IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0279314.html

Quantifying knowledge from the perspective of information structurization

Author

Listed:
  • Xinbing Wang
  • Huquan Kang
  • Luoyi Fu
  • Ling Yao
  • Jiaxin Ding
  • Jianghao Wang
  • Xiaoying Gan
  • Chenghu Zhou
  • John E Hopcroft

Abstract

Scientific literature, as the major medium that carries knowledge between scientists, exhibits explosive growth in the last century. Despite the frequent use of many tangible measures, to quantify the influence of literature from different perspectives, it remains unclear how knowledge is embodied and measured among tremendous scientific productivity, as knowledge underlying scientific literature is abstract and difficult to concretize. In this regard, there has laid a vacancy in the theoretical embodiment of knowledge for their evaluation and excavation. Here, for the first time, we quantify the knowledge from the perspective of information structurization and define a new measure of knowledge quantification index (KQI) that leverages the extent of disorder difference caused by hierarchical structure in the citation network to represent knowledge production in the literature. Built upon 214 million articles, published from 1800 to 2021, KQI is demonstrated for mining influential classics and laureates that are omitted by traditional metrics, thanks to in-depth utilization of structure. Due to the additivity of entropy and the interconnectivity of the network, KQI assembles numerous scientific impact metrics into one and gains interpretability and resistance to manipulation. In addition, KQI explores a new perspective regarding knowledge measurement through entropy and structure, utilizing structure rather than semantics to avoid ambiguity and attain applicability.

Suggested Citation

  • Xinbing Wang & Huquan Kang & Luoyi Fu & Ling Yao & Jiaxin Ding & Jianghao Wang & Xiaoying Gan & Chenghu Zhou & John E Hopcroft, 2023. "Quantifying knowledge from the perspective of information structurization," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(1), pages 1-16, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0279314
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0279314
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0279314
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0279314&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0279314?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Leo Egghe, 2006. "Theory and practise of the g-index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 69(1), pages 131-152, October.
    2. Hajra, Kamalika Basu & Sen, Parongama, 2005. "Aging in citation networks," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 346(1), pages 44-48.
    3. Upul Senanayake & Mahendra Piraveenan & Albert Zomaya, 2015. "The Pagerank-Index: Going beyond Citation Counts in Quantifying Scientific Impact of Researchers," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-34, August.
    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. Paul Wouters & Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Vincent Larivière & Marie E. McVeigh & Bernd Pulverer & Sarah de Rijcke & Ludo Waltman, 2019. "Rethinking impact factors: better ways to judge a journal," Nature, Nature, vol. 569(7758), pages 621-623, May.
    6. B Ian Hutchins & Xin Yuan & James M Anderson & George M Santangelo, 2016. "Relative Citation Ratio (RCR): A New Metric That Uses Citation Rates to Measure Influence at the Article Level," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(9), pages 1-25, September.
    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. Agbleke, Divine Swerwzie, 2025. "The Stock of Knowledge Issue -Quantifying Indigenous Knowledge: Mechanisms of its Diffusion and Growth," OSF Preprints ex59m_v1, Center for Open Science.

    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. Corrêa Jr., Edilson A. & Silva, Filipi N. & da F. Costa, Luciano & Amancio, Diego R., 2017. "Patterns of authors contribution in scientific manuscripts," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 498-510.
    2. Andrej Kastrin & Dimitar Hristovski, 2021. "Scientometric analysis and knowledge mapping of literature-based discovery (1986–2020)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1415-1451, February.
    3. Heng Huang & Donghua Zhu & Xuefeng Wang, 2022. "Evaluating scientific impact of publications: combining citation polarity and purpose," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(9), pages 5257-5281, September.
    4. Zhi Li & Qinke Peng & Che Liu, 2016. "Two citation-based indicators to measure latent referential value of papers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(3), pages 1299-1313, September.
    5. Zabavnik, Darja & Verbič, Miroslav, 2021. "Relationship between the financial and the real economy: A bibliometric analysis," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 55-75.
    6. Dunaiski, Marcel & Geldenhuys, Jaco & Visser, Willem, 2019. "On the interplay between normalisation, bias, and performance of paper impact metrics," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 270-290.
    7. Yang, Alex Jie & Wu, Linwei & Zhang, Qi & Wang, Hao & Deng, Sanhong, 2023. "The k-step h-index in citation networks at the paper, author, and institution levels," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(4).
    8. Dinesh Pradhan & Partha Sarathi Paul & Umesh Maheswari & Subrata Nandi & Tanmoy Chakraborty, 2017. "$$C^3$$ C 3 -index: a PageRank based multi-faceted metric for authors’ performance measurement," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(1), pages 253-273, January.
    9. Hao Wang & Hua-Wei Shen & Xue-Qi Cheng, 2016. "Scientific credit diffusion: Researcher level or paper level?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 827-837, November.
    10. Nisar Ali & Zahid Halim & Syed Fawad Hussain, 2023. "An artificial intelligence-based framework for data-driven categorization of computer scientists: a case study of world’s Top 10 computing departments," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(3), pages 1513-1545, March.
    11. Darrin J. Griffin & Zachary W. Arth & Samuel D. Hakim & Brian C. Britt & James N. Gilbreath & Mackenzie P. Pike & Andrew J. Laningham & Fareed Bordbar & Sage Hart & San Bolkan, 2021. "Collaborations in communication: Authorship credit allocation via a weighted fractional count procedure," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(5), pages 4355-4372, May.
    12. Jun Zhang & Zhaolong Ning & Xiaomei Bai & Xiangjie Kong & Jinmeng Zhou & Feng Xia, 2017. "Exploring time factors in measuring the scientific impact of scholars," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(3), pages 1301-1321, September.
    13. Zhou, Yuhao & Gong, Faming & Wang, Yanwei & Wang, Ruijie & Zeng, An, 2025. "Fusing structural and temporal information in citation networks for identifying milestone works," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    14. Carlos Olmeda-Gómez & Carlos Romá-Mateo & Maria-Antonia Ovalle-Perandones, 2019. "Overview of trends in global epigenetic research (2009–2017)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(3), pages 1545-1574, June.
    15. Deming Lin & Tianhui Gong & Wenbin Liu & Martin Meyer, 2020. "An entropy-based measure for the evolution of h index research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2283-2298, December.
    16. Gaviria-Marin, Magaly & Merigó, José M. & Baier-Fuentes, Hugo, 2019. "Knowledge management: A global examination based on bibliometric analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 194-220.
    17. Salsabil Arabi & Chaoqun Ni & B Ian Hutchins, 2025. "Most researchers would receive more recognition if assessed by article-level metrics than by journal-level metrics," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 23(12), pages 1-18, December.
    18. Ash Mohammad Abbas, 2011. "Weighted indices for evaluating the quality of research with multiple authorship," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(1), pages 107-131, July.
    19. Soutar, Geoffrey N. & Murphy, Jamie, 2009. "Journal quality: A Google Scholar analysis," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 150-153.
    20. Piers Steel & Sjoerd Beugelsdijk & Herman Aguinis, 2021. "The anatomy of an award-winning meta-analysis: Recommendations for authors, reviewers, and readers of meta-analytic reviews," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 52(1), pages 23-44, February.

    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:plo:pone00:0279314. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.