Scientific Matchmaker: Collaborator Recommender System

  • Ilya MakarovEmail author
  • Oleg Bulanov
  • Olga Gerasimova
  • Natalia Meshcheryakova
  • Ilia Karpov
  • Leonid E. Zhukov
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10716)


Modern co-authorship networks contain hidden patterns of researchers interaction and publishing activities. We aim to provide a system for selecting a collaborator for joint research or an expert on a given list of topics. We have improved a recommender system for finding possible collaborator with respect to research interests and predicting quality and quantity of the anticipated publications. Our system is based on a co-authorship network derived from the bibliographic database, as well as content information on research papers obtained from SJR Scimago, staff information and the other features from the open data of researchers profiles. We formulate the recommendation problem as a weighted link prediction within the co-authorship network and evaluate its prediction for strong and weak ties in collaborative communities.


Recommender systems Co-authorship network Scientific collaboration 



The work was supported by the Russian Science Foundation under grant 17-11-01294 and performed at National Research University Higher School of Economics, Russia.


  1. 1.
    Liang, Y., Li, Q., Qian, T.: Finding relevant papers based on citation relations. In: Wang, H., Li, S., Oyama, S., Hu, X., Qian, T. (eds.) WAIM 2011. LNCS, vol. 6897, pp. 403–414. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Newman, M.E.: Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration. Proc. NAS 101(suppl 1), 5200–5205 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Newman, M.: Who is the best connected scientist? A study of scientific coauthorship networks. Complex Netw. 650, 337–370 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Morel, C.M., Serruya, S.J., Penna, G.O., Guimarães, R.: Co-authorship network analysis: a powerful tool for strategic planning of research, development and capacity building programs on neglected diseases. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 3(8), e501 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cetorelli, N., Peristiani, S.: Prestigious stock exchanges: a network analysis of international financial centers. J. Bank. Finance 37(5), 1543–1551 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Li, E.Y., Liao, C.H., Yen, H.R.: Co-authorship networks and research impact: a social capital perspective. Res. Policy 42(9), 1515–1530 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yan, E., Ding, Y.: Applying centrality measures to impact analysis: a coauthorship network analysis. J. IST Assoc. 60(10), 2107–2118 (2009)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sarigöl, E., et al.: Predicting scientific success based on coauthorship networks. EPJ Data Sci. 3(1), 9 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Velden, T., Lagoze, C.: Patterns of collaboration in co-authorship networks in chemistry-mesoscopic analysis and interpretation. In: ISSI 2009 (2009)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wasserman, S., Faust, K.: Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications, vol. 8. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1994)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wang, C., Blei, D.M.: Collaborative topic modeling for recommending scientific articles. In: Proceedings of the 17th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp. 448–456. ACM (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mimno, D., McCallum, A.: Expertise modeling for matching papers with reviewers. In: Proceedings of the 13th ACM SIGKDD IC, pp. 500–509 (2007)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Makarov, I., Bulanov, O., Zhukov, L.: Co-author recommender system. In: Kalyagin, V., Nikolaev, A., Pardalos, P., Prokopyev, O. (eds.) Springer Proceedings in Mathematics and Statistic, vol. 197, pp. 1–6. Springer, Cham (2017)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Powered by HSE Portal: Publications of HSE (2017). Accessed 9 May 2017
  15. 15.
    González-Pereira, B., Guerrero-Bote, V.P., Moya-Anegón, F.: A new approach to the metric of journals’ scientific prestige: the SJR indicator. J. Informetr. 4(3), 379–391 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Guerrero-Bote, V.P., Moya-Anegón, F.: A further step forward in measuring journals’ scientific prestige: the SJR2 indicator. J. Informetr. 6(4), 674–688 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    BigARTM contributors: BigARTM v0.8.2, December 2016.
  18. 18.
    Liben-Nowell, D., Kleinberg, J.: The link-prediction problem for social networks. J. IST Assoc. 58(7), 1019–1031 (2007)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lancichinetti, A., Fortunato, S.: Community detection algorithms: a comparative analysis. Phys. Rev. E 80(5), 056117 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Meier, L., Van De Geer, S., Bühlmann, P.: The group LASSO for logistic regression. J. Roy. Stat. Soc. Ser. B (Stat. Methodol.) 70(1), 53–71 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wainwright, M.J., Ravikumar, P., Lafferty, J.D.: High-dimensional graphical model selection using \(l_1\)-regularized logistic regression. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 19, 1465 (2007)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Beel, J., et al.: Research paper recommender system evaluation: a quantitative literature survey. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on RepSys 2013, pp. 15–22. ACM, New York (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Research University Higher School of EconomicsMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations