph↗

arXiv2025

Network Inequality through Preferential Attachment, Triadic Closure, and Homophily

Inequalities in social networks arise from linking mechanisms, such as preferential attachment (connecting to popular nodes), homophily (connecting to similar others), and triadic closure (connecting through mutual contacts). While preferential attachment mainly drives degree inequality and homophily drives segregation, their three-way interaction remains understudied. This gap limits our understanding of how network inequalities emerge. Here, we introduce PATCH, a network growth model combining the three mechanisms to understand how they create disparities among two groups in synthetic networks. Extensive simulations confirm that homophily and preferential attachment increase segregation and degree inequalities, while triadic closure has countervailing effects: conditional on the other mechanisms, it amplifies population-wide degree inequality while reducing segregation and between-group degree disparities. We demonstrate PATCH's explanatory potential on fifty years of Physics and Computer Science collaboration and citation networks exhibiting persistent gender disparities. PATCH accounts for these gender disparities with the joint presence of preferential attachment, moderate gender homophily, and varying levels of triadic closure. By connecting mechanisms to observed inequalities, PATCH shows how their interplay sustains group disparities and provides a framework for designing interventions that promote more equitable social networks.

physics.soc-ph↗

arXiv2024

Gender differences in collaboration and career progression in physics

We examine gender differences in collaboration networks and academic career progression in physics. We use the likelihood and time to become a principal investigator (PI) and the length of an author's career to measure career progression. Utilising logistic regression and accelerated failure time models, we examine whether the effect of collaboration behaviour varies by gender. We find that, controlling for the number of publications, the relationship between collaborative behaviour and career progression is almost the same for men and women. Specifically, we find that those who eventually reach principal investigator (PI) status, tend to have published with more unique collaborators. In contrast, publishing repeatedly with the same highly interconnected collaborators and/or larger number of co-authors per publication is characteristic of shorter career lengths and not attaining PI status. We observe that women tend to collaborate in more tightly connected and larger groups than men. Finally, we observe that women are less likely to attain the status of PI throughout their careers and have a lower survival probability compared to men, which calls for policies to close this crucial gap.

physics.soc-ph↗

arXiv2024

Gender disparities in the dissemination and acquisition of scientific knowledge

Recent research has challenged the widespread belief that gender inequities in academia would disappear simply by increasing the number of women. More complex causes might be at play, embodied in the networked structure of scientific collaborations. Here, we aim to understand the structural inequality between male and female scholars in the dissemination of scientific knowledge. We use a large-scale dataset of academic publications from the American Physical Society (APS) to build a time-varying network of collaborations from 1970 to 2020. We model knowledge dissemination as a contagion process in which scientists become informed based on the propagation of knowledge through their collaborators. We quantify the fairness of the system in terms of how women acquire and diffuse knowledge compared to men. Our results indicate that knowledge acquisition and diffusion are slower for women than expected. We find that the main determinant of women's disadvantage is the gap in the cumulative number of collaborators, highlighting how time creates structural disadvantages that contribute to marginalize women in physics. Our work sheds light on how the dynamics of scientific collaborations shape gender disparities in knowledge dissemination and calls for a deeper understanding on how to intervene to improve fairness and diversity in the scientific community.

physics.soc-ph↗

arXiv2024

Cumulative Advantage of Brokerage in Academia

Science is a collaborative endeavor in which "who collaborates with whom" profoundly influences scientists' career trajectories and success. Despite its relevance, little is known about how scholars facilitate new collaborations among their peers. In this study, we quantify brokerage in academia and study its effect on the careers of physicists worldwide. We find that early-career participation in brokerage increases later-stage involvement for all researchers, with increasing participation rates and greater career impact among more successful scientists. This cumulative advantage process suggests that brokerage contributes to the unequal distribution of success in academia. Surprisingly, this affects both women and men equally, despite women being more junior in all brokerage roles and lagging behind men's participation due to their late and slow arrival to physics. Because of its cumulative nature, promoting brokerage opportunities to early career scientists might help reduce the inequalities in academic success.

physics.soc-ph↗

arXiv2022

Improving the visibility of minorities through network growth interventions

Improving the position of minorities in networks via interventions is a challenge of high theoretical and societal importance. In this work, we examine how different network growth interventions impact the position of minority nodes in degree rankings over time. We distinguish between two kinds of interventions: (i) group size interventions, such as introducing quotas, that regulate the ratio of incoming minority and majority nodes; and (ii) behavioural interventions, such as homophily, i.e. varying how groups interact and connect to each other. We find that even extreme group size interventions do not have a strong effect on the position of minorities in rankings if certain behavioural changes do not manifest at the same time. For example, minority representation in rankings is not increased by high quotas if the actors in the network do not adopt homophilic behaviour. As a result, a key finding of our research is that in order for the visibility of minorities to improve, group size and behavioural interventions need to be coordinated. Moreover, their potential benefit is highly dependent on pre-intervention conditions in social networks. In a real-world case study, we explore the effectiveness of interventions to reach gender parity in academia. Our work lays a theoretical and computational foundation for further studies aiming to explore the effectiveness of interventions in growing networks.

physics.soc-ph↗

arXiv2020

The Effects of Randomness on the Stability of Node Embeddings

We systematically evaluate the (in-)stability of state-of-the-art node embedding algorithms due to randomness, i.e., the random variation of their outcomes given identical algorithms and graphs. We apply five node embeddings algorithms---HOPE, LINE, node2vec, SDNE, and GraphSAGE---to synthetic and empirical graphs and assess their stability under randomness with respect to (i) the geometry of embedding spaces as well as (ii) their performance in downstream tasks. We find significant instabilities in the geometry of embedding spaces independent of the centrality of a node. In the evaluation of downstream tasks, we find that the accuracy of node classification seems to be unaffected by random seeding while the actual classification of nodes can vary significantly. This suggests that instability effects need to be taken into account when working with node embeddings. Our work is relevant for researchers and engineers interested in the effectiveness, reliability, and reproducibility of node embedding approaches.

cs.LG↗