2023
Masters Theses
1.
Zafar, Lubna
Impact of Field of Study Trend on Citation Count of Scientific Articles and Authors Masters Thesis
The Capital University of Science and Technology, Islamabad, Pakistan, 2023.
@mastersthesis{Zafar2023,
title = {Impact of Field of Study Trend on Citation Count of Scientific Articles and Authors},
author = {Lubna Zafar},
url = {https://cust.edu.pk/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Dissertation-Lubna-Zafar.pdf
},
year = {2023},
date = {2023-07-17},
address = {Islamabad, Pakistan},
school = {The Capital University of Science and Technology},
abstract = {Millions of new scientific articles are published each year. Researchers work and publish in their respective fields of interest. A major portion of the scientific community publishing in the same Field of Study (FoS) forms a trend of that field. A novice researcher chooses his field of interest based upon its popularity.
This may have a positive impact on the acceptance of a study or high count of citations in future. There are multiple studies in literature that focus on FoS trend detection and analysis, birth and establishment of an FoS trend, number of publications and researchers in an FoS trend, communities of researchers being formed around an FoS trend, author’s FoS switching, vanishing of an FoS trend, trends in different disciplines etc. However, the previous work contains a gap, that is, there is no work on impact of following an FoS on citation trend of scientific articles and authors.
This study identifies how significant it is to follow an FoS trend and the impact of the FoS trend on research paper citations and on authors citation count. For this purpose, we have chosen the field of Computer Science and Microsoft Academic Graph (MAG) dataset from the 1950-2018 time period. We extracted publications of different FoS of Computer Science and also citation counts for these publications.
First, we established similarity between citation trends of papers belonging to same FoS using rand index and correlation. Then we proposed a technique to identify trend setters and trend followers that would help to identify influential authors in a particular FoS. Finally, we established the impact of FoS on the citation patterns of authors by achieving a consistent R2 values of papers belonging to same FoS.
The results depict that if papers belong to the same FoS, then there are 69% of the chances of having a similar citation pattern and that they have the same citation trend as they also have achieved a high correlation value. Experimental results show that there is a similarity between citation trend of authors that belong to the same FoS as compared to different FoS and achieved consistent R2 value. FoS trend following has a certain impact on the citation count of authors. The result also shows that if an author publishes in a particular FoS, then the citation trend of this author’s work resembles more to the overall citation trend of that particular FoS than that of some other FoS. This proves that FoS has a certain impact on the citation count of a paper and researchers should contemplate on the FoS trend before selecting a particular research area
},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {mastersthesis}
}
Millions of new scientific articles are published each year. Researchers work and publish in their respective fields of interest. A major portion of the scientific community publishing in the same Field of Study (FoS) forms a trend of that field. A novice researcher chooses his field of interest based upon its popularity.
This may have a positive impact on the acceptance of a study or high count of citations in future. There are multiple studies in literature that focus on FoS trend detection and analysis, birth and establishment of an FoS trend, number of publications and researchers in an FoS trend, communities of researchers being formed around an FoS trend, author’s FoS switching, vanishing of an FoS trend, trends in different disciplines etc. However, the previous work contains a gap, that is, there is no work on impact of following an FoS on citation trend of scientific articles and authors.
This study identifies how significant it is to follow an FoS trend and the impact of the FoS trend on research paper citations and on authors citation count. For this purpose, we have chosen the field of Computer Science and Microsoft Academic Graph (MAG) dataset from the 1950-2018 time period. We extracted publications of different FoS of Computer Science and also citation counts for these publications.
First, we established similarity between citation trends of papers belonging to same FoS using rand index and correlation. Then we proposed a technique to identify trend setters and trend followers that would help to identify influential authors in a particular FoS. Finally, we established the impact of FoS on the citation patterns of authors by achieving a consistent R2 values of papers belonging to same FoS.
The results depict that if papers belong to the same FoS, then there are 69% of the chances of having a similar citation pattern and that they have the same citation trend as they also have achieved a high correlation value. Experimental results show that there is a similarity between citation trend of authors that belong to the same FoS as compared to different FoS and achieved consistent R2 value. FoS trend following has a certain impact on the citation count of authors. The result also shows that if an author publishes in a particular FoS, then the citation trend of this author’s work resembles more to the overall citation trend of that particular FoS than that of some other FoS. This proves that FoS has a certain impact on the citation count of a paper and researchers should contemplate on the FoS trend before selecting a particular research area
This may have a positive impact on the acceptance of a study or high count of citations in future. There are multiple studies in literature that focus on FoS trend detection and analysis, birth and establishment of an FoS trend, number of publications and researchers in an FoS trend, communities of researchers being formed around an FoS trend, author’s FoS switching, vanishing of an FoS trend, trends in different disciplines etc. However, the previous work contains a gap, that is, there is no work on impact of following an FoS on citation trend of scientific articles and authors.
