Abstract
An academic conference is not only a venue for publishing papers but also a nursery room for new scientific encounters. While previous research has investigated scientific collaboration mechanisms based on the triadic closure and focal closure, in this paper, we propose a new collaboration mechanism named conference closure. Conference closure means that scholars involved in a common conference may collaborate with each other in the future. We analyze the extent to which scholars will meet new collaborators from both the individual and community levels by using 22 conferences in the field of data mining extracted from DBLP digital library. Our results demonstrate the existence of conference closure and this phenomenon is more remarkable in conferences with high field rating and large scale attendees. Scholars involved in multiple conferences will encounter more collaborators from the conferences. Another interesting finding is that although most conference attendees are junior scholars with few publications, senior scholars with fruitful publications may gain more collaborations during the conference. Meanwhile, the conference closure still holds if we control the productivity homophily. Our study will shed light on evaluating the impact of a conference from the social function perspective based on the index of conference closure.
References
Abrizah, A., Erfanmanesh, M., Rohani, V. A., Thelwall, M., Levitt, J. M., & Didegah, F. (2014). Sixty-four years of informetrics research: Productivity, impact and collaboration. Scientometrics, 101(1), 569–585.
Alaimo, R. (2004). Top six reasons to attend a conference. Knowledge Quest, 33, 34–35.
Bai, X., Xia, F., Lee, I., Zhang, J., & Ning, Z. (2016). Identifying anomalous citations for objective evaluation of scholarly article impact. PloS one, 11(9), e0162364.
Barabási, A. L. (2016). Network science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Battiston, F., Iacovacci, J., Nicosia, V., Bianconi, G., & Latora, V. (2016). Emergence of multiplex communities in collaboration networks. PloS one, 11(1), e0147451.
Bianconi, G., Darst, R. K., Iacovacci, J., & Fortunato, S. (2014). Triadic closure as a basic generating mechanism of communities in complex networks. Physical Review E, 90(4), 042806.
Coccia, M., & Wang, L. (2016). Evolution and convergence of the patterns of international scientific collaboration. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(8), 2057–2061.
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2013). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. London: Routledge.
Cramér, H. (2016). Mathematical methods of statistics (PMS-9) (Vol. 9). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Dorn, C., & Taylor, R. N. (2015). Analyzing runtime adaptability of collaboration patterns. Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience, 27(11), 2725–2750.
Easley, D., & Kleinberg, J. (2010). Networks, crowds, and markets: Reasoning about a highly connected world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Garfield, E. (1999). Journal impact factor: A brief review. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 161(8), 979–980.
Green, S. B., & Salkind, N. J. (2010). Using SPSS for Windows and Macintosh: Analyzing and understanding data. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Press.
Han, J., Pei, J., & Kamber, M. (2011). Data mining: Concepts and techniques. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
He, Z. L., Geng, X. S., & Campbell-Hunt, C. (2009). Research collaboration and research output: A longitudinal study of 65 biomedical scientists in a New Zealand university. Research Policy, 38(2), 306–317.
Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102, 16569–16572.
Huang, H., Tang, J., Wu, S., Liu, L., et al. (2014). Mining triadic closure patterns in social networks. In Proceedings of the 23rd international conference on world wide web, ACM (pp. 499–504).
Jones, H., & Hugman, A. (2010). Does a conference act as a catalyst for further publications and collaborations? A pilot study of a small science and mathematics education conference. In Proceedings of The Australian Conference on Science and Mathematics Education (formerly UniServe Science Conference), (vol. 16).
Klug, M., & Bagrow, J. P. (2016). Understanding the group dynamics and success of teams. Open Science, 3(4), 160007.
Kossinets, G., & Watts, D. J. (2006). Empirical analysis of an evolving social network. Science, 311(5757), 88–90.
Kronegger, L., Mali, F., Ferligoj, A., & Doreian, P. (2015). Classifying scientific disciplines in slovenia: A study of the evolution of collaboration structures. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(2), 321–339.
