Scientific Collaboration Network Views: A Brazilian Computer Science Graduate Programs Case
Keywords:design science research, digital libraries, scientific interactions, social networks
Scientific collaboration networks can present different views of researchers’ interactions. This work presents SCI-synergy, an online navigable artifact aiming to promote mechanisms and views of scientific collaboration networks. The artifact focuses on the researchers’ interaction in the co-authorship of publications considering intra- and interprogram relationships. SCI-synergy is developed upon the design science research paradigm using scientific publication data available on the large Digital Bibliography & Library Project (DBLP) repository. Official data from the Sucupira repository of six Brazilian graduate program members including Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG), State University of São Paulo (USP), Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN), Federal University of Amazonas (UFAM), University of Brasília (UnB), and University of Vale do Rio dos Sinos (UNISINOS) is used. Data from these graduate programs illustrate the artifact usage regarding the scientific collaboration network of each program, how each researcher cooperates, and what relationship patterns exist in intra- and inter-programs views. We advocate that, even though it is necessary to consider data from each program’s history and current contextualization regarding politics, economics, and administration, the collaboration network views provided by SCI-synergy might help to understand collaboration network patterns.
Arruda, D., Bezerra, F., Neris, V. A., Toro, P. R. D., and Wainera, J. Brazilian computer science research: Gender and regional distributions. Scientometrics vol. 79, pp. 651–665, 2009.
Bazzan, A. L. C. and Argenta, V. F. Network of collaboration among PC members of brazilian computer science conferences. J. Braz. Comp. Soc. 17 (2): 133–139, 2011.
Bonacich, P. Power and centrality: A family of measures. American Journal of Sociology 92 (5): 1170–1182, 1987.
Brandão, M. A. and Moro, M. M. The strength of co-authorship ties through different topological properties. J. Braz. Comp. Soc. 23 (1): 5, 2017.
Brandes, U. and Pich, C. Centrality estimation in large networks. International Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos 17 (07): 2303–2318, 2007.
Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W., and West, J. Open innovation: Researching a new paradigm. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 2006.
Costa, A. R. and Ralha, C. G. Analysis of scientific collaboration network as a management tool for graduate programs. In Proceedings of the Annual Conference on Brazilian Symposium on Information Systems: A Computer Socio-Technical Perspective - Volume 1. SBSI 2015. Brazilian Computer Society, pp. 275–282, 2015.
Costa, A. R. and Ralha, C. G. Análise de Rede de Colaboração Científica como Ferramenta na Gestão de Programas de Pós-graduação. Vol. Princípios e Aplicações da Computação no Brasil 2. Atena Editora, Ponta Grossa, Paraná, Brazil, 2019. [link] (visited 2019-04-11).
Coxon, A. P. M. Perspectives on social network. In Perspectives on Social Network Research, P. W. Holland and S. Leinhardt (Eds.). Academic Press, Oxford, 23, pp. 489–500, 1979.
Cronin, B. The hand of science: Academic writing and its rewards. Scarecrow Press, Lanham, MD, USA, 2005.
Cugmas, M., Mali, F., and Žiberna, A. Scientific collaboration of researchers and organizations: a two-level block-modeling approach. Scientometrics vol. 125, pp. 2471–2489, 2020.
Digiampietri, L. A., Mena-Chalco, J. P., de Melo, P. O. S. V., Malheiro, A. P. R., Meira, D. N. O., Franco, L. F., and Oliveira, L. B. Brax-ray: An x-ray of the brazilian computer science graduate programs. Plos One 9 (4): 1–12, 2014.
Ferreira, A. A., Gonçalves, M. A., and Laender, A. H. F. Automatic Disambiguation of Author Names in Bibliographic Repositories. Morgan & Claypool, San Rafael, CA, USA, 2020.
Franceschet, M. Collaboration in computer science: A network science approach. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology 62 (10): 1992–2012, 2011.
Freire, V. P. and Figueiredo, D. R. Ranking in collaboration networks using a group based metric. J. Braz. Comp. Soc. 17 (4): 255–266, November, 2011.
Glänzel, W. National characteristics in international scientific co-authorship relations. Scientometrics 51 (1): 69–115, 2001.
Glänzel, W. Coauthorship patterns and trends in the sciences (1980-1998): A bibliometric study with implications for database indexing and search strategies. Library trends 50 (3): 461–475, 2002.
Gospodnetic, O., Hatcher, E., and McCandless, M. Lucene in action. Simon and Schuster, 2010.
Hagberg, A., Swart, P., and S. Chult, D. Exploring network structure, dynamics, and function using networkx. In Proceedings of the 7th Python in Science Conferences (SciPy 2008). pp. 11–16, 2008.
Hansen, D. L., Shneiderman, B., Smith, M. A., and Himelboim, I. Chapter 3 - social network analysis: Measuring, mapping, and modeling collections of connections. In Analyzing Social Media Networks with NodeXL (Second Edition), Second Edition ed., D. L. Hansen, B. Shneiderman, M. A. Smith, and I. Himelboim (Eds.). Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 31–51, 2020.
Hevner, A. and Chatterjee, S. Design Research in Information Systems: Theory and Practice. Springer Publishing Company, New York, NY, USA, 2010.