This study identifies how significant it is to follow an FoS trend and the impact of the FoS trend on research paper citations and on authors citation count. For this purpose, we have chosen the field of Computer Science and Microsoft Academic Graph (MAG) dataset from the 1950-2018 time period. We extracted publications of different FoS of Computer Science and also citation counts for these publications.
First, we established similarity between citation trends of papers belonging to same FoS using rand index and correlation. Then we proposed a technique to identify trend setters and trend followers that would help to identify influential authors in a particular FoS. Finally, we established the impact of FoS on the citation patterns of authors by achieving a consistent R2 values of papers belonging to same FoS.
The results depict that if papers belong to the same FoS, then there are 69% of the chances of having a similar citation pattern and that they have the same citation trend as they also have achieved a high correlation value. Experimental results show that there is a similarity between citation trend of authors that belong to the same FoS as compared to different FoS and achieved consistent R2 value. FoS trend following has a certain impact on the citation count of authors. The result also shows that if an author publishes in a particular FoS, then the citation trend of this author’s work resembles more to the overall citation trend of that particular FoS than that of some other FoS. This proves that FoS has a certain impact on the citation count of a paper and researchers should contemplate on the FoS trend before selecting a particular research area
2022
Journal Articles
2.
Toffolini, Quentin; Jeuffroy, Marie-Hélène
On-farm experimentation practices and associated farmer-researcher relationships: a systematic literature review Journal Article
In: Agronomy for Sustainable Development, vol. 42, iss. 2022, no. 114, 2022.
@article{Toffolini2022,
title = {On-farm experimentation practices and associated farmer-researcher relationships: a systematic literature review},
author = {Quentin Toffolini and Marie-Hélène Jeuffroy},
url = {https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13593-022-00845-w},
doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-022-00845-w},
year = {2022},
date = {2022-11-01},
urldate = {2022-11-01},
journal = {Agronomy for Sustainable Development},
volume = {42},
number = {114},
issue = {2022},
abstract = {The convergence among the rise of digital technologies, the attention paid to the localized issues of transitions in practices toward agroecology, and the emergence of new open innovation models are renewing and reviving the scientific community’s interest in on-farm experimentation (OFE). This form of experimentation is claimed to be enhanced by digital tools as well as being an enabler of production of credible, salient, and legitimate science insofar as it embraces a farmer-centric perspective. However, the forms of research in which some experimental activities on farms are anchored vary greatly, notably with regard to the actual forms that interventions on farms take, the legitimacy of the actors involved and their roles, or the observations and instruments applied for interpretation. We propose a systematic review of the literature and an analytical framework in order to better understand this diversity of practices behind on-farm experimentation. Our analysis segregated six major publication clusters based on themes appearing in titles and abstracts. These themes guided a more in-depth analysis of representative articles, from which we identified seven types of OFE practices that are described and discussed here with regard to the knowledge targeted, roles of the various actors, and on-farm experimental space. Our typology provides an original basis for supporting reflexivity and building alignment between the above-mentioned dimensions and the ways in which new tools can support the experimental process.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
The convergence among the rise of digital technologies, the attention paid to the localized issues of transitions in practices toward agroecology, and the emergence of new open innovation models are renewing and reviving the scientific community’s interest in on-farm experimentation (OFE). This form of experimentation is claimed to be enhanced by digital tools as well as being an enabler of production of credible, salient, and legitimate science insofar as it embraces a farmer-centric perspective. However, the forms of research in which some experimental activities on farms are anchored vary greatly, notably with regard to the actual forms that interventions on farms take, the legitimacy of the actors involved and their roles, or the observations and instruments applied for interpretation. We propose a systematic review of the literature and an analytical framework in order to better understand this diversity of practices behind on-farm experimentation. Our analysis segregated six major publication clusters based on themes appearing in titles and abstracts. These themes guided a more in-depth analysis of representative articles, from which we identified seven types of OFE practices that are described and discussed here with regard to the knowledge targeted, roles of the various actors, and on-farm experimental space. Our typology provides an original basis for supporting reflexivity and building alignment between the above-mentioned dimensions and the ways in which new tools can support the experimental process.
Book Chapters
3.
Dubois, Michel
The Anthem Companion to Robert K. Merton: chapter Nine, "Providing Puzzles": Science as Norms and Values Book Chapter
In: Crothers, Charles; Sabetta, Lorenzo (Ed.): Chapter 9, pp. 165-182, Anthem Press, 2022, ISBN: 9781839981173.
@inbook{Dubois2022,
title = {The Anthem Companion to Robert K. Merton: chapter Nine, "Providing Puzzles": Science as Norms and Values},
author = {Michel Dubois},
editor = {Charles Crothers and Lorenzo Sabetta},
url = {https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/anthem-companion-to-robert-k-merton/providing-puzzles-science-as-norms-and-values/FDC7C6779EC32B461FA59F60778DA831},
isbn = {9781839981173},
year = {2022},
date = {2022-09-13},
pages = {165-182},
publisher = {Anthem Press},
chapter = {9},
abstract = {Robert King Merton has played an important role in shaping the field of sociology of science and technology. He defined the main orientations of a collective research program with his 1935 dissertation on Science, Technology and Society in 17th Century England, but even more so through his long-lasting interest in the sociological study of the practices, norms, and values of the scientific community. He succeeded where most of his mentors (Pitirim Sorokin, George Sarton) had previously failed by developing a “disciplinary program” and gathering promising students who tested and pursued some of his intuitions in multiple directions (Dubois 2014). His Columbia University seminar with Harriet Zuckerman on the sociology of science, from 1965 to 1985, played a critical role in this matter. Key contributors to the field of science study have been initially trained in this seminar. And still today the volume edited by Norman Storer for Chicago University Press in 1973—Sociolog y of Science. Theoretical and Empirical Investigations (Merton 1973)—remains an important intellectual landmark.
As we have now reached the fourth (or even the fifth) generation of professional sociologists of science, how should we consider Merton's scientific contribution? Should it be seen as a “patrimonial” component of the field? Merton would have said “Obliteration by incorporation.” I argue here that some of his insights and findings not only still benefit from unexpected visibility but also deserve a more systematic form of critical reappropriation. As one of his former research assistants, Stephen Cole (2004, 843), put it in a quasi-autobiographical essay, “with all its faults, [Merton] had the ability to arouse interest in others—interest that frequently led others to do empirical research. This is, after all, one of the major functions of theoretical work—providing puzzles.”
In this chapter, I examine some of these “Mertonian puzzles” for the study of contemporary science and technology. In the first section, I return briefly to Merton's writings to characterize the main features of his normative approach of science. In the second section, I underline some aspects of the contemporary diffusion of Merton's ideas. Finally, in the third section, I discuss how this program provides some tools to investigate empirically some of the most recent and intriguing forms of evolution in the scientific community.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inbook}
}
Robert King Merton has played an important role in shaping the field of sociology of science and technology. He defined the main orientations of a collective research program with his 1935 dissertation on Science, Technology and Society in 17th Century England, but even more so through his long-lasting interest in the sociological study of the practices, norms, and values of the scientific community. He succeeded where most of his mentors (Pitirim Sorokin, George Sarton) had previously failed by developing a “disciplinary program” and gathering promising students who tested and pursued some of his intuitions in multiple directions (Dubois 2014). His Columbia University seminar with Harriet Zuckerman on the sociology of science, from 1965 to 1985, played a critical role in this matter. Key contributors to the field of science study have been initially trained in this seminar. And still today the volume edited by Norman Storer for Chicago University Press in 1973—Sociolog y of Science. Theoretical and Empirical Investigations (Merton 1973)—remains an important intellectual landmark.
As we have now reached the fourth (or even the fifth) generation of professional sociologists of science, how should we consider Merton's scientific contribution? Should it be seen as a “patrimonial” component of the field? Merton would have said “Obliteration by incorporation.” I argue here that some of his insights and findings not only still benefit from unexpected visibility but also deserve a more systematic form of critical reappropriation. As one of his former research assistants, Stephen Cole (2004, 843), put it in a quasi-autobiographical essay, “with all its faults, [Merton] had the ability to arouse interest in others—interest that frequently led others to do empirical research. This is, after all, one of the major functions of theoretical work—providing puzzles.”
In this chapter, I examine some of these “Mertonian puzzles” for the study of contemporary science and technology. In the first section, I return briefly to Merton's writings to characterize the main features of his normative approach of science. In the second section, I underline some aspects of the contemporary diffusion of Merton's ideas. Finally, in the third section, I discuss how this program provides some tools to investigate empirically some of the most recent and intriguing forms of evolution in the scientific community.
