IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v76y2008i2d10.1007_s11192-007-1913-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Scientific research competitiveness of world universities in computer science

Author

Listed:
  • Ruimin Ma

    (Wuhan University)

  • Chaoqun Ni

    (Wuhan University)

  • Junping Qiu

    (Wuhan University)

Abstract

This article evaluates the scientific research competitiveness of world universities in computer science. The data source is the Essential Science Indicator (ESI) database with a time span of more than 10 years, from 01/01/1996 to 08/31/2006. We establish a hierarchical indicator system including four primary indicators which consist of scientific research production, influence, innovation and development and six secondary indicators which consist of the number of papers, total citations, highly cited papers, hot papers, average citations per paper and the ration of highly cited papers to papers. Then we assign them with proper weights. Based on these, we obtain the rankings of university and country/territory competitiveness in computer science. We hope this paper can contribute to the further study in the evaluation of a certain subject or a whole university.

Suggested Citation

  • Ruimin Ma & Chaoqun Ni & Junping Qiu, 2008. "Scientific research competitiveness of world universities in computer science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 76(2), pages 245-260, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:76:y:2008:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-007-1913-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-007-1913-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-007-1913-7
    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/s11192-007-1913-7?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. Richard Pomfret & Liang Choon Wang, 2003. "Evaluating The Research Output Of Australian Universities' Economics Departments," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(4), pages 418-441, December.
    2. Mu-Hsuan Huang & Han-Wen Chang & Dar-Zen Chen, 2006. "Research evaluation of research-oriented universities in Taiwan from 1993 to 2003," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 67(3), pages 419-435, June.
    3. Thed N. Van Leeuwen & Martijn S. Visser & Henk F. Moed & Ton J. Nederhof & Anthony F. J. Van Raan, 2003. "The Holy Grail of science policy: Exploring and combining bibliometric tools in search of scientific excellence," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 57(2), pages 257-280, June.
    4. Anthony F. J. Raan, 2006. "Comparison of the Hirsch-index with standard bibliometric indicators and with peer judgment for 147 chemistry research groups," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 67(3), pages 491-502, June.
    5. Clara Eugenia Garcia & Luis Sanz-Menéndez, 2005. "Competition for funding as an indicator of research competitiveness," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 64(3), pages 271-300, August.
    6. Anthony F. J. van Raan, 2005. "Fatal attraction: Conceptual and methodological problems in the ranking of universities by bibliometric methods," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 62(1), pages 133-143, January.
    7. Ed J. Rinia & Thed N. van Leeuwen & Anthony F. J. van Raan, 2002. "Impact measures of interdisciplinary research in physics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 53(2), pages 241-248, February.
    8. A. Raan, 1999. "Advanced bibliometric methods for the evaluation of universities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 45(3), pages 417-423, July.
    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. Kun-Yang Chuang & Ming-Huang Wang & Yuh-Shan Ho, 2011. "High-impact papers presented in the subject category of water resources in the essential science indicators database of the institute for scientific information," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(3), pages 551-562, June.
    2. B. M. Gupta & Avinash Kshitij & Charu Verma, 2011. "Mapping of Indian computer science research output, 1999–2008," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(2), pages 261-283, February.
    3. Vivek Kumar Singh & Ashraf Uddin & David Pinto, 2015. "Computer science research: the top 100 institutions in India and in the world," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(2), pages 529-553, August.
    4. Dalibor Fiala & Gabriel Tutoky, 2017. "Computer Science Papers in Web of Science: A Bibliometric Analysis," Publications, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-16, September.
    5. Hu, Zhigang & Tian, Wencan & Xu, Shenmeng & Zhang, Chunbo & Wang, Xianwen, 2018. "Four pitfalls in normalizing citation indicators: An investigation of ESI’s selection of highly cited papers," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 1133-1145.
    6. Nobuko Miyairi & Han-Wen Chang, 2012. "Bibliometric characteristics of highly cited papers from Taiwan, 2000–2009," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(1), pages 197-205, July.
