IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v103y2015i2d10.1007_s11192-015-1546-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Nano language and distribution of article title terms according to power laws

Author

Listed:
  • Tomaz Bartol

    (University of Ljubljana)

  • Karmen Stopar

    (University of Ljubljana)

Abstract

Scientometric evaluation of nanoscience/nanotechnology requires complex search strategies and lengthy queries which retrieve massive amount of information. In order to offer some insight based on the most frequently occurring terms our research focused on a limited amount of data, collected on uniform principles. The prefix nano comes about in many different compound words thus offering a possibility for such assessment. The aim is to identify the scatter of nanoconcepts, among and within journals, as well as more generally, in the Web of Science (WOS). Ten principal journals were identified along with all unique nanoterms in article titles. Such terms occur on average in half of all titles. Terms were thoroughly investigated and mapped by lemmatization or stemming to the appropriate roots—nanoconcepts. The scatter of concepts follows the characteristics of power laws, especially Zipf’s law, exhibiting clear inversely proportional relationship between rank and frequency. The same three nanoconcepts are most frequently occurring in as many as seven journals. Two concepts occupy the first and the second rank in six journals. The same six concepts are the most frequently occurring in ten journals as well as full WOS database, representing almost two thirds of all nanotitled articles, in both instances. Subject categories don’t play a decisive role. Frequency falls progressively, quickly producing a long tail of rare concepts. Drop is almost linear on the log scale. The existence of hundreds of different closed-form compound nanoterms has consequences for the retrieval on the Internet search engines (e.g. Google Scholar) which do not permit truncation.

Suggested Citation

  • Tomaz Bartol & Karmen Stopar, 2015. "Nano language and distribution of article title terms according to power laws," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(2), pages 435-451, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:103:y:2015:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-015-1546-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-015-1546-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-015-1546-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-015-1546-1?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. Mogoutov, Andrei & Cambrosio, Alberto & Keating, Peter & Mustar, Philippe, 2008. "Biomedical innovation at the laboratory, clinical and commercial interface: A new method for mapping research projects, publications and patents in the field of microarrays," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 341-353.
    2. Dora Marinova & Michael McAleer, 2003. "Environmental Technology Strengths: International Rankings Based on US Patent Data," CIRJE F-Series CIRJE-F-204, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo.
    3. Bar-Ilan, Judit, 2008. "Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century—A review," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-52.
    4. Guan, Jiancheng & Ma, Nan, 2007. "China's emerging presence in nanoscience and nanotechnology: A comparative bibliometric study of several nanoscience `giants'," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 880-886, July.
    5. Tom Magerman & Bart Looy & Xiaoyan Song, 2010. "Exploring the feasibility and accuracy of Latent Semantic Analysis based text mining techniques to detect similarity between patent documents and scientific publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(2), pages 289-306, February.
    6. Can Huang & Ad Notten & Nico Rasters, 2011. "Nanoscience and technology publications and patents: a review of social science studies and search strategies," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 145-172, April.
    7. Loet Leydesdorff & Ping Zhou, 2007. "Nanotechnology as a field of science: Its delineation in terms of journals and patents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(3), pages 693-713, March.
    8. Elise Bassecoulard & Alain Lelu & Michel Zitt, 2007. "Mapping nanosciences by citation flows: A preliminary analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(3), pages 859-880, March.
    9. Thomas Heinze & Philip Shapira & Jacqueline Senker & Stefan Kuhlmann, 2007. "Identifying creative research accomplishments: Methodology and results for nanotechnology and human genetics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(1), pages 125-152, January.
    10. Tomaz Bartol & Gordana Budimir & Doris Dekleva-Smrekar & Miro Pusnik & Primoz Juznic, 2014. "Assessment of research fields in Scopus and Web of Science in the view of national research evaluation in Slovenia," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(2), pages 1491-1504, February.
    11. Staša Milojević, 2010. "Power law distributions in information science: Making the case for logarithmic binning," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(12), pages 2417-2425, December.
    12. Strotmann, Andreas & Zhao, Dangzhi, 2010. "Combining commercial citation indexes and open-access bibliographic databases to delimit highly interdisciplinary research fields for citation analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(2), pages 194-200.
    13. Clara Calero & Renald Buter & Cecilia Cabello Valdés & Ed Noyons, 2006. "How to identify research groups using publication analysis: an example in the field of nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 66(2), pages 365-376, February.
    14. Morteza Maghrebi & Ali Abbasi & Saeid Amiri & Reza Monsefi & Ahad Harati, 2011. "A collective and abridged lexical query for delineation of nanotechnology publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(1), pages 15-25, January.
    15. Mogoutov, Andrei & Kahane, Bernard, 2007. "Data search strategy for science and technology emergence: A scalable and evolutionary query for nanotechnology tracking," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 893-903, July.
    16. Lili Wang & Ad Notten & Alexandru Surpatean, 2013. "Interdisciplinarity of nano research fields: a keyword mining approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(3), pages 877-892, March.
    17. Wen Zhang & Taketoshi Yoshida & Xijin Tang, 2009. "Distribution Of Multi-Words In Chinese And English Documents," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 8(02), pages 249-265.
    18. Henry Small, 2011. "Interpreting maps of science using citation context sentiments: a preliminary investigation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(2), pages 373-388, May.
    19. Mike Thelwall & Liz Price, 2006. "Language evolution and the spread of ideas on the Web: A procedure for identifying emergent hybrid word family members," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 57(10), pages 1326-1337, August.
    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. Yoscelina Iraida Hernandez-García & Mónica Anzaldo Montoya, 2021. "Flow of ideas in the study of communication channels and references in publications on nanotechnology applied to food and agriculture in Mexico," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 995-1017, February.
    2. Igor Barahona & Daría Micaela Hernández & Héctor Hugo Pérez-Villarreal & María Pilar Martínez-Ruíz, 2018. "Identifying research topics in marketing science along the past decade: a content analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(1), pages 293-312, October.
    3. Karmen Stopar & Tomaž Bartol, 2019. "Digital competences, computer skills and information literacy in secondary education: mapping and visualization of trends and concepts," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(2), pages 479-498, February.
    4. Mike Thelwall, 2017. "Avoiding obscure topics and generalising findings produces higher impact research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(1), pages 307-320, January.
    5. Karmen Stopar & Damjana Drobne & Klemen Eler & Tomaz Bartol, 2016. "Citation analysis and mapping of nanoscience and nanotechnology: identifying the scope and interdisciplinarity of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(2), pages 563-581, February.

