IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v118y2019i2d10.1007_s11192-018-02999-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Structure and evolution of Indian physics co-authorship networks

Author

Listed:
  • Chakresh Kumar Singh

    () (Indian Institute of Technology Gandhinagar)

  • Shivakumar Jolad

    () (Indian Institute of Technology Gandhinagar)

Abstract

We trace the evolution of Indian physics community from 1919 to 2013 by analyzing the co-authorship network constructed from papers published by authors in India in American Physical Society (APS) journals. We make inferences on India’s contribution to different branches of Physics and identify the most influential Indian physicists at different time periods. The relative contribution of India to global physics publication (research) and its variation across subfields of physics is assessed. We extract the changing collaboration pattern of authors between Indian physicists through various network measures. We study the evolution of Indian physics communities and trace the mean life and stationarity of communities by size in different APS journals. We map the transition of authors between communities of different sizes from 1970 to 2013, capturing their birth, growth, merger and collapse. We find that Indian–Foreign collaborations are increasing at a faster pace compared to the Indian–Indian. We observe that the degree distribution of Indian collaboration networks follows the power law, with distinct patterns between Physical Review A, B and E, and high energy physics journals Physical Review C and D, and Physical Review Letters. In almost every measure, we observe strong structural differences between low-energy and high-energy physics journals.

Suggested Citation

  • Chakresh Kumar Singh & Shivakumar Jolad, 2019. "Structure and evolution of Indian physics co-authorship networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(2), pages 385-406, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:118:y:2019:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-018-02999-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-018-02999-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-018-02999-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    ---><---

    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. Donald Deb. Beaver, 2001. "Reflections on Scientific Collaboration (and its study): Past, Present, and Future," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 52(3), pages 365-377, November.
    2. Erjia Yan & Ying Ding, 2009. "Applying centrality measures to impact analysis: A coauthorship network analysis," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 60(10), pages 2107-2118, October.
    3. Noémi Gaskó & Rodica Ioana Lung & Mihai Alexandru Suciu, 2016. "A new network model for the study of scientific collaborations: Romanian computer science and mathematics co-authorship networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(2), pages 613-632, 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. Chakresh Kumar Singh & Demival Vasques Filho & Shivakumar Jolad & Dion R. J. O’Neale, 2020. "Evolution of interdependent co-authorship and citation networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 385-404, 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. Elsa Alvaro & Angel Yanguas-Gil, 2018. "Characterizing the field of Atomic Layer Deposition: Authors, topics, and collaborations," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(1), pages 1-19, January.
    2. Laurent R. Bergé, 2017. "Network proximity in the geography of research collaboration," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 96(4), pages 785-815, November.
    3. Olle Persson & Wolfgang Glänzel, 2014. "Discouraging honorific authorship," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(2), pages 1417-1419, February.
    4. M. Ausloos, 2013. "A scientometrics law about co-authors and their ranking: the co-author core," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(3), pages 895-909, June.
    5. J. Sylvan Katz & Guillermo Armando Ronda-Pupo, 2019. "Cooperation, scale-invariance and complex innovation systems: a generalization," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(2), pages 1045-1065, November.
    6. Naomi Fukuzawa, 2014. "An empirical analysis of the relationship between individual characteristics and research productivity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(3), pages 785-809, June.
    7. Sameer Kumar & Kuru Ratnavelu, 2016. "Perceptions of Scholars in the Field of Economics on Co-Authorship Associations: Evidence from an International Survey," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(6), pages 1-18, June.
    8. Máxima Bolaños-Pizarro & Bart Thijs & Wolfgang Glänzel, 2010. "Cardiovascular research in Spain. A comparative scientometric study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 85(2), pages 509-526, November.
    9. Sameer Kumar & Jariah Mohd. Jan, 2013. "Mapping research collaborations in the business and management field in Malaysia, 1980–2010," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 97(3), pages 491-517, December.
    10. Ping Ni & Xinying An, 2018. "Relationship between international collaboration papers and their citations from an economic perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(2), pages 863-877, August.
    11. Yichi Zhang & Zhiliang Dong & Sen Liu & Peixiang Jiang & Cuizhi Zhang & Chao Ding, 2021. "Forecast of International Trade of Lithium Carbonate Products in Importing Countries and Small-Scale Exporting Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 13(3), pages 1-23, January.
    12. Fabio Landini & Franco Malerba & Roberto Mavilia, 2015. "The structure and dynamics of networks of scientific collaborations in Northern Africa," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 1787-1807, December.
    13. Jong Hwan Suh, 2019. "SocialTERM-Extractor: Identifying and Predicting Social-Problem-Specific Key Noun Terms from a Large Number of Online News Articles Using Text Mining and Machine Learning Techniques," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 11(1), pages 1-44, January.
    14. Hui Xuan Tan & Ephrance Abu Ujum & Kwai Fatt Choong & Kuru Ratnavelu, 2015. "Impact analysis of domestic and international research collaborations: a Malaysian case study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 885-904, January.
    15. Cho, Yung-Jan & Fu, Pei-Wen & Wu, Chi-Cheng, 2017. "Popular Research Topics in Marketing Journals, 1995–2014," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 52-72.
    16. Claudia Noumedem Temgoua, 2018. "Highly skilled migration and the internationalization of knowledge," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2018-16, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    17. Ho Fai Chan & Ali Sina Önder & Benno Torgler, 2015. "Do Nobel laureates change their patterns of collaboration following prize reception?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 2215-2235, December.
    18. Jun-You Lin & Chih-Hai Yang, 2020. "Heterogeneity in industry–university R&D collaboration and firm innovative performance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 1-25, July.
    19. Wolfgang Glänzel & Lin Zhang, 2018. "Scientometric research assessment in the developing world: A tribute to Michael J. Moravcsik from the perspective of the twenty-first century," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(3), pages 1517-1532, June.
    20. Radhamany Sooryamoorthy, 2010. "Medical research in South Africa: a scientometric analysis of trends, patterns, productivity and partnership," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(3), pages 863-885, 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:spr:scient:v:118:y:2019:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-018-02999-5. 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: (Sonal Shukla) or (Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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 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.

    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.