IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/infome/v11y2017i1p198-222.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Detecting rising stars in dynamic collaborative networks

Author

Listed:
  • Panagopoulos, George
  • Tsatsaronis, George
  • Varlamis, Iraklis

Abstract

In today's complex academic environment the process of performance evaluation of scholars is becoming increasingly difficult. Evaluation committees often need to search in several repositories in order to deliver their evaluation summary report for an individual. However, it is extremely difficult to infer performance indicators that pertain to the evolution and the dynamics of a scholar. In this paper we propose a novel computational methodology based on unsupervised machine learning that can act as an important tool at the hands of evaluation committees of individual scholars. The suggested methodology compiles a list of several key performance indicators (features) for each scholar and monitors them over time. All these indicators are used in a clustering framework which groups the scholars into categories by automatically discovering the optimal number of clusters using clustering validity metrics. A profile of each scholar can then be inferred through the labeling of the clusters with the used performance indicators. These labels can ultimately act as the main profile characteristics of the individuals that belong to that cluster. Our empirical analysis gives emphasis on the “rising stars” who demonstrate the biggest improvement over time across all of the key performance indicators (KPIs), and can also be employed for the profiling of scholar groups.

Suggested Citation

  • Panagopoulos, George & Tsatsaronis, George & Varlamis, Iraklis, 2017. "Detecting rising stars in dynamic collaborative networks," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 198-222.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:11:y:2017:i:1:p:198-222
    DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2016.11.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157716300645
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.joi.2016.11.003?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rodrigo Costas & Thed N. van Leeuwen & María Bordons, 2010. "A bibliometric classificatory approach for the study and assessment of research performance at the individual level: The effects of age on productivity and impact," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(8), pages 1564-1581, August.
    2. Bruno S. Frey & Katja Rost, 2010. "Do rankings reflect research quality?," Journal of Applied Economics, Universidad del CEMA, vol. 13, pages 1-38, May.
    3. Fiala, Dalibor & Šubelj, Lovro & Žitnik, Slavko & Bajec, Marko, 2015. "Do PageRank-based author rankings outperform simple citation counts?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 334-348.
    4. Bornmann, Lutz & Marx, Werner, 2015. "Methods for the generation of normalized citation impact scores in bibliometrics: Which method best reflects the judgements of experts?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 408-418.
    5. Pablo D. Batista & Mônica G. Campiteli & Osame Kinouchi, 2006. "Is it possible to compare researchers with different scientific interests?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 68(1), pages 179-189, July.
    6. Ali Daud & Muhammad Ahmad & M. S. I. Malik & Dunren Che, 2015. "Using machine learning techniques for rising star prediction in co-author network," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(2), pages 1687-1711, February.
    7. Michael C. Wendl, 2007. "H-index: however ranked, citations need context," Nature, Nature, vol. 449(7161), pages 403-403, September.
    8. Glänzel Wolfgang & Thijs Bart & Schlemmer Balázs, 2004. "A bibliometric approach to the role of author self-citations in scientific communication," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 59(1), pages 63-77, January.
    9. Rodrigo Costas & Thed N. van Leeuwen & María Bordons, 2010. "A bibliometric classificatory approach for the study and assessment of research performance at the individual level: The effects of age on productivity and impact," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(8), pages 1564-1581, August.
    10. Ludo Waltman & Nees Jan van Eck, 2012. "The inconsistency of the h-index," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(2), pages 406-415, February.
    11. Sven E. Hug & Michael Ochsner & Hans-Dieter Daniel, 2013. "Criteria for assessing research quality in the humanities: a Delphi study among scholars of English literature, German literature and art history," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 22(5), pages 369-383, August.
    12. Tom Z. J. Fu & Qianqian Song & Dah Ming Chiu, 2014. "The academic social network," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 203-239, October.
    13. Wolfgang Glänzel & Bart Thijs, 2004. "The influence of author self-citations on bibliometric macro indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 59(3), pages 281-310, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yongmei Bai & Jian Du, 2022. "Measuring the impact of health research data in terms of data citations by scientific publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(12), pages 6881-6893, December.
    2. Bai, Xiaomei & Zhang, Fuli & Lee, Ivan, 2019. "Predicting the citations of scholarly paper," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 407-418.
    3. Wanjun Xia & Tianrui Li & Chongshou Li, 2023. "A review of scientific impact prediction: tasks, features and methods," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(1), pages 543-585, January.
    4. Aftab Nawaz & MSI Malik, 2022. "Rising stars prediction in reviewer network," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 53-75, March.
    5. Yubing Nie & Yifan Zhu & Qika Lin & Sifan Zhang & Pengfei Shi & Zhendong Niu, 2019. "Academic rising star prediction via scholar’s evaluation model and machine learning techniques," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(2), pages 461-476, August.
    6. Lin Zhu & Junjie Zhang & Scott W. Cunningham, 2022. "Domain expertise extraction for finding rising stars," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(9), pages 5475-5495, September.
