CorTexT platform

@article{chavalarias2013phylomemetic,

title = {Phylomemetic patterns in science evolution - the rise and fall of scientific fields},

author = {David Chavalarias and Jean-Philippe Cointet},

url = {https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0054847},

doi = {10.1371/journal.pone.0054847},

year  = {2013},

date = {2013-01-01},

urldate = {2013-01-01},

journal = {PloS one},

volume = {8},

number = {2},

pages = {e54847},

publisher = {Public Library of Science},

abstract = {We introduce an automated method for the bottom-up reconstruction of the cognitive evolution of science, based on big-data issued from digital libraries, and modeled as lineage relationships between scientific fields. We refer to these dynamic structures as phylomemetic networks or phylomemies, by analogy with biological evolution; and we show that they exhibit strong regularities, with clearly identifiable phylomemetic patterns. Some structural properties of the scientific fields - in particular their density -, which are defined independently of the phylomemy reconstruction, are clearly correlated with their status and their fate in the phylomemy (like their age or their short term survival). Within the framework of a quantitative epistemology, this approach raises the question of predictibility for science evolution, and sketches a prototypical life cycle of the scientific fields: an increase of their cohesion after their emergence, the renewal of their conceptual background through branching or merging events, before decaying when their density is getting too low.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{keating2013therapy,

title = {Therapy’s shadow: a short history of the study of resistance to cancer chemotherapy},

author = {Peter Keating and Alberto Cambrosio and Nicole Nelson and Andrei Mogoutov and Jean-Philippe Cointet},

url = {https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2013.00058},

doi = {10.3389/fphar.2013.00058},

year  = {2013},

date = {2013-01-01},

urldate = {2013-01-01},

journal = {Frontiers in pharmacology},

volume = {4},

pages = {58},

publisher = {Frontiers},

abstract = {This article traces the history of research on resistance to drug therapy in oncology using scientometric techniques and qualitative analysis. Using co-citation analysis, we generate maps to visualize subdomains in resistance research in two time periods, 1975–1990 and 1995–2010. These maps reveal two historical trends in resistance research: first, a shift in focus from generic mechanisms of resistance to chemotherapy to a focus on resistance to targeted therapies and molecular mechanisms of oncogenesis; and second, a movement away from an almost exclusive reliance on animal and cell models and toward the generation of knowledge about resistance through clinical trial work. A close reading of highly cited articles within each subdomain cluster reveals specific points of transition from one regime to the other, in particular the failure of several promising theories of resistance to be translated into clinical insights and the emergence of interest in resistance to a new generation of targeted agents such as imatinib and trastuzumab. We argue that the study of resistance in the oncology field has thus become more integrated with research into cancer therapy – rather than constituting it as a separate domain of study, as it has done in the past, contemporary research treats resistance as the flip side to treatment, as therapy’s shadow.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{raimbault2013caracterisation,

title = {Caractérisation du processus d’émergence de la biologie synthétique à partir d’une approche scientomiétrique},

author = {Benjamin Raimbault and Jean-Philippe Cointet and Pierre-Benoît Joly},

url = {https://doi.org/10.1051/medsci/201329s213},

doi = {10.1051/medsci/201329s213},

year  = {2013},

date = {2013-01-01},

urldate = {2013-01-01},

journal = {médecine/sciences},

volume = {29},

pages = {47-55},

publisher = {Éditions EDK, Groupe EDP Sciences},

abstract = {La biologie de synthèse est un espace hétérogène dont la définition n’est pas stabilisée. Elle se situe à l’intersection de différents champs disciplinaires : chimie, biologie moléculaire, bio-informatique, et est classiquement abordée par la littérature selon trois angles [1–3] : 1 une approche « DNA based device construction » (biobrick), ou approche bottom-up, focalisée sur l’ingénierie de circuits de gènes synthétiques ; 2 une approche « genome-driven cell engineering », ou approche top-down, focalisée sur la synthèse d’un génome dans son intégralité ; 3 une approche « proto-cell creation » qui vise à recréer des systèmes cellulaires minimaux, et en vertu de laquelle les recherches sont focalisées sur le principe de l’émergence, ouvertement présenté comme un obstacle par les tenants de la première approche.

},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}