Kumpula, J. M., Onnela, J. P., Saramäki, J., Kaski, K., & Kertész, J. (2007). Emergence of communities in weighted networks. Physical Review Letters, 99(22), 228701.
Ley, M. (2009). Dblp: Some lessons learned. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment, 2(2), 1493–1500.
Lotka, A. (2010). The frequency distribution of scientific productivity. Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences, 16(12), 317–323.
Lou, T., Tang, J., Hopcroft, J., Fang, Z., & Ding, X. (2013). Learning to predict reciprocity and triadic closure in social networks. ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data (TKDD), 7(2), 5.
McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27(1), 415–444.
Myers, L., & Sirois, M. J. (2006). Spearman correlation coefficients, differences between. Wiley StatsRef: Statistics Reference Online.
Newman, M. E. (2004). Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101(suppl 1), 5200–5205.
Newman, M. E., Watts, D. J., & Strogatz, S. H. (2002). Random graph models of social networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99(suppl 1), 2566–2572.
Opsahl, T. (2013). Triadic closure in two-mode networks: Redefining the global and local clustering coefficients. Social Networks, 35(2), 159–167.
Pain, E. (2015). How to network effectively http://www.sciencemag.org/careers/2015/10/how-network-effectively
Pain, E. (2016). Building successful collaborations. http://www.sciencemag.org/careers/2016/06/building-successful-collaborations
Pao, M. L. (1986). An empirical examination of Lotka’s law. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 37(1), 26–33.
Scholz, C., Atzmueller, M., Kibanov, M., & Stumme, G. (2014). Predictability of evolving contacts and triadic closure in human face-to-face proximity networks. Social Network Analysis and Mining, 4(1), 217.
Scott, J. (2012). Social network analysis. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Shockley, W. (1957). On the statistics of individual variations of productivity in research laboratories. Proceedings of the IRE, 45(3), 279–290.
Sinha, A., Shen, Z., Song, Y., Ma, H., Eide, D., Hsu, B. J. P., Wang, K. (2015). An overview of microsoft academic service (mas) and applications. In Proceedings of the 24th international conference on world wide web, ACM, (pp. 243–246).
Su, X., Wang, W., Yu, S., Zhang, C., Bekele, T. M., Xia, F. (2016). Can academic conferences promote research collaboration? In Proceedings of the 16th ACM/IEEE-CS on joint conference on digital libraries, ACM, (pp. 231–232).
van Ypersele, J. P., et al. (2013). The maze of impact metrics. Nature, 502(7472), 423–423.
Voos, H. (1974). Lotka and information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 25(4), 270–272.
Wang, W., Yu, S., Bekele, T. M., Kong, X., & Xia, F. (2017). Scientific collaboration patterns vary with scholars’ academic ages. Scientometrics, 112(1), 329–343.
Wu, Y., Venkatramanan, S., & Chiu, D. M. (2016). Research collaboration and topic trends in computer science based on top active authors. PeerJ Computer Science, 2, e41.
Xia, F., Chen, Z., Wang, W., Li, J., & Yang, L. T. (2014). Mvcwalker: Random walk-based most valuable collaborators recommendation exploiting academic factors. IEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in Computing, 2(3), 364–375.
Xia, F., Su, X., Wang, W., Zhang, C., Ning, Z., & Lee, I. (2016). Bibliographic analysis of nature based on twitter and facebook altmetrics data. PloS one, 11(12), e0165997.
Xia, F., Wang, W., Bekele, T. M., & Liu, H. (2017). Big scholarly data: A survey. IEEE Transactions on Big Data, 3(1), 18–35.
Acknowledgements
The authors extend their appreciation to the International Scientific Partnership Program ISPP at King Saud University for funding this research work through ISPP\(\#\) 0078.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wang, W., Bai, X., Xia, F. et al. From triadic closure to conference closure: the role of academic conferences in promoting scientific collaborations. Scientometrics 113, 177–193 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2468-x
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2468-x