Analysis of co-authorship graphs of CORE-ranked software conferences
In most areas of computer science (CS), and in the software domain in particular, international conferences are as important as journals as a venue to disseminate research results. This has resulted in the creation of rankings to provide quality assessment of conferences (specially used for academic promotion purposes) like the well-known CORE ranking created by the Computing Research and Education Association of Australasia. In this paper we analyze 102 CORE-ranked conferences in the software area (covering all aspects of software engineering, programming languages, software architectures and the like) included in the DBLP dataset, an online reference for computers science bibliographic information. We define a suite of metrics focusing on the analysis of the co-authorship graph of the conferences, where authors are represented as nodes and co-authorship relationships as edges. Our aim is to first characterize the patterns and structure of the community of researchers in software conferences. We then try to see if these values depend on the quality rank of the conference justifying this way the existence of the different classifications in the CORE-ranking system.
KeywordsCo-authorship graph DBLP dataset CORE conference ranking Scientometrics Computer science Software engineering
- Biryukov, M., & Dong, C. (2010). Analysis of computer science communities based on DBLP. ECDL Conference, 6273, 228–235.Google Scholar
- Blondel, V. D., Guillaume, J. L., Lambiotte, R., & Lefebvre, E. (2008). Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, 10, 1000.Google Scholar
- Hassan, A.E., & Holt, R.C. (2004). The Small World of Software Reverse EngineeringGoogle Scholar
- Huang, J., Zhuang, Z., Li, J., & Giles, C. L. (2008). Collaboration over time: Characterizing and modeling network evolution. In WSDM Conference, pp. 107–116Google Scholar
- Newman, M. (2001). Scientific collaboration networks. I. Network construction and fundamental results. Physical Review, 64(1), 1–8.Google Scholar
- Newman, M. E. J. (2000). Scientific collaboration networks. II. Shortest paths, weighted networks, and centrality. Physical Review, 64, 17.Google Scholar
- Rahm, E. (2008). Comparing the scientific impact of conference and journal publications in computer science. Information Services and Use, 28, 127–128.Google Scholar
- Tool, graphs and metric results used in the study (2016). https://github.com/SOM-Research/metaScience-SoftwareConferences.
- Vasilescu, B., Serebrenik, A., & Mens, T. (2013). A historical dataset of software engineering conferences. In MSR conference, pp. 373–376Google Scholar
- Veselin, G., Zhaochen, G., Serrano, D., Tansey, B., Barbosa, D., & Stroulia, E. (2009). An environment for building, exploring and querying academic social networks. In MEDES conference, p. 42Google Scholar