    7. Vivek Kumar Singh & Sumit Kumar Banshal & Khushboo Singhal & Ashraf Uddin, 2015. "Scientometric mapping of research on ‘Big Data’," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(2), pages 727-741, November.
    8. Ashraf Uddin & Vivek Kumar Singh & David Pinto & Ivan Olmos, 2015. "Scientometric mapping of computer science research in Mexico," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(1), pages 97-114, 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. Mu-Hsuan Huang & Han-Wen Chang & Dar-Zen Chen, 2006. "Research evaluation of research-oriented universities in Taiwan from 1993 to 2003," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 67(3), pages 419-435, June.
    2. Domingo Docampo & Lawrence Cram, 2019. "Highly cited researchers: a moving target," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(3), pages 1011-1025, March.
    3. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Marco Solazzi, 2010. "National research assessment exercises: a measure of the distortion of performance rankings when labor input is treated as uniform," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(3), pages 605-619, September.
    4. Mehdi Rhaiem & Nabil Amara, 2020. "Determinants of research efficiency in Canadian business schools: evidence from scholar-level data," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 53-99, October.
    5. Daraio, Cinzia & Bonaccorsi, Andrea & Simar, Léopold, 2015. "Rankings and university performance: A conditional multidimensional approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 244(3), pages 918-930.
    6. Hui-Zhen Fu & Yuh-Shan Ho, 2013. "Comparison of independent research of China’s top universities using bibliometric indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(1), pages 259-276, July.
    7. Shahryar Rahnamayan & Sedigheh Mahdavi & Kalyanmoy Deb & Azam Asilian Bidgoli, 2020. "Ranking Multi-Metric Scientific Achievements Using a Concept of Pareto Optimality," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-46, June.
    8. Bar-Ilan, Judit, 2008. "Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century—A review," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-52.
    9. Javier Ruiz-Castillo, 2012. "The evaluation of citation distributions," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 3(1), pages 291-310, March.
    10. J. W. Fedderke, 2013. "The objectivity of national research foundation peer review in South Africa assessed against bibliometric indexes," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 97(2), pages 177-206, November.
    11. Brito, Ricardo & Navarro, Alonso Rodríguez, 2021. "The inconsistency of h-index: A mathematical analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1).
    12. Franceschini, Fiorenzo & Maisano, Domenico, 2010. "The citation triad: An overview of a scientist's publication output based on Ferrers diagrams," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 503-511.
    13. Jingda Ding & Junping Qiu, 2011. "An approach to improve the indicator weights of scientific and technological competitiveness evaluation of Chinese universities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(2), pages 285-297, February.
    14. Primož Južnič & Stojan Pečlin & Matjaž Žaucer & Tilen Mandelj & Miro Pušnik & Franci Demšar, 2010. "Scientometric indicators: peer-review, bibliometric methods and conflict of interests," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 85(2), pages 429-441, November.
    15. Themis Lazaridis, 2010. "Ranking university departments using the mean h-index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(2), pages 211-216, February.
    16. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D'Angelo & Flavia Di Costa, 2009. "Mapping Excellence in National Research Systems," Evaluation Review, , vol. 33(2), pages 159-188, April.
    17. John P A Ioannidis, 2008. "Measuring Co-Authorship and Networking-Adjusted Scientific Impact," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 3(7), pages 1-8, July.
    18. Christoph Neuhaus & Andreas Litscher & Hans-Dieter Daniel, 2007. "Using scripts to streamline citation analysis on STN International," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 71(1), pages 145-150, April.
    19. Giovanni Abramo & Tindaro Cicero & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo, 2013. "National peer-review research assessment exercises for the hard sciences can be a complete waste of money: the Italian case," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(1), pages 311-324, April.
    20. Guo Chen & Lu Xiao & Chang-ping Hu & Xue-qin Zhao, 2015. "Identifying the research focus of Library and Information Science institutions in China with institution-specific keywords," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(2), pages 707-724, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:76:y:2008:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-007-1913-7. 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.