Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

x-index: Identifying core competency and thematic research strengths of institutions using an NLP and network based ranking framework

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The currently prevailing international ranking systems for institutions are limited in their assessment as they only provide assessments either at an overall level or at very broad subject levels such as Science, Engineering, Medicine, etc. While these rankings have their own usage, they cannot be used to identify best institutions in a specific subject (say Computer Science) by taking into account their performance in different thematic areas of research of the given subject (say Artificial Intelligence or Machine Learning or Computer Vision etc. for the subject Computer Science). This paper tries to bridge this gap by proposing a framework that uses the NLP and Network approach for identifying the core competency of institutions and their thematic research strengths. The core competency can be viewed as a measure of breadth of research capability of an institution in a given subject, whereas thematic research strength can be viewed as depth of research of the institution in a specific theme of a subject. The working of the framework is demonstrated in the area of Computer Science for 195 Indian institutions. The framework can be useful for institutions and the scientometrics research community as a system providing a detailed assessment of the core competency and the research strengths of institutions in different thematic areas. The framework and outcomes can also be useful for funding agencies in devising programs for ‘performance-based funding’ in ‘thrust areas’ or ‘national priority areas’.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abramo, G., & D’Angelo, C. A. (2014). Assessing national strengths and weaknesses in research fields. Journal of Informetrics, 8(3), 766–775.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abramo, G., & D’Angelo, C. A. (2020). A novel methodology to assess the scientific standing of nations at field level. Journal of Informetrics, 14(1), 100986.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ammar, W., Groeneveld, D., Bhagavatula, C., Beltagy, I., Crawford, M., Downey, D., ... & Etzioni, O. (2018). Construction of the literature graph in semantic scholar. arXiv preprint arXiv:1805.02262.

  • Anowar, F., Helal, M. A., Afroj, S., Sultana, S., Sarker, F., & Mamun, K. A. (2015). A critical review on world university ranking in terms of top four ranking systems. Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering, 312, 559–566.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bastian, M., Heymann, S., & Jacomy, M. (2009, March). Gephi: an open source software for exploring and manipulating networks. In Third international AAAI conference on weblogs and social media.

  • Basu, A., Banshal, S. K., Singhal, K., & Singh, V. K. (2016). Designing a Composite Index for research performance evaluation at the national or regional level: Ranking Central Universities in India. Scientometrics, 107(3), 1171–1193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batagelj, V. (2012). Social network analysis, large-scale. In A. Robert Meyers (Ed.), Computational complexity: Theory, techniques, and applications (pp. 2878–2897). New York: Springer.

  • Batagelj, V., & Mrvar, A. (1998). Pajek-Program for Large Network Analysis. Connections, 21(2), 47–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, S., & Morrow, A. (2010). Canada’s universities make the grade globally. The Globe And Mail. Retrieved from https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/canadas-universities-make-the-grade-globally/article4326026/ on 10th Jan. 2021.

  • Billaut, J. C., Bouyssou, D., & Vincke, P. (2010). Should you believe in the Shanghai ranking? Scientometrics, 84(1), 237–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bornmann, L., Stefaner, M., de Moya Anegón, F., & Mutz, R. (2014). What is the effect of country-specific characteristics on the research performance of scientific institutions? Using multi-level statistical models to rank and map universities and research-focused institutions worldwide. Journal of Informetrics, 8(3), 581–593.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowman, N. A., & Bastedo, M. N. (2011). Anchoring effects in world university rankings: Exploring biases in reputation scores. Higher Education, 61(4), 431–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costas, R., & Bordons, M. (2007). The h-index: Advantages, limitations and its relation with other bibliometric indicators at the micro level. Journal of Informetrics, 1(3), 193–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Boer, H., Jongbloed, B., Benneworth, P., Cremonini, L., Kolster, R., Kottmann, A., ... & Vossensteyn, H. (2015). Performance-based funding and performance agreements in fourteen higher education systems. Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.

