MetaScience: Holistic Approach for Research Modeling and Analysis
•Als PPTX, PDF herunterladen•
1 gefällt mir•1,071 views
This article (presented at the ER2016 conference) proposes a conceptual schema providing a holistic view of conference-related information (e.g., authors, papers, committees and topics). This schema is automatically and incrementally populated with data available online. A number of data analysis and visualization algorithms are applied on top of this data to provide meaningful information to prospective authors, PC members and conference steering committeees
Empfohlen
Empfohlen
Weitere ähnliche Inhalte
Was ist angesagt?
Was ist angesagt? (9)
Andere mochten auch
Andere mochten auch (20)
Ähnlich wie MetaScience: Holistic Approach for Research Modeling and Analysis
Ähnlich wie MetaScience: Holistic Approach for Research Modeling and Analysis (20)
Mehr von Jordi Cabot
Mehr von Jordi Cabot (20)
Kürzlich hochgeladen
Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)
MetaScience: Holistic Approach for Research Modeling and Analysis
- 1. MetaScience An Holistic Approach for Research Modeling Valerio Cosentino, Javier Cánovas & Jordi Cabot ICREA – Open University of Catalonia @softmodeling modeling-languages.com
- 3. Both need to work together to have a healthy community
- 4. How can we use conceptual models to help ?
- 8. -Data vs Information -Non-trivial analysis: Integration of different sources -Conceptual Schema as unifying representation -Separation of data collection from data analysis
- 11. DB schema
- 12. DB schema
- 14. Conferences and papers: DBLP Table mapping
- 15. PCs and topics: web scrapping
- 16. + a variety of other (overlapping) sources & formats
- 18. Single metrics, e.g. authors per paper 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 ρ = 0.88
- 19. Single metrics, e.g. seniority of researchers
- 20. Graph-based analysis: Co-authorship graphs Prolific authors Frequent collaborations Clusters Betweenness (bridge authors)
- 21. Historical / temporal view, e.g. PC Analysis ARE PC MEMBERS ACTIVE IN THE CONFERENCE? 60 out of the 99 members from 2015 did not publish in the previous 3 editions ARE ACTIVE MEMBERS BEING IGNORED? Only 7 researchers published constantly from 2012 to 2014 3 of them were PC members in 2015, while the remaining 4 were not
- 22. Newcomers % of papers with all authors new to the main track % of papers with all authors new to the conf
- 23. NL/ Topic analysis, e.g. Top-30 keywords for last 10 edts From paper abstracts From topics of interest
- 24. http://matt.might.net/articles/phd-school-in-pictures And there’s much more... Collaborating with the complex systems group: rich club ordering, small- world behaviour, inter- conf analysis…
- 25. CORE analysis (shameless plug)
- 27. Gitana: Integrated analysis (ER’15) Coding platform Issue trackers Commun. channels Code review tools
- 32. The CS keeps growing
- 34. And even more challenges…. Paper classification o Not clear distinction of paper types o Changes on the characteristics from one edition to another (e.g. number of pages for short papers) Committee / topics data o Conference edition web sites may be not available anymore Partial solution: WayBack Machine o Committee data similar but there is no common “standard” Entity resolution o Researchers can use different names Partial solution: DBLP provides aliases o Researcher names may appear misspelled (mostly in committee data)
Hinweis der Redaktion
- There is a duality living inside every one of us. Every member of the research community plays two different roles: the role of the researcher and the role of the evaluator of the research work made by others And like it or not both are very important for the health of the community
- Example for the SC to make the right decisions regarding the future of the conference but also for authors in order to choose a conference to target
- But today we’re going to talk about another thing . How did we get involved on this? Even if many of my academic colleagues don’t believe so there is life beyond papers so we got interested in understanding how we could have a greater impact
- If you can do Science, I can do meta science. We can eat our own dog food. In the rest of the paper we’ll show we use conceptual modeling to represent and then analyze communities
- Size of the community doesn’t really matter. Or at least it’s much more important how the community is internally structured
- Raw community data is not enough to get any meaningful information Still, looking at raw community data is a mess. A good community analysis is not trivial to do. For any
- Mention that it’s incremental
- Gitana https://github.com/SOM-Research/Gitana
- The Web Crawler relies on Selenium
- Not all of them implemented!!! Just to give an idea of the challenges Microsoft offers the academic knowledge API
- I’ll show now some of the analysis that can be done. Obviously these are just examples, once you have the data, you can calculate anything you want to know. Our point is that these analysis are useful for the SC to make the right decisions regarding the future of the conference but also for authors in order to choose a conference to target (e.g. How easy is to enter a conference for new authors, how easy is to become a PC member,...)
- Example of a single metric and its positive trend
- We’re not getting any younger
- Gitana https://github.com/SOM-Research/Gitana
- Caution: PC members not publishing may still publish in workshops or had other responsiblities Active members being ignored may have their co-authors in the PC so their expertise can be
- Whether these numbers are good or bad also depend on the comparison with other conferences. Also it depends a lot of what you exactly consider a newcomer
- Process and business do not show up so strongly in the call for papers While reverse and enterprise only appear in the enterprise This can be helpful to evaluate whether the call for papers respond to the reality of the conference
- They have more advanced mathematical models that rely on bipartite graphs to calculate more advanced emergent properties of graph
- Gitana https://github.com/SOM-Research/Gitana
- Then, we have other research tools that can help to actually improve WordPress itself
- MetaScience reuses some components of another of our tools Gitana – for analysis of software projects (presented here last year)
- GEXT: Graph exchange XML format Mecana calculates some metrics on the database data but others are easier to calculate on the graph data There are several exportesr depending on what we wawnt to calculate We can use gephi to directly visusalize the graphs but we are also developing our own visualization component This can be installed and deployed on your own server
- Gitana https://github.com/SOM-Research/Gitana
- Partial online service
- Then, we have other research tools that can help to actually improve WordPress itself
- Gitana https://github.com/SOM-Research/Gitana
- We managed to get the whole university blocked from google scholar. As you can imagine we didn’t do many friends. But no, this was not the reason why I escaped from France and get back to Barcelona Without APIs we are limited regarding the information we can use. Sure, it would need to be anonymized but it would really useful to have data on the review process and the rejected papers
- I hope we can then work together to solve some of these challenges and built the tools we need to better understand ourselves and make sure ER continues being a great conference for many years