IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/infome/v10y2016i1p82-97.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Interrelations among scientific fields and their relative influences revealed by an input–output analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Shen, Zhesi
  • Yang, Liying
  • Pei, Jiansuo
  • Li, Menghui
  • Wu, Chensheng
  • Bao, Jianzhang
  • Wei, Tian
  • Di, Zengru
  • Rousseau, Ronald
  • Wu, Jinshan

Abstract

In this paper, we try to answer two questions about any given scientific discipline: first, how important is each subfield and second, how does a specific subfield influence other subfields? We modify the well-known open-system Leontief Input–Output Analysis in economics into a closed-system analysis focusing on eigenvalues and eigenvectors and the effects of removing one subfield. We apply this method to the subfields of physics. This analysis has yielded some promising results for identifying important subfields (for example the field of statistical physics has large influence while it is not among the largest subfields) and describing their influences on each other (for example the subfield of mechanical control of atoms is not among the largest subfields cited by quantum mechanics, but our analysis suggests that these fields are strongly connected). This method is potentially applicable to more general systems that have input–output relations among their elements.

Suggested Citation

  • Shen, Zhesi & Yang, Liying & Pei, Jiansuo & Li, Menghui & Wu, Chensheng & Bao, Jianzhang & Wei, Tian & Di, Zengru & Rousseau, Ronald & Wu, Jinshan, 2016. "Interrelations among scientific fields and their relative influences revealed by an input–output analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 82-97.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:10:y:2016:i:1:p:82-97
    DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2015.11.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157715300717
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.joi.2015.11.002?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chen, P. & Xie, H. & Maslov, S. & Redner, S., 2007. "Finding scientific gems with Google’s PageRank algorithm," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 8-15.
    2. Umed Temurshoev, 2010. "Identifying Optimal Sector Groupings With The Hypothetical Extraction Method," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(4), pages 872-890, October.
    3. Narin, Francis & Hamilton, Kimberly S. & Olivastro, Dominic, 1997. "The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 317-330, October.
    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. Cinzia Daraio & Francesco Fabbri & Giulia Gavazzi & Maria Grazia Izzo & Luca Leuzzi & Giammarco Quaglia & Giancarlo Ruocco, 2018. "Assessing the interdependencies between scientific disciplinary profiles," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 1785-1803, September.
    2. Zhenquan Lin & Shanci Hou & Jinshan Wu, 2016. "The correlation between editorial delay and the ratio of highly cited papers in Nature, Science and Physical Review Letters," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(3), pages 1457-1464, June.
    3. Li, Menghui & Yang, Liying & Zhang, Huina & Shen, Zhesi & Wu, Chensheng & Wu, Jinshan, 2017. "Do mathematicians, economists and biomedical scientists trace large topics more strongly than physicists?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 598-607.
    4. Niu, Qikai & Zhou, Jianlin & Zeng, An & Fan, Ying & Di, Zengru, 2016. "Which publication is your representative work?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 842-853.
    5. Teodoro Luque-Martínez & Ignacio Luque-Raya, 2024. "Spanish scientific research by field and subject. Strategic analysis with ARWU indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(9), pages 5265-5285, September.
    6. Du, Ruijin & Wang, Ya & Dong, Gaogao & Tian, Lixin & Liu, Yixiao & Wang, Minggang & Fang, Guochang, 2017. "A complex network perspective on interrelations and evolution features of international oil trade, 2002–2013," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 196(C), pages 142-151.

    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. Gersbach, Hans & Schneider, Maik & Schneller, Olivier, 2010. "Optimal Mix of Applied and Basic Research, Distance to Frontier, and Openness," CEPR Discussion Papers 7795, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    2. Balland, Pierre-Alexandre & Boschma, Ron, 2022. "Do scientific capabilities in specific domains matter for technological diversification in European regions?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    3. Masashi Shirabe, 2014. "Identifying SCI covered publications within non-patent references in U.S. utility patents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(2), pages 999-1014, November.
    4. Yong-Gil Lee & Jeong-Dong Lee & Yong-Il Song & Se-Jun Lee, 2007. "An in-depth empirical analysis of patent citation counts using zero-inflated count data model: The case of KIST," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(1), pages 27-39, January.
    5. Hyeonchae Yang & Woo-Sung Jung, 2015. "A strategic management approach for Korean public research institutes based on bibliometric investigation," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 49(4), pages 1437-1464, July.
    6. Fenghua Wang & Ying Fan & An Zeng & Zengru Di, 2019. "Can we predict ESI highly cited publications?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(1), pages 109-125, January.
    7. Beck, Mathias & Junge, Martin & Kaiser, Ulrich, 2017. "Public Funding and Corporate Innovation," IZA Discussion Papers 11196, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    8. Bornmann, Lutz, 2014. "Validity of altmetrics data for measuring societal impact: A study using data from Altmetric and F1000Prime," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 935-950.
    9. Ludovic Dibiaggio & Lionel Nesta & Simone Vannuccini, 2024. "European Sovereignty in Artificial Intelligence: A Competence-Based Perspective," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-04841182, HAL.
    10. Wolfgang Becker & Juergen Peters, 2000. "Technological Opportunities, Absorptive Capacities, and Innovation," Discussion Paper Series 195, Universitaet Augsburg, Institute for Economics.
    11. Hirschey, Mark & Richardson, Vernon J., 2001. "Valuation effects of patent quality: A comparison for Japanese and U.S. firms," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 65-82, January.
    12. Borsato, Andrea & Lorentz, André, 2025. "Public science vs. mission-oriented policies in long-run growth: An agent-based model," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 129-146.
    13. Tang, Christopher S. & Davarzani, Hoda & Sarkis, Joseph, 2015. "Quantitative models for managing supply chain risks: A reviewAuthor-Name: Fahimnia, Behnam," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 247(1), pages 1-15.
    14. McMillan, G. Steven & Narin, Francis & Deeds, David L., 2000. "An analysis of the critical role of public science in innovation: the case of biotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 1-8, January.
    15. Su, Cheng & Pan, YunTao & Zhen, YanNing & Ma, Zheng & Yuan, JunPeng & Guo, Hong & Yu, ZhengLu & Ma, CaiFeng & Wu, YiShan, 2011. "PrestigeRank: A new evaluation method for papers and journals," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 1-13.
    16. Gersbach, Hans & Schneider, Maik & Schetter, Ulrich, 2015. "How Much Science? The 5 Ws (and 1 H) of Investing in Basic Research," CEPR Discussion Papers 10482, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    17. Jiang Wu, 2013. "Geographical knowledge diffusion and spatial diversity citation rank," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(1), pages 181-201, January.
    18. Yuan Sun & Masamitsu Negishi, 2010. "Measuring the relationships among university, industry and other sectors in Japan’s national innovation system: a comparison of new approaches with mutual information indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(3), pages 677-685, March.
    19. Stefano Brusoni & Paola Criscuolo & Aldo Geuna, 2005. "The knowledge bases of the world's largest pharmaceutical groups: what do patent citations to non-patent literature reveal?," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(5), pages 395-415.
    20. Robert J. W. Tijssen & Jos J. Winnink, 2018. "Capturing ‘R&D excellence’: indicators, international statistics, and innovative universities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(2), pages 687-699, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:eee:infome:v:10:y:2016:i:1:p:82-97. 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.