Holzschuher, F. and Peinl, R. Performance of graph query languages: comparison of cypher, gremlin and native access in neo4j. In Proceedings of the Joint EDBT/ICDT 2013 Workshops. ACM, pp. 195–204, 2013.
Hu, Z., Tian, W., Guo, J., and Wang, X. Mapping research collaborations in different countries and regions: 1980–2019. Scientometrics vol. 124, pp. 729–745, 2020.
Jiang, J., Shi, P., An, B., Yu, J., and Wang, C. Measuring the social influences of scientist groups based on multiple types of collaboration relations. Information Processing & Management 53 (1): 1–20, 2017.
Kang, I., Na, S., Lee, S., Jung, H., Kim, P., Sung, W., and Lee, J. On co-authorship for author disambiguation. Inf. Process. Manag. 45 (1): 84–97, 2009.
Katz, J. S. and Martin, B. R. What is research collaboration? Research Policy 26 (1): 1 – 18, 1997.
Kim, K.-W. Measuring international research collaboration of peripheral countries: Taking the context into consideration. Scientometrics 66 (2): 231–240, 2006.
Laender, A. H. F., de Lucena, C. J. P., Maldonado, J. C., de Souza e Silva, E., and Ziviani, N. Assessing the research and education quality of the top brazilian computer science graduate programs. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin 40 (2): 135–145, 2008. Invited Report.
Ley, M. The DBLP computer science bibliography: Evolution, research issues, perspectives. In International Symposium on String Processing and Information Retrieval (SPIRE), A. H. F. Laender and A. L. Oliveira (Eds.). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2476. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, Lisbon, Portugal, pp. 1–10, 2002.
Lima, H., Silva, T. H. P., Moro, M. M., Santos, R. L. T., Meira, W., and Laender, A. H. F. Assessing the profile of top brazilian computer science researchers. Scientometrics 103 (3): 879–896, 2015.
Lima, L. H. C., Penha, G., de A. Rocha, L. M., Moro, M. M., da Silva, A. P. C., Laender, A. H. F., and de Oliveira, J. P. M. The collaboration network of the brazilian symposium on databases-30 editions of history. J. Braz. Comp. Soc. 23 (1): 10, 2017.
Linden, R., Barbosa, L. F., and Digiampietri, L. A. ”brazilian style science”—an analysis of the difference between brazilian and international computer science departments and graduate programs using social networks analysis and bibliometrics. Social Network Analysis and Mining 44 (7), 2017.
Lopes, G. R., da Silva, R., Moro, M. M., and de Oliveira, J. P. M. Scientific collaboration in research networks: A quantification method by using gini coefficient. Int. J. Comput. Sci. Appl. 9 (2): 15–31, 2012.
Maia, G., de Melo, P. O. S. V., Guidoni, D. L., Souza, F. S. H., Silva, T. H. P., Almeida, J. M., and Loureiro, A. A. F. On the analysis of the collaboration network of the brazilian symposium on computer networks and distributed systems. J. Braz. Comp. Soc. 19 (3): 361, 2013.
Martin, C. and Niemeyer, P. On the impact of network size and average degree on the robustness of centrality measures. Network Science 9 (S1): S61–S82, 2021.
Milgram, S. The small world problem. Psychology today 2 (1): 60–67, 1967.
Newman, M. Networks: An introduction. Oxford University Press, Oxford, New York, 2010.
Newman, M. E. J. Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences of the United States of America 101 (suppl 1): 5200–5205, 2004.
Park, J.-H. and Nam, E. Intra- and inter-institutional collaborative pairing trends of lis field in south korea. Libri 66 (2): 125–136, 2016.
Silva, T. H. P., Laender, A. H. F., Jr., C. A. D., da Silva, A. P. C., and Moro, M. M. A profile analysis of the top brazilian computer science graduate programs. Scientometrics 113 (1): 237–255, 2017.
Simon, H. A. The sciences of the artificial. MIT press, Cambridge, MA, 1996.
Tang, L. and Walsh, J. Bibliometric fingerprints: name disambiguation based on approximate structure equivalence of cognitive maps. Scientometrics 84 (3): 763–784, 2010.
Tomizawa, H. and Shirabe, M. Likelihood of overseas access to international co-authorships. Scientometrics 53 (1): 113–121, 2002.
Trucolo, C. C. and Digiampietri, L. A. Improving trend analysis using social network features. J. Braz. Comp. Soc. 23 (1): 8, 2017.
Wagner, C. S., Whetsell, T. A., and Mukherjee, S. International research collaboration: Novelty, conventionality, and a typicality in knowledge recombination. Research Policy 48 (5): 1260–1270, 2019.
Weber, S. Design science research: Paradigm or approach? In AMCIS 2010 Proceedings, 2010.
Yoshikane, F. and Kageura, K. Comparative analysis of coauthorship networks of different domains: The growth and change of networks. Scientometrics 60 (3): 435–446, 2004.
Yu, S., Bedru, H. D., Lee, I., and Xia, F. Science of scientific team science: A survey. Computer Science Review vol. 31, pp. 72–83, 2019.
Zhang, C., Bu, Y., Ding, Y., and Xu, J. Understanding scientific collaboration: Homophily, transitivity, and preferential attachment. J. of the Association for Information Science and Technology 69 (1): 72–86, 2018.