As we have now reached the fourth (or even the fifth) generation of professional sociologists of science, how should we consider Merton's scientific contribution? Should it be seen as a “patrimonial” component of the field? Merton would have said “Obliteration by incorporation.” I argue here that some of his insights and findings not only still benefit from unexpected visibility but also deserve a more systematic form of critical reappropriation. As one of his former research assistants, Stephen Cole (2004, 843), put it in a quasi-autobiographical essay, “with all its faults, [Merton] had the ability to arouse interest in others—interest that frequently led others to do empirical research. This is, after all, one of the major functions of theoretical work—providing puzzles.”
In this chapter, I examine some of these “Mertonian puzzles” for the study of contemporary science and technology. In the first section, I return briefly to Merton's writings to characterize the main features of his normative approach of science. In the second section, I underline some aspects of the contemporary diffusion of Merton's ideas. Finally, in the third section, I discuss how this program provides some tools to investigate empirically some of the most recent and intriguing forms of evolution in the scientific community.
2021
Journal Articles
4.
Malanski, Priscila Duarte; de Alencar Schiavi, Sandra Mara; Dedieu, Benoît; Damasceno, Julio Cesar
Labor in agrifood value chains: a scientometric review from Scopus Journal Article
In: International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, pp. 1-20, 2021.
@article{Malanski2021,
title = {Labor in agrifood value chains: a scientometric review from Scopus},
author = {Priscila Duarte Malanski and Sandra Mara de Alencar Schiavi and Benoît Dedieu and Julio Cesar Damasceno},
url = {https://www.wageningenacademic.com/doi/pdf/10.22434/IFAMR2021.0066},
doi = {10.22434/IFAMR2021.0066},
year = {2021},
date = {2021-12-24},
urldate = {2021-12-24},
journal = {International Food and Agribusiness Management Review},
pages = {1-20},
abstract = {Addressing labor issues is crucial to agrifood value chain analysis, improvements and sustainability.
However, the specific contribution of value chain approaches to discussions on labor in agriculture is still a research gap. To fill this gap, we reviewed the international literature on labor in agrifood value chains. We performed a scientometric analysis of the articles indexed in Scopus, which was composed by a bibliometric, diachronic and synchronic analysis. The main results show that labor in agrifood value chains is a relative new scientific community. Researchers’ interest evolved around three hotspots over the past 20 years, and five consolidated research domains. Our review provides an overview about the main characteristics of a rising scientific community, and a synthesis of knowledge produced to support scientific innovation on labor in agrifood value chains. Regarding chain agents, our results stress the importance of governance for improving employment and working conditions to promote chain sustainability.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Addressing labor issues is crucial to agrifood value chain analysis, improvements and sustainability.
However, the specific contribution of value chain approaches to discussions on labor in agriculture is still a research gap. To fill this gap, we reviewed the international literature on labor in agrifood value chains. We performed a scientometric analysis of the articles indexed in Scopus, which was composed by a bibliometric, diachronic and synchronic analysis. The main results show that labor in agrifood value chains is a relative new scientific community. Researchers’ interest evolved around three hotspots over the past 20 years, and five consolidated research domains. Our review provides an overview about the main characteristics of a rising scientific community, and a synthesis of knowledge produced to support scientific innovation on labor in agrifood value chains. Regarding chain agents, our results stress the importance of governance for improving employment and working conditions to promote chain sustainability.
However, the specific contribution of value chain approaches to discussions on labor in agriculture is still a research gap. To fill this gap, we reviewed the international literature on labor in agrifood value chains. We performed a scientometric analysis of the articles indexed in Scopus, which was composed by a bibliometric, diachronic and synchronic analysis. The main results show that labor in agrifood value chains is a relative new scientific community. Researchers’ interest evolved around three hotspots over the past 20 years, and five consolidated research domains. Our review provides an overview about the main characteristics of a rising scientific community, and a synthesis of knowledge produced to support scientific innovation on labor in agrifood value chains. Regarding chain agents, our results stress the importance of governance for improving employment and working conditions to promote chain sustainability.
2020
Proceedings Articles
5.
Malanski, Priscila Duarte; Dedieu, Benoît; de Souza, Mariana Augusta; de Alencar Schiavi, Sandra Mara
Labor studies in agricultural value chains: a scientometric analysis from scopus Proceedings Article
In: SOBER 2020, Foz do Iguaçu, Brazil, 2020.
