Advertisement

Scienceography: The Study of How Science Is Written

  • Graham Cormode
  • S. Muthukrishnan
  • Jinyun Yan
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7288)

Abstract

Scientific literature has itself been the subject of much scientific study, for a variety of reasons: understanding how results are communicated, how ideas spread, and assessing the influence of areas or individuals. However, most prior work has focused on extracting and analyzing citation and stylistic patterns. In this work, we introduce the notion of ‘scienceography’, which focuses on the writing of science. We provide a first large scale study using data derived from the arXiv e-print repository. Crucially, our data includes the “source code” of scientific papers—the \(\hbox{\LaTeX }\) source—which enables us to study features not present in the “final product”, such as the tools used and private comments between authors. Our study identifies broad patterns and trends in two example areas—computer science and mathematics—as well as highlighting key differences in the way that science is written in these fields. Finally, we outline future directions to extend the new topic of scienceography.

Keywords

Citation Analysis Input String Portable Document Format Maximal Comment Distinct Word 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Atkins, H.B., Cronin, B.: The Web of Knowledge. Information Today (2000)Google Scholar
  2. Bellis, N.D.: Bibliometrics and Citation Analysis: From the Science Citation Index to Cybermetrics. Scarecrow Press (2009)Google Scholar
  3. Fealing, K.H., Lane, J.I., Marburger III, J.H., Shipp, S.S. (eds.): The Science of Science Policy: A Handbook. Stanford University press (2011)Google Scholar
  4. Gerrish, S.M., Blei, D.: A language-based approach to measuring scholarly impact. In: International Conference on Machine Learning (2010)Google Scholar
  5. Goth, G.: The science of better science. Communications of the ACM (2012)Google Scholar
  6. Hirsch, J.E.: An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. PNAS 102(46), 16569–16572 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Klink, S., Reuther, P., Weber, A., Walter, B., Ley, M.: Analysing Social Networks Within Bibliographical Data. In: Bressan, S., Küng, J., Wagner, R. (eds.) DEXA 2006. LNCS, vol. 4080, pp. 234–243. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Moed, H.F.: Citation Analysis in Research Evaluation. Springer (2011)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Graham Cormode
    • 1
  • S. Muthukrishnan
    • 2
  • Jinyun Yan
    • 2
  1. 1.AT&T Labs–ResearchUSA
  2. 2.Rutgers UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations