, Volume 104, Issue 2, pp 529–553 | Cite as

Computer science research: the top 100 institutions in India and in the world

  • Vivek Kumar Singh
  • Ashraf Uddin
  • David Pinto


This paper aims to perform a detailed scientometric and text-based analysis of Computer Science (CS) research output of the 100 most productive institutions in India and in the world. The analytical characterization is based on research output data indexed in Scopus during the last 25 years period (1989–2013). Our computational analysis involves a two-dimensional approach involving the standard scientometric methodology and text-based analysis. The scientometric characterization aims to assess CS domain research output in leading Indian institutions vis-à-vis the leading world institutions and to bring out the similarities and differences among them. It involves analysis along traditional scientometric indicators such as total output, citation-based impact assessment, co-authorship patterns, international collaboration levels etc. The text-based characterization aims to identify the key research themes and their temporal trends for the two sets. The key contribution of the experimental work is that it’s an analytical characterization of its kind, which identifies characteristic similarities and differences in CS research landscape of Indian institutions vis-à-vis world institutions.


Computer Science research India Information Technology Informetrics Scientometrics 

JEL Classifications




This work is supported by research grants from Department of Science and Technology, Government of India (Grant: INT/MEXICO/P-13/2012) and University Grants Commission of India (Grant: F. No. 41-624/2012(SR)).

Supplementary material

11192_2015_1612_MOESM1_ESM.docx (35 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 35 kb)


  1. Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A., & Murgia, G. (2013). The collaboration behaviors of scientists in Italy: A field level analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 7(2), 442–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bhattacharya, S., & Bhati, M. (2012). China and India: The two new players in the nanotechnology race. Scientometrics, 93(1), 59–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bound, K. (2007). India: The uneven innovator, the atlas of ideas—Mapping the new geography of science. Domos Study.Google Scholar
  4. Costa, B. M. G., Pedro, E. S., & Macedo, G. R. (2013). Scientific collaboration in biotechnology: The case of the northeast region in Brazil. Scientometrics, 95(2), 571–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ding, Z. Q., Ge, J. P., Wu, X. M., & Zheng, X. N. (2013). Bibliometrics evaluation of research performance in pharmacology/pharmacy: China relative to ten representative countries. Scientometrics, 96(3), 829–844.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fu, H. Z., & Ho, Y. S. (2013). Independent research of China in Science Citation Index Expanded during 1980–2011. Journal of Informetrics, 7(1), 210–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Glänzel, W. (2001). National characteristics in international scientific co-authorship relations. Scientometrics, 51(1), 69–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gupta, B. M., Kshitij, A., & Verma, C. (2011). Mapping of Indian computer science research output, 1999–2008. Scientometrics, 86(2), 261–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Karpagam, R., Gopalakrishnan, S., Babu, B. R., & Natarajan, M. (2012). Scientometric analysis of stem cell research: A comparative study of India and other countries. Collnet Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management, 6(2), 229–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kleinberg, J. (2003). Bursty and hierarchical structure in streams. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 7, 373–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kostoff, R. N. (2008). Comparison of China/USA science and technology performance. Journal of Informetrics, 2(4), 354–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kumar, S., & Garg, K. C. (2005). Scientometrics of computer science research in India and China. Scientometrics, 64(2), 121–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Larsen, P. O., Maye, I., & von Ins, M. (2008). Scientific output and impact: Relative positions of China, Europe, India, Japan and the USA. Collnet Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management, 2(2), 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Liu, Y., Rousseau, R., & Guns, R. (2013). A layered framework to study collaboration as a form of knowledge sharing and diffusion. Journal of Informetrics, 7(3), 651–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ma, R., Ni, C., & Qiu, J. (2008). Scientific research competitiveness of world universities in computer science. Scientometrics, 76(2), 245–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Nishy, P., Panwar, Y., Prasad, S., Mandal, G. K., & Prathap, G. (2012). An impact-citations-exergy (iCX) trajectory analysis of leading research institutions in India. Scientometrics, 91(1), 245–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Onyancha, O. B., & Maluleka, J. R. (2011). Knowledge production through collaborative research in sub-Saharan Africa: How much do countries contribute to each other’s knowledge output and citation impact? Scientometrics, 87(2), 315–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ortega, J. L., & Aguillo, I. F. (2013). Institutional and country collaboration in an online service of scientific profiles: Google Scholar Citations. Journal of Informetrics, 7(2), 394–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ozel, B. (2012). Collaboration structure and knowledge diffusion in Turkish management academia. Scientometrics, 93(1), 183–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Prathap, G. (2013). Second order indicators for evaluating international scientific collaboration. Scientometrics, 95(2), 563–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Tang, L., & Shapira, P. (2011). China–US scientific collaboration in nanotechnology: Patterns and dynamics. Scientometrics, 88(1), 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Teodorescu, D., & Andrei, T. (2011). The growth of international collaboration in East European scholarly communities: A bibliometric analysis of journal articles published between 1989 and 2009. Scientometrics, 89(2), 711–722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Uddin, A., & Singh, V. K. (2014a). Measuring research output and collaboration in South Asian countries. Current Science, 107(1), 31–38.Google Scholar
  24. Uddin, A., & Singh, V. K. (2014b). Mapping the computer science research in SAARC countries. IETE Technical Review, 31(4), 287–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Uddin, A., & Singh, V. K. (2015). A quantity–quality composite ranking of indian institutions in computer science research. IETE Technical Review,. doi: 10.1080/02564602.2015.1010614. (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  26. Viana, M. P., Amancio, D. R., & Costa, L. F. (2013). On time-varying collaboration networks. Journal of Informetrics, 7(2), 371–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wang, X., Xu, S., Liu, D., & Liang, Y. (2012). The role of Chinese–American scientists in China–US scientific collaboration: A study in nanotechnology. Scientometrics, 91(3), 737–749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceSouth Asian UniversityNew DelhiIndia
  2. 2.Faculty of Computer ScienceBenemérita Universidad Autonóma de PueblaPueblaMexico

Personalised recommendations