  • Egghe, L. (2006). An improvement of the h-index: The g-index. ISSI Newsletter, 2(1), 8–9.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • García, J. A., Rodriguez-Sánchez, R., Fdez-Valdivia, J., Torres-Salinas, D., & Herrera, F. (2012). Ranking of research output of universities on the basis of the multidimensional prestige of influential fields: Spanish universities as a case of study. Scientometrics, 93(3), 1081–1099.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • George, S., Lathabai, H. H., Prabhakaran, T., & Changat, M. (2020). A framework towards bias-free contextual productivity assessment. Scientometrics, 122(1), 127–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. PNAS, 102(46), 16569–16572.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jeremic, V., Bulajic, M., Martic, M., & Radojicic, Z. (2011). A fresh approach to evaluating the academic ranking of world universities. Scientometrics, 87(3), 587–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lathabai, H. H., Prabhakaran, T., & Changat, M. (2017). Contextual productivity assessment of authors and journals: A network scientometric approach. Scientometrics, 110(2), 711–737.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lathabai, H. H., Nandy, Abhirup & Singh, V. K. (2021). Expertise-based institutional collaboration recommendation in different thematic areas. In proceedings of the 11th International Workshop on Bibliometric-enhanced Information Retrieval co-located with 43rd European Conference on Information Retrieval (ECIR 2021), Lucca, Italy (online only), April 1st, 2021.

  • Lazaridis, T. (2010). Ranking university departments using the mean h-index. Scientometrics, 82(2), 211–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levenshtein, V. I. (1966). Binary codes capable of correcting deletions, insertions, and reversals. In Soviet Physics Doklady, 10(8), 707–710.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • López-Illescas, C., de Moya-Anegón, F., & Moed, H. F. (2011). A ranking of universities should account for differences in their disciplinary specialization. Scientometrics, 88(2), 563–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geoff Maslen (2019, August 24), New performance-based funding system for universities, https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20190822085127986, accessed on 10th Jan. 2021.

  • Pislyakov, V., & Shukshina, E. (2014). Measuring excellence in Russia: Highly cited papers, leading institutions, patterns of national and international collaboration. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(11), 2321–2330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shanghai Ranking's Academic Ranking of World Universities Methodology 2021, https://www.shanghairanking.com/methodology/arwu/2021, accessed on 10th Jan 2021.

  • Sivertsen, G. (2016). Publication-based funding: The Norwegian model. In Research assessment in the humanities (pp. 79–90). Springer, Cham.

  • Sörlin, S. (2007). Funding diversity: Performance-based funding regimes as drivers of differentiation in higher education systems. Higher Education Policy, 20(4), 413–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torres-Salinas, D., Moreno-Torres, J. G., Delgado-Lopez-Cozar, E., & Herrera, F. (2011). A methodology for institution-field ranking based on a bi-dimensional analysis. Scientometrics, 88(3), 771–786.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uddin, A., Bhoosreddy, J., Tiwari, M., & Singh, V. K. (2016). A Sciento-text framework to characterize research strength of institutions at fine-grained thematic area level. Scientometrics, 106(3), 1135–1150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, J., Yu, Q., Zheng, F., Long, C., Lu, Z., & Duan, Z. (2016). Comparing keywords plus of WOS and author keywords: A case study of patient adherence research. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(4), 967–972.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the support provided by the DST-NSTMIS funded project- ‘Design of a Computational Framework for Discipline-wise and Thematic Mapping of Research Performance of Indian Higher Education Institutions (HEIs)’, bearing Grant No. DST/NSTMIS/05/04/2019-20, for this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, 221005, India

    Hiran H. Lathabai, Abhirup Nandy & Vivek Kumar Singh

Authors
  1. Hiran H. Lathabai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Abhirup Nandy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Vivek Kumar Singh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vivek Kumar Singh.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lathabai, H.H., Nandy, A. & Singh, V.K. x-index: Identifying core competency and thematic research strengths of institutions using an NLP and network based ranking framework. Scientometrics 126, 9557–9583 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04188-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04188-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation