154 research outputs found

    Inferential sensor for the olive oil industry

    Get PDF
    This paper shows an inferential sensor that has been developed to be used in the olive oil industry. This sensor has been designed to measure two variables that appear in the elaboration of olive oil in a mill which are very difficult to be measured on line by a physical sensor. The knowledge of these variables on line is crucial for the optimal operation of the process, since they provide the state of the plant, allowing the development of a control strategy that can improve the quality and yield of the product. This sensor measures variables that in other case should come form laboratory analysis with large processing delays or from very expensive and difficult to use on line analysers. The sensor has been devised based upon artificial Neural Networks (NN) and has been implemented as a routine running on a Programmable Logic Controller (PLC) and successfully tested on a real plant.Ministerio de Ciencia y Tecnología DPI2001-2380-C02-0

    Formulación del problema de optimización multiobjetivo del confort en edificación sostenible

    Get PDF
    XXXVII Jornadas de Automática. 07/09/2016. MadridEn este trabajo se realiza un análisis detallado del problema de optimización del confort desde un enfoque basado en criterios de edificación sostenible. Para ello, se propone una arquitectura de control jerárquico multicapa gobernada mediante una estrategia de optimización multiobjetivo que proporciona trayectorias de referencia para la temperatura del aire y la iluminancia en el interior de las estancias de un edificio. Los objetivos que se han establecido para el desarrollo de este trabajo son maximizar el confort térmico, el confort visual y la eficiencia energética.Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad DPI2014-56364-C2-1-

    Identificación y estudio de Grupos de Investigación a través de indicadores bibliométricos

    Get PDF
    A methodology based on coauthorship analysis is shown for the identifícation of research teams in a given discipline or research centre. The method includes using in-house programs to analyse a collection of documents downloaded from the Science Citation Index database. Three basic stages can be distinguished in the process: retrieval, downloading and normalisation of bibliographic data, construction of the author productivity file, and delimitation of research teams through coauthorship analysis. As a final step, teams are characterised by means of bibliometric indicators: team size, production, productivity, collaboration rate and subject specialisation of groups. The Spanish production in both a discipline and a research centre, over the years 1990-1993, is analysed through the methodology to test its performance and main results.Se presenta un método para la identificación de los grupos de investigación activos en una determinada área o centro de investigación, a través de un análisis de co-autoría en las publicaciones científicas del área o centro objeto de estudio. La metodología expuesta se basa en programas de elaboración propia aplicados a una descarga de documentos del Science Citation Index. El proceso incluye tres etapas básicas: recuperación, descarga y normalización de los datos bibliográficos a estudiar; construcción del fichero de productividad de los autores; y delimitación de grupos a través de las frecuencias de co-autoría. La última etapa del proceso consiste en la caracterización de los grupos mediante indicadores bibliométricos: tamaño de grupo, producción, productividad, tasas de colaboración y especialización temática. Se ilustra el funcionamiento de la metodología mediante su aplicación a la producción española de una disciplina y de un centro de investigación en el período 1990-93

    Does Collocation Inform the Impact of Collaboration?

    Get PDF
    Background It has been shown that large interdisciplinary teams working across geography are more likely to be impactful. We asked whether the physical proximity of collaborators remained a strong predictor of the scientific impact of their research as measured by citations of the resulting publications. Methodology/Principal Findings Articles published by Harvard investigators from 1993 to 2003 with at least two authors were identified in the domain of biomedical science. Each collaboration was geocoded to the precise three-dimensional location of its authors. Physical distances between any two coauthors were calculated and associated with corresponding citations. Relationship between distance of coauthors and citations for four author relationships (first-last, first-middle, last-middle, and middle-middle) were investigated at different spatial scales. At all sizes of collaborations (from two authors to dozens of authors), geographical proximity between first and last author is highly informative of impact at the microscale (i.e. within building) and beyond. The mean citation for first-last author relationship decreased as the distance between them increased in less than one km range as well as in the three categorized ranges (in the same building, same city, or different city). Such a trend was not seen in other three author relationships. Conclusions/Significance Despite the positive impact of emerging communication technologies on scientific research, our results provide striking evidence for the role of physical proximity as a predictor of the impact of collaborations.Ewing Marion Kauffman FoundationHarvard University. Office of the Provost (1992-

    Towards Open and Equitable Access to Research and Knowledge for Development

    Get PDF
    Leslie Chan and colleagues discuss the value of open access not just for access to health information, but also for transforming structural inequity in current academic reward systems and for valuing scholarship from the South

    Productivity trends and collaboration patterns: A diachronic study in the eating disorders field

    Full text link
    [EN] Objective The present study seeks to extend previous bibliometric studies on eating disorders (EDs) by including a time-dependent analysis of the growth and evolution of multi-author collaborations and their correlation with ED publication trends from 1980 to 2014 (35 years). Methods Using standardized practices, we searched Web of Science (WoS) Core Collection (WoSCC) (indexes: Science Citation Index-Expanded [SCIE], & Social Science Citation Index [SSCI]) and Scopus (areas: Health Sciences, Life Sciences, & Social Sciences and Humanities) to identify a large sample of articles related to EDs. We then submitted our sample of articles to bibliometric and graph theory analyses to identify co-authorship and social network patterns. Results We present a large number of detailed findings, including a clear pattern of scientific growth measured as number of publications per five-year period or quinquennium (Q), a tremendous increase in the number of authors attracted by the ED subject, and a very high and steady growth in collaborative work. Conclusions We inferred that the noted publication growth was likely driven by the noted increase in the number of new authors per Q. Social network analyses suggested that collaborations within ED follow patters of interaction that are similar to well established and recognized disciplines, as indicated by the presence of a ¿giant cluster¿, high cluster density, and the replication of the ¿small world¿ phenomenon¿the principle that we are all linked by short chains of acquaintances.This work was performed with a subsidy from Universidad Catolica de Valencia "San Vicente Martir" to resarch group INDOTEI: Evaluacion de la Ciencia, for the years 2016-2017. This work is benefited from Spanish Government assistance through Government Delegation for the National Drugs Plan of the Ministry of Health, Social Services and Equality (project 2016/028); and National R+D+I (projects: CS02012-39632-C02-01 and CS02015-65594-C2-2-R) and 2015-Networks of Excellence Call (project CS02015-71867-REDT) of the Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness.Valderrama Zurian, JC.; Aguilar-Moya, R.; Cepeda-Benito, A.; Melero-Fuentes, D.; Navarro-Moreno, MÁ.; Gandía-Balaguer, A.; Aleixandre-Benavent, R. (2017). Productivity trends and collaboration patterns: A diachronic study in the eating disorders field. PLoS ONE. 12(8):1-17. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0182760S117128McClelland, J., Bozhilova, N., Campbell, I., & Schmidt, U. (2013). A Systematic Review of the Effects of Neuromodulation on Eating and Body Weight: Evidence from Human and Animal Studies. European Eating Disorders Review, 21(6), 436-455. doi:10.1002/erv.2256Lancelot, C., Brooks-Gunn, J., Warren, M. P., & Newman, D. L. (1991). Comparison of DSM-III and DSM-III-R bulimia nervosa classifications for psychopathology and other eating behaviors. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 10(1), 57-66. doi:10.1002/1098-108x(199101)10:13.0.co;2-tWONDERLICH, S. A., CROSBY, R. D., JOINER, T., PETERSON, C. B., BARDONE-CONE, A., KLEIN, M., … VRSHEK, S. (2005). Personality subtyping and bulimia nervosa: psychopathological and genetic correlates. Psychological Medicine, 35(5), 649-657. doi:10.1017/s0033291704004234Spitzer, R. L., Devlin, M. J., Walsh, B. T., Hasin, D., Wing, R., Marcus, M. D., … Nonas, C. (1991). Binge eating disorder: To be or not to be in DSM-IV. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 10(6), 627-629. doi:10.1002/1098-108x(199111)10:63.0.co;2-4Wonderlich, S. A., Gordon, K. H., Mitchell, J. E., Crosby, R. D., & Engel, S. G. (2014). The Validity and Clinical Utility of Binge Eating Disorder. FOCUS, 12(4), 489-505. doi:10.1176/appi.focus.120412Theander, S. S. (2002). Literature on eating disorders during 40 Years: increasing number of papers, emergence of bulimia nervosa. European Eating Disorders Review, 10(6), 386-398. doi:10.1002/erv.495Clinton, D. (2010). Towards an ecology of eating disorders: Creating sustainability through the integration of scientific research and clinical practice. European Eating Disorders Review, 18(1), 1-9. doi:10.1002/erv.986Soh, N. L.-W., & Walter, G. (2013). Publications on cross-cultural aspects of eating disorders. Journal of Eating Disorders, 1(1). doi:10.1186/2050-2974-1-4Wuchty, S., Jones, B. F., & Uzzi, B. (2007). The Increasing Dominance of Teams in Production of Knowledge. Science, 316(5827), 1036-1039. doi:10.1126/science.1136099Kumar, S. (2015). Co-authorship networks: a review of the literature. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 67(1), 55-73. doi:10.1108/ajim-09-2014-0116Barabási, A. ., Jeong, H., Néda, Z., Ravasz, E., Schubert, A., & Vicsek, T. (2002). Evolution of the social network of scientific collaborations. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 311(3-4), 590-614. doi:10.1016/s0378-4371(02)00736-7Newman, M. E. J. (2004). Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101(Supplement 1), 5200-5205. doi:10.1073/pnas.0307545100Aleixandre-Benavent, R., & Alonso-Arroyo, A. (2011). Indicadores bibliométricos, patología del aparato respiratorio y reducción del consumo de tabaco. Revista de Patología Respiratoria, 14(1), 1-3. doi:10.1016/s1576-9895(11)70095-9Pino-Díaz, J., Jiménez-Contreras, E., Ruíz-Baños, R., & Bailón-Moreno, R. (2011). Evaluación de redes tecnocientíficas: la red española sobre Áreas Protegidas, según la Web of Science. Revista española de Documentación Científica, 34(3), 301-333. doi:10.3989/redc.2011.3.804Valderrama-Zurián, J.-C., Aguilar-Moya, R., Melero-Fuentes, D., & Aleixandre-Benavent, R. (2015). A systematic analysis of duplicate records in Scopus. Journal of Informetrics, 9(3), 570-576. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2015.05.002Guardiola-Wanden-Berghe, R., Sanz-Valero, J., & Wanden-Berghe, C. (2012). Medical subject headings versus American Psychological Association Index Terms: indexing eating disorders. Scientometrics, 94(1), 305-311. doi:10.1007/s11192-012-0866-7Soh, N., Walter, G., Touyz, S., Russell, J., Malhi, G. S., & Hunt, G. E. (2012). Food for thought: Comparison of citations received from articles appearing in specialized eating disorder journals versus general psychiatry journals. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 45(8), 990-994. doi:10.1002/eat.22036Theander, S. S. (2004). Trends in the literature on eating disorders over 36 years(1965-2000): terminology, interpretation and treatment. European Eating Disorders Review, 12(1), 4-17. doi:10.1002/erv.559Kawamura, M., Thomas, C. D. L., Tsurumoto, A., Sasahara, H., & Kawaguchi, Y. (2000). Lotka’s law and productivity index of authors in a scientific journal. Journal of Oral Science, 42(2), 75-78. doi:10.2334/josnusd.42.75Lawani SM. Quality, collaboration and citations in cancer research: A bibliometric study. PhD thesis. Florida State University, Tallahassee. 1980.Watts, D. J., & Strogatz, S. H. (1998). Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks. Nature, 393(6684), 440-442. doi:10.1038/30918Jacomy, M., Venturini, T., Heymann, S., & Bastian, M. (2014). ForceAtlas2, a Continuous Graph Layout Algorithm for Handy Network Visualization Designed for the Gephi Software. PLoS ONE, 9(6), e98679. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0098679Pike, K. M., & Dunne, P. E. (2015). The rise of eating disorders in Asia: a review. Journal of Eating Disorders, 3(1). doi:10.1186/s40337-015-0070-2El Ghoch, M., Soave, F., Calugi, S., & Dalle Grave, R. (2013). Eating Disorders, Physical Fitness and Sport Performance: A Systematic Review. Nutrients, 5(12), 5140-5160. doi:10.3390/nu5125140Jones, A. W. (2007). The distribution of forensic journals, reflections on authorship practices, peer-review and role of the impact factor. Forensic Science International, 165(2-3), 115-128. doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2006.05.013Baker, T., Hatsukami, D., Lerman, C., O’Malley, S., Shields, A., & Fiore, M. (2003). Transdisciplinary science applied to the evaluation of treatments for tobacco use. Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 5(6), 89-99. doi:10.1080/14622200310001625564González-Alcaide, G., Melero-Fuentes, D., Aleixandre-Benavent, R., & Valderrama-Zurián, J.-C. (2013). Productivity and Collaboration in Scientific Publications on Criminology. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 24(1), 15-37. doi:10.1080/10511253.2012.664153López-Muñoz, F., Alamo, C., Rubio, G., García-García, P., Martín-Agueda, B., & Cuenca, E. (2003). Bibliometric analysis of biomedical publications on SSRI during 1980-2000. Depression and Anxiety, 18(2), 95-103. doi:10.1002/da.10121González-Alcaide, G., Aleixandre-Benavent, R., Navarro-Molina, C., & Valderrama-Zurián, J. C. (2008). Coauthorship networks and institutional collaboration patterns in reproductive biology. Fertility and Sterility, 90(4), 941-956. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.07.1378González-Alcaide, G., Park, J., Huamaní, C., Belinchón, I., & Ramos, J. M. (2015). Evolution of Cooperation Patterns in Psoriasis Research: Co-Authorship Network Analysis of Papers in Medline (1942–2013). PLOS ONE, 10(12), e0144837. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0144837Bordons, M., & Ángeles Zulueta, M. (2002). La interdisciplinariedad en los grupos españoles de investigación en el área cardiovascular. Revista Española de Cardiología, 55(9), 900-912. doi:10.1016/s0300-8932(02)76728-6Chan, H. F., Önder, A. S., & Torgler, B. (2015). The first cut is the deepest: repeated interactions of coauthorship and academic productivity in Nobel laureate teams. Scientometrics, 106(2), 509-524. doi:10.1007/s11192-015-1796-yBordons, M., Aparicio, J., González-Albo, B., & Díaz-Faes, A. A. (2015). The relationship between the research performance of scientists and their position in co-authorship networks in three fields. Journal of Informetrics, 9(1), 135-144. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2014.12.001Newman, M. E. J. (2001). The structure of scientific collaboration networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 98(2), 404-409. doi:10.1073/pnas.98.2.404Fatt, C. K., Ujum, E. A., & Ratnavelu, K. (2010). The structure of collaboration in the Journal of Finance. Scientometrics, 85(3), 849-860. doi:10.1007/s11192-010-0254-0Kretschmer, H. (2004). Author productivity and geodesic distance in bibliographic co-authorship networks, and visibility on the Web. Scientometrics, 60(3), 409-420. doi:10.1023/b:scie.0000034383.86665.22Yan, E., Ding, Y., & Zhu, Q. (2009). Mapping library and information science in China: a coauthorship network analysis. Scientometrics, 83(1), 115-131. doi:10.1007/s11192-009-0027-9Yin, L., Kretschmer, H., Hanneman, R. A., & Liu, Z. (2006). Connection and stratification in research collaboration: An analysis of the COLLNET network. Information Processing & Management, 42(6), 1599-1613. doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2006.03.021Lambiotte, R., & Panzarasa, P. (2009). Communities, knowledge creation, and information diffusion. Journal of Informetrics, 3(3), 180-190. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2009.03.007Leydesdorff, L. (2012). World shares of publications of the USA, EU-27, and China compared and predicted using the new Web of Science interface versus Scopus. El Profesional de la Informacion, 21(1), 43-49. doi:10.3145/epi.2012.ene.06Bartol, T., Budimir, G., Dekleva-Smrekar, D., Pusnik, M., & Juznic, P. (2013). Assessment of research fields in Scopus and Web of Science in the view of national research evaluation in Slovenia. Scientometrics, 98(2), 1491-1504. doi:10.1007/s11192-013-1148-8López-Illescas, C., de Moya-Anegón, F., & Moed, H. F. (2008). Coverage and citation impact of oncological journals in the Web of Science and Scopus. Journal of Informetrics, 2(4), 304-316. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2008.08.001Warren, C. S., Gleaves, D. H., Cepeda-Benito, A., Fernandez, M. del C., & Rodriguez-Ruiz, S. (2005). Ethnicity as a protective factor against internalization of a thin ideal and body dissatisfaction. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 37(3), 241-249. doi:10.1002/eat.20102Prince, R., & Thebaud, E. F. (1983). Is Anorexia Nervosa a Culture-Bound Syndrome? Transcultural Psychiatric Research Review, 20(4), 299-302. doi:10.1177/136346158302000419Miller, M. N., & Pumariega, A. J. (2001). Culture and Eating Disorders: A Historical and Cross-Cultural Review. Psychiatry: Interpersonal and Biological Processes, 64(2), 93-110. doi:10.1521/psyc.64.2.93.1862

    Social Network Analytics for Advanced Bibliometrics: Referring to Actor Roles of Management Journals instead of Journal Rankings

    Get PDF
    Impact factors are commonly used to assess journals relevance. This implies a simplified view on science as a single-stage linear process. Therefore, few top-tier journals are one-sidedly favored as outlets, such that submissions to top-tier journals explode whereas others are short of submissions. Consequently, the often claimed gap between research and practical application in application-oriented disciplines as business administration is not narrowing but becoming entrenched. A more complete view of the scientific system is needed to fully capture journals ´ contributions in the development of a discipline. Simple citation measures, as e.g. citation counts, are commonly used to evaluate scientific work. There are many known dangers of miss- or over-interpretation of such simple data and this paper adds to this discussion by developing an alternative way of interpreting a discipline based on the positions and roles of journals in their wider network. Specifically, we employ ideas from the network analytic approach. Relative positions allow the direct comparison between different fields. Similarly, the approach provides a better understanding of the diffusion process of knowledge as it differentiates positions in the knowledge creation process. We demonstrate how different modes of social capital create different patterns of action that require a multidimensional evaluation of scientific research. We explore different types of social capital and intertwined relational structures of actors to compare journals with different bibliometric profiles. Ultimately, we develop a multi-dimensional evaluation of actor roles based upon multiple indicators and we test this approach by classifying management journals based on their bibliometric environment
    corecore