@inproceedings{Malanski2020,
title = {Labor studies in agricultural value chains: a scientometric analysis from scopus},
author = {Priscila Duarte Malanski and Benoît Dedieu and Mariana Augusta de Souza and Sandra Mara de Alencar Schiavi
},
url = {https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343345088},
year = {2020},
date = {2020-10-01},
urldate = {2020-10-01},
booktitle = {SOBER 2020},
address = {Foz do Iguaçu, Brazil},
abstract = {Agricultural value chains are important to create rural employment. According to FAO, employment opportunities, increasing wages and high-job quality are crucial labor-related conditions to value chains sustainability. However, there is a gap in the literature gathering the specific contribution of value chains approaches to discussions on labor in agriculture. Our aim was to review the state of the international literature on labor in agricultural value chains. A scientometric analysis of the articles indexed in Scopus were performed. The main results were: 1) labor in agricultural value chains is a relative new scientific community lead by research developed by UK, USA, Germany and Kenya; 2) the reference authors, journals, institutions and articles were characterized; 3) the hotspots changed over the past 20 years; 4) researches are structured in six main research domains. Our scientometric review provides an overview about the main characteristics of a new rising scientific community focused in labor in agricultural value chain, as well as a synthesis of knowledge produced to support scientific innovation in this field. Regarding agriculture value chains agents, our results advance the importance of governance to improve employment relations and working conditions in farms in order to promote chain sustainability.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inproceedings}
}
Agricultural value chains are important to create rural employment. According to FAO, employment opportunities, increasing wages and high-job quality are crucial labor-related conditions to value chains sustainability. However, there is a gap in the literature gathering the specific contribution of value chains approaches to discussions on labor in agriculture. Our aim was to review the state of the international literature on labor in agricultural value chains. A scientometric analysis of the articles indexed in Scopus were performed. The main results were: 1) labor in agricultural value chains is a relative new scientific community lead by research developed by UK, USA, Germany and Kenya; 2) the reference authors, journals, institutions and articles were characterized; 3) the hotspots changed over the past 20 years; 4) researches are structured in six main research domains. Our scientometric review provides an overview about the main characteristics of a new rising scientific community focused in labor in agricultural value chain, as well as a synthesis of knowledge produced to support scientific innovation in this field. Regarding agriculture value chains agents, our results advance the importance of governance to improve employment relations and working conditions in farms in order to promote chain sustainability.
2019
Journal Articles
6.
Malanski, Priscila Duarte; de Alencar Schiavi, Sandra Mara; Dedieu, Benoît
Characteristics of “work in agriculture” scientific communities. A bibliometric review Journal Article
In: Agronomy for Sustainable Development, vol. 39, no. 36, 2019.
@article{Malanski2019b,
title = {Characteristics of “work in agriculture” scientific communities. A bibliometric review},
author = {Priscila Duarte Malanski and Sandra Mara de Alencar Schiavi and Benoît Dedieu },
url = {https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13593-019-0582-2},
doi = {10.1007/s13593-019-0582-2},
year = {2019},
date = {2019-06-19},
urldate = {2019-06-19},
journal = {Agronomy for Sustainable Development},
volume = {39},
number = {36},
abstract = {Work is a central concern for sustainable farming systems and rural communities, especially regarding specific issues of the agricultural sector, as the strong decrease in rural employment and the less attractive working conditions. Many articles covering diverse related topics have been published. However, the few studies analyzing the state of worldwide scientific research on work in agriculture give only a fragmented view, since they focus on specialized topics and disciplines. To fill this knowledge gap, the aim of this study was to review the state of research on work in agriculture addressed by the scientific literature, through a bibliometric analysis by country, institution, journal, author, and keywords. Our main finds are that (1) work in agriculture issues is divided into six main research domains: occupational health and safety, labor market and rural employment, labor and farm sustainability, work organization, agricultural policy and agrarian changes, and labor and family farms; (2) these research domains are analyzed by five scientific communities: ergonomics, agricultural economics, livestock farming systems, rural sociology, and agricultural policy; (3) the reference authors, most-cited articles, and main journals were identified for each scientific community; (4) USA, France, and China arise as leaders in the scientific landscape. We show for the first time the characteristics of the main scientific communities worldwide that have performed the most relevant research related to work in agriculture over the past 10 years. This review provides a benchmark for future research on agricultural work-related topics and encourages collaborations between researchers from different scientific communities for interdisciplinary innovation, which support sustainable working conditions in agriculture.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Work is a central concern for sustainable farming systems and rural communities, especially regarding specific issues of the agricultural sector, as the strong decrease in rural employment and the less attractive working conditions. Many articles covering diverse related topics have been published. However, the few studies analyzing the state of worldwide scientific research on work in agriculture give only a fragmented view, since they focus on specialized topics and disciplines. To fill this knowledge gap, the aim of this study was to review the state of research on work in agriculture addressed by the scientific literature, through a bibliometric analysis by country, institution, journal, author, and keywords. Our main finds are that (1) work in agriculture issues is divided into six main research domains: occupational health and safety, labor market and rural employment, labor and farm sustainability, work organization, agricultural policy and agrarian changes, and labor and family farms; (2) these research domains are analyzed by five scientific communities: ergonomics, agricultural economics, livestock farming systems, rural sociology, and agricultural policy; (3) the reference authors, most-cited articles, and main journals were identified for each scientific community; (4) USA, France, and China arise as leaders in the scientific landscape. We show for the first time the characteristics of the main scientific communities worldwide that have performed the most relevant research related to work in agriculture over the past 10 years. This review provides a benchmark for future research on agricultural work-related topics and encourages collaborations between researchers from different scientific communities for interdisciplinary innovation, which support sustainable working conditions in agriculture.
Online
7.
Kara, Atakan; Voll, Corinna; Nissen, Rasmus
Mapping Energy Technology : A supply of energy is crucial for human demands, but how do we extract, manage and access it? Online
2019.
@online{nokey,
title = {Mapping Energy Technology : A supply of energy is crucial for human demands, but how do we extract, manage and access it?},
author = {Atakan Kara and Corinna Voll and Rasmus Nissen},
url = {https://medium.com/@atakankaraa/mapping-energy-technology-85605a494488},
year = {2019},
date = {2019-02-26},
abstract = {Energy use for human plans and programs have contributed to global climate change and related crises, which in turn are impacting human relation to energy. As such, not only are new methods of energy generation, distribution and storage emerging; but also bringing along with them new modes of technical innovation and social organization.
While some of these technologies prioritize quickly securing the energy supply for humans when faced with environmental adversity (such as fracking, nuclear power…), others focus on environmental regeneration and limiting human impact on nature (such as renewable energies). Furthermore, these developments expand and warp ways in which energy is socially, politically, economically organized. Struggles about prioritization, expertise and boundaries appear which make energy technology controversial.
We want to better understand the shape of this controversy. In order to do so, we investigate the landscape of energy technology on a public open source medium. Wikipedia provides us good starting point to dive into the different themes, conflicts and shifts related to energy technology. The results of our investigation and mapping compel us to pursue the debates taking place in this realm further. Through investigating Scopus, we delve deeper into the controversy and uncover the debates in the scientific community surrounding the currently most prominent field in energy technology: renewable energy. Within the field, the controversy surrounding the methods of distribution, generation and storage of energy proved interesting, as well as the questions of efficiency and reliability which were linked externally to ‘clean’ nuclear energy.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {online}
}
Energy use for human plans and programs have contributed to global climate change and related crises, which in turn are impacting human relation to energy. As such, not only are new methods of energy generation, distribution and storage emerging; but also bringing along with them new modes of technical innovation and social organization.
While some of these technologies prioritize quickly securing the energy supply for humans when faced with environmental adversity (such as fracking, nuclear power…), others focus on environmental regeneration and limiting human impact on nature (such as renewable energies). Furthermore, these developments expand and warp ways in which energy is socially, politically, economically organized. Struggles about prioritization, expertise and boundaries appear which make energy technology controversial.
We want to better understand the shape of this controversy. In order to do so, we investigate the landscape of energy technology on a public open source medium. Wikipedia provides us good starting point to dive into the different themes, conflicts and shifts related to energy technology. The results of our investigation and mapping compel us to pursue the debates taking place in this realm further. Through investigating Scopus, we delve deeper into the controversy and uncover the debates in the scientific community surrounding the currently most prominent field in energy technology: renewable energy. Within the field, the controversy surrounding the methods of distribution, generation and storage of energy proved interesting, as well as the questions of efficiency and reliability which were linked externally to ‘clean’ nuclear energy.
While some of these technologies prioritize quickly securing the energy supply for humans when faced with environmental adversity (such as fracking, nuclear power…), others focus on environmental regeneration and limiting human impact on nature (such as renewable energies). Furthermore, these developments expand and warp ways in which energy is socially, politically, economically organized. Struggles about prioritization, expertise and boundaries appear which make energy technology controversial.
We want to better understand the shape of this controversy. In order to do so, we investigate the landscape of energy technology on a public open source medium. Wikipedia provides us good starting point to dive into the different themes, conflicts and shifts related to energy technology. The results of our investigation and mapping compel us to pursue the debates taking place in this realm further. Through investigating Scopus, we delve deeper into the controversy and uncover the debates in the scientific community surrounding the currently most prominent field in energy technology: renewable energy. Within the field, the controversy surrounding the methods of distribution, generation and storage of energy proved interesting, as well as the questions of efficiency and reliability which were linked externally to ‘clean’ nuclear energy.
2018
Technical Reports
8.
Aubin, Sophie; Huber, Madeleine
eROSA. e-infrastructure Roadmap for Open Science in Agriculture : bibliometric study results Technical Report
INRA, Horizon 2020 2018, (Ref. Ares(2018)3404573).
@techreport{Aubin2018,
title = {eROSA. e-infrastructure Roadmap for Open Science in Agriculture : bibliometric study results},
author = {Sophie Aubin and Madeleine Huber},
url = {https://zenodo.org/record/1305000/files/Bibliometric%20study%20results.pdf},
year = {2018},
date = {2018-06-28},
urldate = {2018-06-28},
institution = {INRA, Horizon 2020},
abstract = {This study highlights the results of a bibliometric analysis conducted at a global scale in order to identify key scientists and associated research performing organisations (e.g. public research institutes, universities, Research & Development departments of private companies) that work in the field of agricultural data sources and services. The added value of such a methodological approach is the resulting ability to provide a detailed answer to the question “who does what?” by collecting, processing, analysing and visualising the metadata1 of related scientific publications. The study focuses on articles that have been published in the past 10 years (i.e. during the period 2005-2015). As such, the analysis is a first attempt at delineating, mapping and describing the scientific community that the e-ROSA project seeks to engage with. It neither aims at being exhaustive nor at providing an evaluation on the scientific excellence of identified stakeholders as this is not the goal of the community-building activity under e-ROSA. The specific objectives of the analysis include:
1 - The identification of scientists and related collaboration networks involved in data science for agriculture in order to initiate further contact while building and engaging with the e-ROSA community throughout the project: e.g. these results provide valuable contacts in the context of the desk surveys that will be carried out under Work Package 1 in order to consolidate and reach out to the community, and in the context of the workshops organised under Work Package 2 that seek community-building and co-design of the e-ROSA Roadmap.
2 - The identification of specific domains related to data and computer science that are of interest to identified scientists (i.e. working on agricultural issues).
3 - The identification of related conferences and journals that the e-ROSA project can target in order to effectively reach out to the relevant communities involved in data science issues related to agriculture.},
note = {Ref. Ares(2018)3404573},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {techreport}
}
This study highlights the results of a bibliometric analysis conducted at a global scale in order to identify key scientists and associated research performing organisations (e.g. public research institutes, universities, Research & Development departments of private companies) that work in the field of agricultural data sources and services. The added value of such a methodological approach is the resulting ability to provide a detailed answer to the question “who does what?” by collecting, processing, analysing and visualising the metadata1 of related scientific publications. The study focuses on articles that have been published in the past 10 years (i.e. during the period 2005-2015). As such, the analysis is a first attempt at delineating, mapping and describing the scientific community that the e-ROSA project seeks to engage with. It neither aims at being exhaustive nor at providing an evaluation on the scientific excellence of identified stakeholders as this is not the goal of the community-building activity under e-ROSA. The specific objectives of the analysis include:
1 - The identification of scientists and related collaboration networks involved in data science for agriculture in order to initiate further contact while building and engaging with the e-ROSA community throughout the project: e.g. these results provide valuable contacts in the context of the desk surveys that will be carried out under Work Package 1 in order to consolidate and reach out to the community, and in the context of the workshops organised under Work Package 2 that seek community-building and co-design of the e-ROSA Roadmap.
2 - The identification of specific domains related to data and computer science that are of interest to identified scientists (i.e. working on agricultural issues).
3 - The identification of related conferences and journals that the e-ROSA project can target in order to effectively reach out to the relevant communities involved in data science issues related to agriculture.
1 - The identification of scientists and related collaboration networks involved in data science for agriculture in order to initiate further contact while building and engaging with the e-ROSA community throughout the project: e.g. these results provide valuable contacts in the context of the desk surveys that will be carried out under Work Package 1 in order to consolidate and reach out to the community, and in the context of the workshops organised under Work Package 2 that seek community-building and co-design of the e-ROSA Roadmap.
