Predicting Scientific Success Based on Coauthorship Networks

We address the question to what extent the success of scientific articles is due to social influence. Analyzing a data set of over 100000 publications from the field of Computer Science, we study how centrality in the coauthorship network differs between authors who have highly cited papers and those who do not. We further show that a machine learning classifier, based only on coauthorship network centrality measures at time of publication, is able to predict with high precision whether an article will be highly cited five years after publication. By this we provide quantitative insight into the social dimension of scientific publishing - challenging the perception of citations as an objective, socially unbiased measure of scientific success.Comment: 21 pages, 2 figures, incl. Supplementary Materia

Understanding the Impact of Early Citers on Long-Term Scientific Impact

This paper explores an interesting new dimension to the challenging problem of predicting long-term scientific impact (LTSI) usually measured by the number of citations accumulated by a paper in the long-term. It is well known that early citations (within 1-2 years after publication) acquired by a paper positively affects its LTSI. However, there is no work that investigates if the set of authors who bring in these early citations to a paper also affect its LTSI. In this paper, we demonstrate for the first time, the impact of these authors whom we call early citers (EC) on the LTSI of a paper. Note that this study of the complex dynamics of EC introduces a brand new paradigm in citation behavior analysis. Using a massive computer science bibliographic dataset we identify two distinct categories of EC - we call those authors who have high overall publication/citation count in the dataset as influential and the rest of the authors as non-influential. We investigate three characteristic properties of EC and present an extensive analysis of how each category correlates with LTSI in terms of these properties. In contrast to popular perception, we find that influential EC negatively affects LTSI possibly owing to attention stealing. To motivate this, we present several representative examples from the dataset. A closer inspection of the collaboration network reveals that this stealing effect is more profound if an EC is nearer to the authors of the paper being investigated. As an intuitive use case, we show that incorporating EC properties in the state-of-the-art supervised citation prediction models leads to high performance margins. At the closing, we present an online portal to visualize EC statistics along with the prediction results for a given query paper

Measuring academic influence: Not all citations are equal

The importance of a research article is routinely measured by counting how many times it has been cited. However, treating all citations with equal weight ignores the wide variety of functions that citations perform. We want to automatically identify the subset of references in a bibliography that have a central academic influence on the citing paper. For this purpose, we examine the effectiveness of a variety of features for determining the academic influence of a citation. By asking authors to identify the key references in their own work, we created a data set in which citations were labeled according to their academic influence. Using automatic feature selection with supervised machine learning, we found a model for predicting academic influence that achieves good performance on this data set using only four features. The best features, among those we evaluated, were those based on the number of times a reference is mentioned in the body of a citing paper. The performance of these features inspired us to design an influence-primed h-index (the hip-index). Unlike the conventional h-index, it weights citations by how many times a reference is mentioned. According to our experiments, the hip-index is a better indicator of researcher performance than the conventional h-index

Gravity-Inspired Graph Autoencoders for Directed Link Prediction

Graph autoencoders (AE) and variational autoencoders (VAE) recently emerged as powerful node embedding methods. In particular, graph AE and VAE were successfully leveraged to tackle the challenging link prediction problem, aiming at figuring out whether some pairs of nodes from a graph are connected by unobserved edges. However, these models focus on undirected graphs and therefore ignore the potential direction of the link, which is limiting for numerous real-life applications. In this paper, we extend the graph AE and VAE frameworks to address link prediction in directed graphs. We present a new gravity-inspired decoder scheme that can effectively reconstruct directed graphs from a node embedding. We empirically evaluate our method on three different directed link prediction tasks, for which standard graph AE and VAE perform poorly. We achieve competitive results on three real-world graphs, outperforming several popular baselines.Comment: ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM 2019

Using Machine Learning to Predict the Evolution of Physics Research

The advancement of science as outlined by Popper and Kuhn is largely qualitative, but with bibliometric data it is possible and desirable to develop a quantitative picture of scientific progress. Furthermore it is also important to allocate finite resources to research topics that have growth potential, to accelerate the process from scientific breakthroughs to technological innovations. In this paper, we address this problem of quantitative knowledge evolution by analysing the APS publication data set from 1981 to 2010. We build the bibliographic coupling and co-citation networks, use the Louvain method to detect topical clusters (TCs) in each year, measure the similarity of TCs in consecutive years, and visualize the results as alluvial diagrams. Having the predictive features describing a given TC and its known evolution in the next year, we can train a machine learning model to predict future changes of TCs, i.e., their continuing, dissolving, merging and splitting. We found the number of papers from certain journals, the degree, closeness, and betweenness to be the most predictive features. Additionally, betweenness increases significantly for merging events, and decreases significantly for splitting events. Our results represent a first step from a descriptive understanding of the Science of Science (SciSci), towards one that is ultimately prescriptive.Comment: 24 pages, 10 figures, 4 tables, supplementary information is include