    7. Chung, Jaemin & Ko, Namuk & Kim, Hyeonsu & Yoon, Janghyeok, 2021. "Inventor profile mining approach for prospective human resource scouting," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1).
    8. Allahbakhsh, Mohammad & Amintoosi, Haleh & Behkamal, Behshid & Beheshti, Amin & Bertino, Elisa, 2021. "SCiMet: Stable, sCalable and reliable Metric-based framework for quality assessment in collaborative content generation systems," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2).
    9. Ali Daud & Min Song & Malik Khizar Hayat & Tehmina Amjad & Rabeeh Ayaz Abbasi & Hassan Dawood & Anwar Ghani, 2020. "Finding rising stars in bibliometric networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 633-661, July.
    10. Guoliang Lyu & Ganwei Shi, 2019. "On an approach to boosting a journal’s citation potential," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(3), pages 1387-1409, September.
    11. Matthias Kuppler, 2022. "Predicting the future impact of Computer Science researchers: Is there a gender bias?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(11), pages 6695-6732, November.
    12. David A. Pendlebury, 2019. "Charting a path between the simple and the false and the complex and unusable: Review of Henk F. Moed, Applied Evaluative Informetrics [in the series Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Scientifi," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(1), pages 549-560, April.
    13. Lin Zhu & Donghua Zhu & Xuefeng Wang & Scott W. Cunningham & Zhinan Wang, 2019. "An integrated solution for detecting rising technology stars in co-inventor networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(1), pages 137-172, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Waltman, Ludo, 2016. "A review of the literature on citation impact indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 365-391.
    2. Lutz Bornmann & Werner Marx, 2014. "How to evaluate individual researchers working in the natural and life sciences meaningfully? A proposal of methods based on percentiles of citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(1), pages 487-509, January.
    3. Wildgaard, Lorna, 2016. "A critical cluster analysis of 44 indicators of author-level performance," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 1055-1078.
    4. Lucy Amez, 2012. "Citation measures at the micro level: Influence of publication age, field, and uncitedness," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(7), pages 1459-1465, July.
    5. Bar-Ilan, Judit, 2008. "Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century—A review," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-52.
    6. Frank Havemann & Birger Larsen, 2015. "Bibliometric indicators of young authors in astrophysics: Can later stars be predicted?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(2), pages 1413-1434, February.
    7. Andersen, Jens Peter & Nielsen, Mathias Wullum, 2018. "Google Scholar and Web of Science: Examining gender differences in citation coverage across five scientific disciplines," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 950-959.
    8. Rodrigo Costas & Thomas Franssen, 2018. "Reflections around ‘the cautionary use’ of the h-index: response to Teixeira da Silva and Dobránszki," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(2), pages 1125-1130, May.
    9. Shang, Jing & Zeng, Mingbin & Zhang, Gupeng, 2022. "Investigating the mentorship effect on the academic success of young scientists: An empirical study of the 985 project universities of China," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    10. Peter van den Besselaar & Ulf Sandström, 2019. "Measuring researcher independence using bibliometric data: A proposal for a new performance indicator," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(3), pages 1-20, March.
    11. Andersen, Jens Peter, 2017. "An empirical and theoretical critique of the Euclidean index," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 455-465.
    12. Yves Fassin, 2020. "The HF-rating as a universal complement to the h-index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(2), pages 965-990, November.
    13. Marek Kwiek & Wojciech Roszka, 2022. "Academic vs. biological age in research on academic careers: a large-scale study with implications for scientifically developing systems," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(6), pages 3543-3575, June.
    14. Rodrigo Costas & María Bordons, 2011. "Do age and professional rank influence the order of authorship in scientific publications? Some evidence from a micro-level perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(1), pages 145-161, July.
    15. Zoltán Krajcsák, 2021. "Researcher Performance in Scopus Articles ( RPSA ) as a New Scientometric Model of Scientific Output: Tested in Business Area of V4 Countries," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-23, October.
    16. Claus-Christian Carbon, 2011. "The Carbon_h-Factor: Predicting Individuals' Research Impact at Early Stages of Their Career," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(12), pages 1-7, December.
    17. Abramo, Giovanni & Cicero, Tindaro & D’Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea, 2012. "The dispersion of research performance within and between universities as a potential indicator of the competitive intensity in higher education systems," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 155-168.
    18. James C. Ryan, 2016. "A validation of the individual annual h-index (hIa): application of the hIa to a qualitatively and quantitatively different sample," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(1), pages 577-590, October.
    19. Ioana Alexandra Horodnic & Adriana Zaiţ, 2015. "Motivation and research productivity in a university system undergoing transition," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 24(3), pages 282-292.
    20. Xingchen Li & Qiang Wu & Yuanyuan Liu, 2017. "A quantitative analysis of researcher citation personal display considering disciplinary differences and influence factors," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(2), pages 1093-1112, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:11:y:2017:i:1:p:198-222. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/joi .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.