Analysing academic paper ranking algorithms using test data and benchmarks:an investigation

Research on academic paper ranking has received great attention in recent years, and many algorithms have been proposed to automatically assess a large number of papers for this purpose. How to evaluate or analyse the performance of these ranking algorithms becomes an open research question. Theoretically, evaluation of an algorithm requires to compare its ranking result against a ground truth paper list. However, such ground truth does not exist in the field of scholarly ranking due to the fact that there does not and will not exist an absolutely unbiased, objective, and unified standard to formulate the impact of papers. Therefore, in practice researchers evaluate or analyse their proposed ranking algorithms by different methods, such as using domain expert decisions (test data) and comparing against predefined ranking benchmarks. The question is whether using different methods leads to different analysis results, and if so, how should we analyse the performance of the ranking algorithms? To answer these questions, this study compares among test data and different citation-based benchmarks by examining their relationships and assessing the effect of the method choices on their analysis results. The results of our experiments show that there does exist difference in analysis results when employing test data and different benchmarks, and relying exclusively on one benchmark or test data may bring inadequate analysis results. In addition, a guideline on how to conduct a comprehensive analysis using multiple benchmarks from different perspectives is summarised, which can help provide a systematic understanding and profile of the analysed algorithms.</p

Research complexity of Australian universities

Strategic research direction and prioritisation is crucial for decision making in universities. Analysis of research diversification and sophistication helps differentiating universities according to their research attributes. Based on the Microsoft Academic Graph data set, this paper conducts research complexity analysis for all Australian universities, and examines the ubiquity and diversity of the research output. This paper also investigates research complexity indices of Australian universities, with further discussions for universities with research leadership, technological and practical focuses, and young research universities

Challenging Social Media Threats using Collective Well-being Aware Recommendation Algorithms and an Educational Virtual Companion

Social media (SM) have become an integral part of our lives, expanding our inter-linking capabilities to new levels. There is plenty to be said about their positive effects. On the other hand however, some serious negative implications of SM have repeatedly been highlighted in recent years, pointing at various SM threats for society, and its teenagers in particular: from common issues (e.g. digital addiction and polarization) and manipulative influences of algorithms to teenager-specific issues (e.g. body stereotyping). The full impact of current SM platform design -- both at an individual and societal level -- asks for a comprehensive evaluation and conceptual improvement. We extend measures of Collective Well-Being (CWB) to SM communities. As users' relationships and interactions are a central component of CWB, education is crucial to improve CWB. We thus propose a framework based on an adaptive "social media virtual companion" for educating and supporting the entire students' community to interact with SM. The virtual companion will be powered by a Recommender System (CWB-RS) that will optimize a CWB metric instead of engagement or platform profit, which currently largely drives recommender systems thereby disregarding any societal collateral effect. CWB-RS will optimize CWB both in the short term, by balancing the level of SM threat the students are exposed to, as well as in the long term, by adopting an Intelligent Tutor System role and enabling adaptive and personalized sequencing of playful learning activities. This framework offers an initial step on understanding how to design SM systems and embedded educational interventions that favor a more healthy and positive society

A Framework for the Verification and Validation of Artificial Intelligence Machine Learning Systems

An effective verification and validation (V&V) process framework for the white-box and black-box testing of artificial intelligence (AI) machine learning (ML) systems is not readily available. This research uses grounded theory to develop a framework that leads to the most effective and informative white-box and black-box methods for the V&V of AI ML systems. Verification of the system ensures that the system adheres to the requirements and specifications developed and given by the major stakeholders, while validation confirms that the system properly performs with representative users in the intended environment and does not perform in an unexpected manner. Beginning with definitions, descriptions, and examples of ML processes and systems, the research results identify a clear and general process to effectively test these systems. The developed framework ensures the most productive and accurate testing results. Formerly, and occasionally still, the system definition and requirements exist in scattered documents that make it difficult to integrate, trace, and test through V&V. Modern system engineers along with system developers and stakeholders collaborate to produce a full system model using model-based systems engineering (MBSE). MBSE employs a Unified Modeling Language (UML) or System Modeling Language (SysML) representation of the system and its requirements that readily passes from each stakeholder for system information and additional input. The comprehensive and detailed MBSE model allows for direct traceability to the system requirements. xxiv To thoroughly test a ML system, one performs either white-box or black-box testing or both. Black-box testing is a testing method in which the internal model structure, design, and implementation of the system under test is unknown to the test engineer. Testers and analysts are simply looking at performance of the system given input and output. White-box testing is a testing method in which the internal model structure, design, and implementation of the system under test is known to the test engineer. When possible, test engineers and analysts perform both black-box and white-box testing. However, sometimes testers lack authorization to access the internal structure of the system. The researcher captures this decision in the ML framework. No two ML systems are exactly alike and therefore, the testing of each system must be custom to some degree. Even though there is customization, an effective process exists. This research includes some specialized methods, based on grounded theory, to use in the testing of the internal structure and performance. Through the study and organization of proven methods, this research develops an effective ML V&V framework. Systems engineers and analysts are able to simply apply the framework for various white-box and black-box V&V testing circumstances