Difference between revisions of "Newman, PNAS, 2001."
From Cohen Courses
Jump to navigationJump to search| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
This is a paper investigating the structure of scientific collaboration. The author ulitized data from a number of databases in different fields: Biomedical, Physics and Computer Science. Properties of these networks are: | This is a paper investigating the structure of scientific collaboration. The author ulitized data from a number of databases in different fields: Biomedical, Physics and Computer Science. Properties of these networks are: | ||
| − | * | + | * In all cases, scientific communities seem to constitute a ‘‘small world,’’[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small-world_network] in which the average distance between scientists via a line of intermediate collaborators varies logarithmically with the size of the relevant community. |
| + | |||
| + | * Those networks are highly clustered, meaning that two scientists are much more likely to have collaborated if they have a third common collaborator than are two scientists chosen at random from the community. | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Distributions of both the number of collaborators of scientists and the numbers of papers are well fit by power-law forms with an exponential cutoff. This cutoff may be caused by the finite time window (1995-1999) used in the study. | ||
| + | |||
| + | * There are a number of significant statistical differences between different scientific communities. Some of these are | ||
| + | obvious. | ||
Revision as of 02:05, 4 February 2011
Contents
Citation
M.E.J.Newman. 2001. The Structure of Scientific Collaboration Networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 404-409.
Online Version
http://www.pnas.org/content/98/2/404.full.pdf+html
Databases
MEDLINE (biomedical research)[1]
Los Alamos e-Print Archive (physics)[2]
NCSTRL (computer science)[3]
Summary
This is a paper investigating the structure of scientific collaboration. The author ulitized data from a number of databases in different fields: Biomedical, Physics and Computer Science. Properties of these networks are:
- In all cases, scientific communities seem to constitute a ‘‘small world,’’[4] in which the average distance between scientists via a line of intermediate collaborators varies logarithmically with the size of the relevant community.
- Those networks are highly clustered, meaning that two scientists are much more likely to have collaborated if they have a third common collaborator than are two scientists chosen at random from the community.
- Distributions of both the number of collaborators of scientists and the numbers of papers are well fit by power-law forms with an exponential cutoff. This cutoff may be caused by the finite time window (1995-1999) used in the study.
- There are a number of significant statistical differences between different scientific communities. Some of these are
obvious.
