IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/infome/v10y2016i2p606-621.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Generation of topic evolution trees from heterogeneous bibliographic networks

Author

Listed:
  • Jensen, Scott
  • Liu, Xiaozhong
  • Yu, Yingying
  • Milojevic, Staša

Abstract

The volume of the existing research literature is such it can make it difficult to find highly relevant information and to develop an understanding of how a scientific topic has evolved. Prior research on topic evolution has often leveraged refinements to Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) to identify emerging topics. However, such methods do not answer the question of which studies contributed to the evolution of a topic. In this paper we show that meta-paths over a heterogeneous bibliographic network (consisting of papers, authors and venues) can be used to identify the network elements that made the greatest contributions to a topic. In particular, by adding derived edges that capture the contribution of papers, authors, and venues to a topic (using PageRank algorithm), a restricted meta-path over the bibliographic network can be used to restrict the evolution of topics to the context of interest to a researcher. We use such restricted meta-paths to construct a topic evolution tree that can provide researchers with a web-based visualization of the evolution of a scientific topic in the context of interest to them. Compared to baseline networks without restrictions, we find that restricted networks provide more useful topic evolution trees.

Suggested Citation

  • Jensen, Scott & Liu, Xiaozhong & Yu, Yingying & Milojevic, Staša, 2016. "Generation of topic evolution trees from heterogeneous bibliographic networks," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 606-621.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:10:y:2016:i:2:p:606-621
    DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2016.04.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157715302145
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.joi.2016.04.002?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Benjamin F. Jones, 2009. "The Burden of Knowledge and the "Death of the Renaissance Man": Is Innovation Getting Harder?," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 76(1), pages 283-317.
    2. van Eck, Nees Jan & Waltman, Ludo, 2014. "CitNetExplorer: A new software tool for analyzing and visualizing citation networks," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 802-823.
    3. Benjamin F. Jones, 2011. "As Science Evolves, How Can Science Policy?," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 11, pages 103-131, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Lutz Bornmann & Rüdiger Mutz, 2015. "Growth rates of modern science: A bibliometric analysis based on the number of publications and cited references," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(11), pages 2215-2222, November.
    5. Small, Henry & Boyack, Kevin W. & Klavans, Richard, 2014. "Identifying emerging topics in science and technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(8), pages 1450-1467.
    6. Ludo Waltman & Nees Eck, 2013. "A smart local moving algorithm for large-scale modularity-based community detection," The European Physical Journal B: Condensed Matter and Complex Systems, Springer;EDP Sciences, vol. 86(11), pages 1-14, November.
    7. Xiaozhong Liu & Jinsong Zhang & Chun Guo, 2013. "Full-text citation analysis: A new method to enhance scholarly networks," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(9), pages 1852-1863, September.
    8. Wagner, Caroline S. & Roessner, J. David & Bobb, Kamau & Klein, Julie Thompson & Boyack, Kevin W. & Keyton, Joann & Rafols, Ismael & Börner, Katy, 2011. "Approaches to understanding and measuring interdisciplinary scientific research (IDR): A review of the literature," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 14-26.
    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. Xu, Haiyun & Winnink, Jos & Yue, Zenghui & Liu, Ziqiang & Yuan, Guoting, 2020. "Topic-linked innovation paths in science and technology," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(2).
    2. Sichao Tong & Per Ahlgren, 2017. "Evolution of three Nobel Prize themes and a Nobel snub theme in chemistry: a bibliometric study with focus on international collaboration," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(1), pages 75-90, July.
    3. Qian, Yue & Liu, Yu & Sheng, Quan Z., 2020. "Understanding hierarchical structural evolution in a scientific discipline: A case study of artificial intelligence," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(3).