2 - The identification of specific domains related to data and computer science that are of interest to identified scientists (i.e. working on agricultural issues).
3 - The identification of related conferences and journals that the e-ROSA project can target in order to effectively reach out to the relevant communities involved in data science issues related to agriculture.
2015
Journal Articles
9.
Mesmoudi, Salma; Rodic, Mathieu; Cioli, Claudia; Cointet, Jean-Philippe; Yarkoni, Tal; Burnod, Yves
Linkrbrain: Multi-scale data integrator of the brain Journal Article
In: Journal of neuroscience methods, vol. 241, pp. 44-52, 2015.
@article{mesmoudi2015linkrbrain,
title = {Linkrbrain: Multi-scale data integrator of the brain},
author = {Salma Mesmoudi and Mathieu Rodic and Claudia Cioli and Jean-Philippe Cointet and Tal Yarkoni and Yves Burnod},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2014.12.008},
doi = {10.1016/j.jneumeth.2014.12.008},
year = {2015},
date = {2015-01-01},
urldate = {2015-01-01},
journal = {Journal of neuroscience methods},
volume = {241},
pages = {44-52},
publisher = {Elsevier},
abstract = {Background LinkRbrain is an open-access web platform for multi-scale data integration and visualization of human brain data. This platform integrates anatomical, functional, and genetic knowledge produced by the scientific community. New method The linkRbrain platform has two major components: (1) a data aggregation component that integrates multiple open databases into a single platform with a unified representation; and (2) a website that provides fast multi-scale integration and visualization of these data and makes the results immediately available. Results LinkRbrain allows users to visualize functional networks or/and genetic expression over a standard brain template (MNI152). Interrelationships between these components based on topographical overlap are displayed using relational graphs. Moreover, linkRbrain enables comparison of new experimental results with previous published works. Comparison with existing methods Previous tools and studies illustrate the opportunities of data mining across multiple tiers of neuroscience and genetic information. However, a global systematic approach is still missing to gather cognitive, topographical, and genetic knowledge in a common framework in order to facilitate their visualization, comparison, and integration. Conclusions LinkRbrain is an efficient open-access tool that affords an integrative understanding of human brain function. },
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Background LinkRbrain is an open-access web platform for multi-scale data integration and visualization of human brain data. This platform integrates anatomical, functional, and genetic knowledge produced by the scientific community. New method The linkRbrain platform has two major components: (1) a data aggregation component that integrates multiple open databases into a single platform with a unified representation; and (2) a website that provides fast multi-scale integration and visualization of these data and makes the results immediately available. Results LinkRbrain allows users to visualize functional networks or/and genetic expression over a standard brain template (MNI152). Interrelationships between these components based on topographical overlap are displayed using relational graphs. Moreover, linkRbrain enables comparison of new experimental results with previous published works. Comparison with existing methods Previous tools and studies illustrate the opportunities of data mining across multiple tiers of neuroscience and genetic information. However, a global systematic approach is still missing to gather cognitive, topographical, and genetic knowledge in a common framework in order to facilitate their visualization, comparison, and integration. Conclusions LinkRbrain is an efficient open-access tool that affords an integrative understanding of human brain function.
LIST OF SCIENTIFIC WORKS THAT HAVE USED CORTEXT MANAGER
(Sources: Google Scholar, HAL, Scopus, WOS and search engines)
We are grateful that you have found CorTexT Manager useful. Over the years, you have been more than 1050 authors to trust CorTexT for your publicly accessible analyzes. This represents a little less than 10% of CorTexT Manager user’s community. So, thank you!
We seek to understand how the scientific production that used CorText Manager has evolved and to characterise it. You will find here our analysis of this scientific production.
Browse documents by main topics
| What types of documents? |
|---|
| What types of documents? |
| 211 journal articles |
| 42 conference proceedings |
| 37 conference (not in proceedings) |
| 29 online articles |
| 28 Ph.D. thesis |
| 28 reports |
| 20 masters thesis |
| 19 book chapters |
| 11 workshop |
| 8 book |
| 7 bachelorthesis |
| 3 miscellaneous |
| 1 workingpaper |
| 1 manual |
| 1 proceedings |
| Main peer-reviewed journals |
|---|
| Main peer-reviewed journals |
| Scientometrics |
| I2D - Information, données & documents |
| PloS one |
| Réseaux |
| Journal of Rural Studies |
| Revue d’anthropologie des connaissances |
| Library Hi Tech |
| Revue d'anthropologie des connaissances |
| Journal of Hazardous Materials |
| Competition & Change |
Browse narrower topics
