Web Science: expanding the notion of Computer Science

Academic disciplines which practice in the context of rapid external change face particular problems when seeking to maintain timely, current and relevant teaching programs. In different institutions faculty will tune and update individual component courses while more radical revisions are typically departmental-wide strategic responses to perceived needs. Internationally, the ACM has sought to define curriculum recommendations since the 1960s and recognizes the diversity of the computing disciplines with its 2005 overview volume. The consequent rolling program of revisions is demanding in terms of time and effort, but an inevitable response to the change inherent is our family of specialisms. Preparation for the Computer Curricula 2013 is underway, so it seems appropriate to ask what place Web Science will have in the curriculum landscape. Web Science has been variously described; the most concise definition being the ‘science of decentralized information systems’. Web science is fundamentally interdisciplinary encompassing the study of the technologies and engineering which constitute the Web, alongside emerging associated human, social and organizational practices. Furthermore, to date little teaching of Web Science is at undergraduate level. Some questions emerge - is Web Science a transient artifact? Can Web Science claim a place in the ACM family, Is Web Science an exotic relative with a home elsewhere? This paper discusses the role and place of Web Science in the context of the computing disciplines. It provides an account of work which has been established towards defining an initial curriculum for Web Science with plans for future developments utilizing novel methods to support and elaborate curriculum definition and review. The findings of a desk survey of existing related curriculum recommendations are presented. The paper concludes with recommendations for future activities which may help us determine whether we should expand the notion of computer science

A Comparison between Two Main Academic Literature Collections: Web of Science and Scopus Databases

Nowadays, the world’s scientific community has been publishing an enormous number of papers in different scientific fields. In such environment, it is essential to know which databases are equally efficient and objective for literature searches. It seems that two most extensive databases are Web of Science and Scopus. Besides searching the literature, these two databases used to rank journals in terms of their productivity and the total citations received to indicate the journals impact, prestige or influence. This article attempts to provide a comprehensive comparison of these databases to answer frequent questions which researchers ask, such as: How Web of Science and Scopus are different? In which aspects these two databases are similar? Or, if the researchers are forced to choose one of them, which one should they prefer? For answering these questions, these two databases will be compared based on their qualitative and quantitative characteristics.Cite as: Aghaei Chadegani, A., Salehi, H., Yunus, M. M., Farhadi, H., Fooladi, M., Farhadi, M., & Ale Ebrahim, N. (2013). A Comparison between Two Main Academic Literature Collections: Web of Science and Scopus Databases. Asian Social Science, 9(5), 18-26. doi: 10.5539/ass.v9n5p1

Does it Matter Which Citation Tool is Used to Compare the h-index of a Group of Highly Cited Researchers?

h-index retrieved by citation indexes (Scopus, Google scholar, and Web of Science) is used to measure the scientific performance and the research impact studies based on the number of publications and citations of a scientist. It also is easily available and may be used for performance measures of scientists, and for recruitment decisions. The aim of this study is to investigate the difference between the outputs and results from these three citation databases namely Scopus, Google Scholar, and Web of Science based upon the h-index of a group of highly cited researchers (Nobel Prize winner scientist). The purposive sampling method was adopted to collect the required data. The results showed that there is a significant difference in the h-index between three citation indexes of Scopus, Google scholar, and Web of Science; the Google scholar h-index was more than the h-index in two other databases. It was also concluded that there is a significant positive relationship between h-indices based on Google scholar and Scopus. The citation indexes of Scopus, Google scholar, and Web of Science may be useful for evaluating h-index of scientists but they have some limitations as well.Cite as: Farhadi, H., Salehi, H., Yunus, M. M., Aghaei Chadegani, A., Farhadi, M., Fooladi, M., & Ale Ebrahim, N. (2013). Does it Matter Which Citation Tool is Used to Compare the h-index of a Group of Highly Cited Researchers? Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 7(4), 198-202. doi: arXiv:1306.072

Cable-Driven Robots with Wireless Control Capability for Pedagogical Illustration in Science

Science teaching in secondary schools is often abstract for students. Even if some experiments can be conducted in classrooms, mainly for chemistry or some physics fields, mathematics is not an experimental science. Teachers have to convince students that theorems have practical implications. We present teachers an original and easy-to-use pedagogical tool: a cable-driven robot with a Web-based remote control interface. The robot implements several scientific concepts such as 3D-geometry and kinematics. The remote control enables the teacher to move freely in the classroom.Comment: CAR - 8th National Conference on "Control Architecure of Robots" (2013

Comment on Reply to Comment of Finger et al. (2013) on: 'Evidence for an Early-Middle Miocene age of the Navidad Formation (central Chile): Paleontological, paleoclimatic and tectonic implications' of Gutiérrez et al. (2013, Andean Geology 40 (1): 66-78)

Indexación: Web of Science; ScieloIn their answer to our Comment (Finger et al., 2013), Le Roux et al. (2013) misunderstand several of our remarks and present what we view as f lawed arguments, principally their case for a shallow-marine environment for part of the Navidad Formation. We do not wish to see this exchange evolve into an endless discussion, but we feel obligated to clarify some points. We think this is necessary because of history and importance of the Navidad Formation as the reference for the marine Miocene of Chile. Here we also expound upon some concepts relevant to the distinction between shallow-and deep-marine environments

Trends in Russian research output indexed in Scopus and Web of Science

Trends are analysed in the annual number of documents published by Russian institutions and indexed in Scopus and Web of Science, giving special attention to the time period starting in the year 2013 in which the Project 5-100 was launched by the Russian Government. Numbers are broken down by document type, publication language, type of source, research discipline, country and source. It is concluded that Russian publication counts strongly depend upon the database used, and upon changes in database coverage, and that one should be cautious when using indicators derived from WoS, and especially from Scopus, as tools in the measurement of research performance and international orientation of the Russian science system.Comment: Author copy of a manuscript accepted for publication in the journal Scientometrics, May 201

Crowd-Sourcing Fuzzy and Faceted Classification for Concept Search

Searching for concepts in science and technology is often a difficult task. To facilitate concept search, different types of human-generated metadata have been created to define the content of scientific and technical disclosures. Classification schemes such as the International Patent Classification (IPC) and MEDLINE's MeSH are structured and controlled, but require trained experts and central management to restrict ambiguity (Mork, 2013). While unstructured tags of folksonomies can be processed to produce a degree of structure (Kalendar, 2010; Karampinas, 2012; Sarasua, 2012; Bragg, 2013) the freedom enjoyed by the crowd typically results in less precision (Stock 2007). Existing classification schemes suffer from inflexibility and ambiguity. Since humans understand language, inference, implication, abstraction and hence concepts better than computers, we propose to harness the collective wisdom of the crowd. To do so, we propose a novel classification scheme that is sufficiently intuitive for the crowd to use, yet powerful enough to facilitate search by analogy, and flexible enough to deal with ambiguity. The system will enhance existing classification information. Linking up with the semantic web and computer intelligence, a Citizen Science effort (Good, 2013) would support innovation by improving the quality of granted patents, reducing duplicitous research, and stimulating problem-oriented solution design. A prototype of our design is in preparation. A crowd-sourced fuzzy and faceted classification scheme will allow for better concept search and improved access to prior art in science and technology