    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. Nees Jan Eck & Ludo Waltman, 2017. "Citation-based clustering of publications using CitNetExplorer and VOSviewer," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(2), pages 1053-1070, May.
    2. Fang Han & Christopher L. Magee, 2018. "Testing the science/technology relationship by analysis of patent citations of scientific papers after decomposition of both science and technology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(2), pages 767-796, August.
    3. Matthias Krapf, 2015. "Age and complementarity in scientific collaboration," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 49(2), pages 751-781, September.
    4. Banal-Estañol, Albert & Macho-Stadler, Inés & Pérez-Castrillo, David, 2019. "Evaluation in research funding agencies: Are structurally diverse teams biased against?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7), pages 1823-1840.
    5. Petros Gkotsis & Antonio Vezzani, 2016. "Technological diffusion as a recombinant process," JRC Working Papers on Corporate R&D and Innovation 2016-07, Joint Research Centre (Seville site).
    6. Kevin W. Boyack, 2017. "Investigating the effect of global data on topic detection," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(2), pages 999-1015, May.
    7. Chaker Jebari & Enrique Herrera-Viedma & Manuel Jesus Cobo, 2021. "The use of citation context to detect the evolution of research topics: a large-scale analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(4), pages 2971-2989, April.
    8. Andreas Thor & Lutz Bornmann & Werner Marx & Rüdiger Mutz, 2018. "Identifying single influential publications in a research field: new analysis opportunities of the CRExplorer," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 591-608, July.
    9. Tosi, Mauro Dalle Lucca & dos Reis, Julio Cesar, 2021. "SciKGraph: A knowledge graph approach to structure a scientific field," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1).
    10. Ugo Moschini & Elena Fenialdi & Cinzia Daraio & Giancarlo Ruocco & Elisa Molinari, 0. "A comparison of three multidisciplinarity indices based on the diversity of Scopus subject areas of authors’ documents, their bibliography and their citing papers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 0, pages 1-14.
    11. Sjögårde, Peter & Ahlgren, Per, 2018. "Granularity of algorithmically constructed publication-level classifications of research publications: Identification of topics," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 133-152.
    12. Frank Nagle & Florenta Teodoridis, 2020. "Jack of all trades and master of knowledge: The role of diversification in new distant knowledge integration," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(1), pages 55-85, January.
    13. Yi Zhang & Xiaojing Cai & Caroline V. Fry & Mengjia Wu & Caroline S. Wagner, 2021. "Topic evolution, disruption and resilience in early COVID-19 research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(5), pages 4225-4253, May.
    14. Huang, Lu & Chen, Xiang & Ni, Xingxing & Liu, Jiarun & Cao, Xiaoli & Wang, Changtian, 2021. "Tracking the dynamics of co-word networks for emerging topic identification," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    15. Ajay Agrawal & John McHale & Alexander Oettl, 2018. "Finding Needles in Haystacks: Artificial Intelligence and Recombinant Growth," NBER Chapters, in: The Economics of Artificial Intelligence: An Agenda, pages 149-174, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Florenta Teodoridis, 2018. "Understanding Team Knowledge Production: The Interrelated Roles of Technology and Expertise," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(8), pages 3625-3648, August.
    17. Luis-Millán González & Xavier García-Massó & Alberto Pardo-Ibañez & Fernanda Peset & José Devís-Devís, 2018. "An author keyword analysis for mapping Sport Sciences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(8), pages 1-22, August.
    18. Xu, Haiyun & Winnink, Jos & Yue, Zenghui & Zhang, Huiling & Pang, Hongshen, 2021. "Multidimensional Scientometric indicators for the detection of emerging research topics," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    19. Werner Marx & Lutz Bornmann, 2016. "Change of perspective: bibliometrics from the point of view of cited references—a literature overview on approaches to the evaluation of cited references in bibliometrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 1397-1415, November.
    20. Philip Shapira & Seokbeom Kwon & Jan Youtie, 2017. "Tracking the emergence of synthetic biology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(3), pages 1439-1469, September.

    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:2:p:606-621. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

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

    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 hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.