arXiv subjects

Staša Milojević

Publications and source records attributed to Staša Milojević.

23 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

arXiv2012

Information Metrics (iMetrics): A Research Specialty with a Socio-Cognitive Identity?

"Bibliometrics", "scientometrics", "informetrics", and "webometrics" can all be considered as manifestations of a single research area with similar objectives and methods, which we call "information metrics" or iMetrics. This study explores the cognitive and social distinctness of iMetrics with respect to the general information science (IS), focusing on a core of researchers, shared vocabulary and literature/knowledge base. Our analysis investigates the similarities and differences between four document sets. The document sets are drawn from three core journals for iMetrics research (Scientometrics, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, and Journal of Informetrics). We split JASIST into document sets containing iMetrics and general IS articles. The volume of publications in this representation of the specialty has increased rapidly during the last decade. A core of researchers that predominantly focus on iMetrics topics can thus be identified. This core group has developed a shared vocabulary as exhibited in high similarity of title words and one that shares a knowledge base. The research front of this field moves faster than the research front of information science in general, bringing it closer to Price's dream.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2012

Social Dynamics of Science

The birth and decline of disciplines are critical to science and society. However, no quantitative model to date allows us to validate competing theories of whether the emergence of scientific disciplines drives or follows the formation of social communities of scholars. Here we propose an agent-based model based on a \emph{social dynamics of science,} in which the evolution of disciplines is guided mainly by the social interactions among scientists. We find that such a social theory can account for a number of stylized facts about the relationships between disciplines, authors, and publications. These results provide strong quantitative support for the key role of social interactions in shaping the dynamics of science. A "science of science" must gauge the role of exogenous events, such as scientific discoveries and technological advances, against this purely social baseline.

physics.soc-ph↗

arXiv2012

Multidisciplinary Cognitive Content of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology

This article examines the cognitive evolution and disciplinary diversity of nanotechnology as expressed through the terminology used in titles of nano journal articles. The analysis is based on the NanoBank bibliographic database of 287,106 nano articles published between 1981 and 2004. We perform multifaceted analyses of title words, focusing on 100 most frequent terms. Hierarchical clustering of title terms reveals three distinct time periods of cognitive development of nano research: formative (1981-1990), early (1991-1998), and current (after 1998). Early period is characterized by the introduction of thin film deposition techniques, while the current period is characterized by the increased focus on carbon nanotube and nanoparticle research. We introduce a method to identify disciplinary components of nanotechnology. It shows that the nano research is being carried out in a number of diverse parent disciplines. Currently only 5% of articles are published in dedicated nano-only journals. We find that some 85% of nano research today is multidisciplinary. Hierarchical clustering of disciplinary components reveals that the cognitive content of current nanoscience can be divided into nine clusters. Some clusters account for a large fraction of nano research and are identified with such parent disciplines as the condensed matter and applied physics, materials science, and analytical chemistry. Other clusters represent much smaller parts of nano research, but are as cognitively distinct. In the decreasing order of size, these fields are: polymer science, biotechnology, general chemistry, surface science, and pharmacology. Cognitive content of research published in nano-only journals is closest to nano research published in condensed matter and applied physics journals.

physics.soc-ph↗

arXiv2010

Power-law Distributions in Information Science - Making the Case for Logarithmic Binning

We suggest partial logarithmic binning as the method of choice for uncovering the nature of many distributions encountered in information science (IS). Logarithmic binning retrieves information and trends "not visible" in noisy power-law tails. We also argue that obtaining the exponent from logarithmically binned data using a simple least square method is in some cases warranted in addition to methods such as the maximum likelihood. We also show why often used cumulative distributions can make it difficult to distinguish noise from genuine features, and make it difficult to obtain an accurate power-law exponent of the underlying distribution. The treatment is non-technical, aimed at IS researchers with little or no background in mathematics.

physics.soc-ph↗

arXiv2010

Modes of Collaboration in Modern Science - Beyond Power Laws and Preferential Attachment

The goal of the study is to determine the underlying processes leading to the observed collaborator distribution in modern scientific fields, with special attention to non-power law behavior. Nanoscience is used as a case study of a modern interdisciplinary field, and its coauthorship network for 2000-04 period is constructed from NanoBank database. We find three collaboration modes that correspond to three distinct ranges in the distribution of collaborators: (1) for authors with fewer than 20 collaborators (the majority) preferential attachment does not hold and they form a log-normal "hook" instead of a power law, (2) authors with more than 20 collaborators benefit from preferential attachment and form a power law tail, and (3) authors with between 250 and 800 collaborators are more frequent than expected because of the hyperauthorship practices in certain subfields.

physics.soc-ph↗