    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. Muñoz-Écija, Teresa & Vargas-Quesada, Benjamín & Chinchilla Rodríguez, Zaida, 2019. "Coping with methods for delineating emerging fields: Nanoscience and nanotechnology as a case study," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(4).
    2. Coccia, Mario & Wang, Lili, 2015. "Path-breaking directions of nanotechnology-based chemotherapy and molecular cancer therapy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 155-169.
    3. Patrick Herron & Aashish Mehta & Cong Cao & Timothy Lenoir, 2016. "Research diversification and impact: the case of national nanoscience development," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 629-659, November.
    4. Laura I. Schultz & Frederick L. Joutz, 2010. "Methods for identifying emerging General Purpose Technologies: a case study of nanotechnologies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 85(1), pages 155-170, October.
    5. Qingjun Zhao & Jiancheng Guan, 2012. "Modeling the dynamic relation between science and technology in nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(2), pages 561-579, February.
    6. Ahmad Barirani & Bruno Agard & Catherine Beaudry, 2013. "Discovering and assessing fields of expertise in nanomedicine: a patent co-citation network perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(3), pages 1111-1136, March.
    7. Hamid R. Jamali & Ghasem Azadi-Ahmadabadi & Saeid Asadi, 2018. "Interdisciplinary relations of converging technologies: Nano–Bio–Info–Cogno (NBIC)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(2), pages 1055-1073, August.
    8. Sanjay K. Arora & Alan L. Porter & Jan Youtie & Philip Shapira, 2013. "Capturing new developments in an emerging technology: an updated search strategy for identifying nanotechnology research outputs," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(1), pages 351-370, April.
    9. Can Huang & Ad Notten & Nico Rasters, 2011. "Nanoscience and technology publications and patents: a review of social science studies and search strategies," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 145-172, April.
    10. Wang, Gangbo & Guan, Jiancheng, 2010. "The role of patenting activity for scientific research: A study of academic inventors from China's nanotechnology," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(3), pages 338-350.
    11. T. Gorjiara & C. Baldock, 2014. "Nanoscience and nanotechnology research publications: a comparison between Australia and the rest of the world," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 100(1), pages 121-148, July.
    12. Karmen Stopar & Damjana Drobne & Klemen Eler & Tomaz Bartol, 2016. "Citation analysis and mapping of nanoscience and nanotechnology: identifying the scope and interdisciplinarity of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(2), pages 563-581, February.
    13. Ying Huang & Jannik Schuehle & Alan L. Porter & Jan Youtie, 2015. "A systematic method to create search strategies for emerging technologies based on the Web of Science: illustrated for ‘Big Data’," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 2005-2022, December.
    14. Sabatier, Mareva & Chollet, Barthélemy, 2017. "Is there a first mover advantage in science? Pioneering behavior and scientific production in nanotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 522-533.
    15. Santiago Ruiz-Navas & Kumiko Miyazaki, 2018. "A complement to lexical query’s search-term selection for emerging technologies: the case of “big data”," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(1), pages 141-162, October.
    16. Qingjun Zhao & Jiancheng Guan, 2013. "Love dynamics between science and technology: some evidences in nanoscience and nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(1), pages 113-132, January.
    17. Jiancheng Guan & Yuan Shi, 2012. "Transnational citation, technological diversity and small world in global nanotechnology patenting," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(3), pages 609-633, December.
    18. R. Karpagam & S. Gopalakrishnan & M. Natarajan & B. Ramesh Babu, 2011. "Mapping of nanoscience and nanotechnology research in India: a scientometric analysis, 1990–2009," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(2), pages 501-522, November.
    19. Ramani, Shyama V. & Chowdhury, Nupur & Coronini, Roger & Reid, Susan, 2011. "On India's plunge into Nanotechnology: What are good ways to catch-up?," MERIT Working Papers 2011-020, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    20. Jiancheng Guan & Gangbo Wang, 2010. "A comparative study of research performance in nanotechnology for China’s inventor–authors and their non-inventing peers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(2), pages 331-343, August.

    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:spr:scient:v:103:y:2015:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-015-1546-1. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.