Abstract
In this article, we study the evolution of the computer science research community over the past 30 years. Analyzing data from the full Scopus database, we investigate how aspects such as the community size, gender composition, and academic seniority of its members changed over time. We also shed light on the varying popularity of specific research areas, as derived from the ACM’s Special Interest Groups and IEEE classifications. Our analysis spans 19 nations (all members of the G20 group, excluding the EU) and involves a total of 728,374 authors and 8,412,543 publications. This work shows that the overall size of the computer science community has increased by a factor of ten in the time period 1991–2020, with China and India enjoying the highest growth. At the same time, this increase has not been uniform across research areas. Female participation has also increased, but more slowly than expected and not uniformly across countries and areas.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
This work uses Scopus data provided by Elsevier through ICSR Lab.
References
Aleixandre-Benavent, R., Alonso-Arroyo, A., Chorro-Gascó, F., Alfonso-Manterola, F., González-Alcaide, G., Salvador, M., Bolaños-Pizarro, M., Areses, E., Valderrama-Zurián, J., Barón-Esquivias, G., Plaza-Celemín, L., Teresa-Galván, E., Macaya-Miguel, C., Pulpón-Rivera, L., Anguita-Sánchez, M., Pérez-Villacastín, J., Escosa-Royo, L., Martin-Burrieza, F. (2009) Cardiovascular Scientific Production in Spain and in the European and Global Context (2003-2007). Revista Espanola de Cardiologia 62 (12 2009), 1404–1417. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-8932(09)73126-4
Banshal, S.K., Uddin, A., & Singh, V.K. (2015) Identifying themes and trends in CS research output from India. In 2015 International Conference on Cognitive Computing and Information Processing(CCIP) (pp. 1–6). https://doi.org/10.1109/CCIP.2015.7100742
Cavero, J. M., Vela, B., & Cáceres, P. (2014). Computer science research: More production, less productivity. Scientometrics, 98, 2103–2111. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1178-2
Chernysheva, N. A., Bakulina, A. A., & Bich, M. G. (2019). The new trends in the Chinese Hi-Tech industry: the evidence from Huawei. In Proceedings of the External Challenges and Risks for Russia in the Context of the World Community’s Transition to Polycentrism: Economics, Finance and Business (ICEFB 2019). Atlantis Press (pp. 9�12). https://doi.org/10.2991/icefb-19.2019.3
Confraria, H., Godinho, M. M., & Wang, L. (2017). Determinants of citation impact: A comparative analysis of the Global South versus the Global North. Research Policy, 46, 265–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2016.11.004
Courtioux, P., étivier, F., & Reberioux, A. (2019). Scientific Competition between Countries: Did China Get What It Paid for? https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-02307534 Documents de travail du Centre d’Economie de la Sorbonne 2019.13.
Das, J., Do, Q.-T., Shaines, K., & Srikant, S. (2013). U.S. and them: The Geography of Academic Research. Journal of Development Economics, 105, 112–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2013.07.010
Demetrescu, C., Finocchi, I., Ribichini, A., & Schaerf, M. (2020). On bibliometrics in academic promotions: a case study in computer science and engineering in Italy. Scientometrics, 124, 6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03548-9
Demetrescu, C., Finocchi, I., Ribichini, A., & Schaerf, M. (2022). Which conference is that? A case study in computer science. Journal of Data and Information Quality, 14(3), 13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3519031
Demetrescu, C., Lupia, F., Mendicelli, A., Ribichini, A., Scarcello, F., & Schaerf, M. (2019). On the Shapley value and its application to the Italian VQR research assessment exercise. Journal of Informetrics, 13, 87–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.11.008
Demetrescu, C., Ribichini, A., & Schaerf, M. (2018). Accuracy of Author Names in Bibliographic Data Sources: An Italian Case Study. Scientometrics, 11, 1777–1791. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2945-x
Fortnow, L. (2009). Viewpoint: Time for Computer Science to Grow Up. Communication on ACM, 52, 33–35. https://doi.org/10.1145/1536616.1536631
Franceschini, F., & Maisano, D. (2017). Critical remarks on the Italian research assessment exercise VQR 2011–2014. Journal of Informetrics, 11, 337–357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.02.005
Glänzel, W., Schlemmer, B., Schubert, A., & Thijs, B. (2006). Proceedings literature as additional data source for bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics, 68, 457–473. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0124-y
Goodrum, A., McCain, K. W., Lawrence, S., & Giles, C. L. (2001). Scholarly publishing in the Internet age: A citation analysis of computer science literature. Information Processing & Management, 37, 661–675. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0306-4573(00)00047-9
Guan, J., & Ma, N. (2004). A comparative study of research performance in computer science. Scientometrics, 61, 339–359. https://doi.org/10.1023/b:scie.0000045114.85737.1b
Gul, S., Nisa, N., Shah, T., Gupta, S., Jan, A., & Ahmad, S. (2015). Middle East: research productivity and performance across nations. Scientometrics, 105, 1157–1166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1722-3
Gupta, B. M., & Dhawan, S. (2005). Computer Science Research in India: A Scientometric Analysis of Research Output During the Period 1994-2001. DESIDOC Bulletin of Information Technology 25, 3–12. https://doi.org/10.14429/dbit.25.1.3644
He, Y., & Guan, J. (2008). Contribution of Chinese publications in computer science: A case study on LNCS. Scientometrics, 75, 519–534. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1781-1
Hoonlor, A., Szymanski, B. K., & Zaki, M. J. (2013). Trends in Computer Science Research. Communication on ACM, 56, 74–83. https://doi.org/10.1145/2500892
Jaffe, K., Horst, E., Gunn, L. H., Zambrano, J. D., & Molina, G. (2020). A network analysis of research productivity by country, discipline, and wealth. PLoS ONE 15, 5 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0232458
King, D. A. (2004). The scientific impact of nations. Nature, 430, 311–316. https://doi.org/10.1038/430311a
Kulczycki, E. (2017). Assessing publications through a bibliometric indicator: The case of comprehensive evaluation of scientific units in Poland. Research Evaluation, 26, 41–52. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvw023
Kumar, S., & Garg, K. (2005). Scientometrics of computer science research in India and China. Scientometrics, 64, 121–132. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-005-0244-9
Leydesdorff, L., & Wagner, C. (2009). Is the United States Losing Ground in Science? A Global Perspective on the World Science System. Scientometrics, 78, 11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-008-1830-4
Liang, Z., Luo, X., Gong, F., Bao, H., Qian, H., Jia, Z., & Li, G. (2015). Worldwide Research Productivity in the Field of Arthroscopy: A Bibliometric Analysis. Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2015.03.009
Mantovani, A., Rinaldi, E., & Zusi, C. (2020). Country rankings on the scientific production in endocrinology and diabetology. Exploration of Medicine 1, 10. https://doi.org/10.37349/emed.2020.00020
Patterson, D., Snyder, L., Ullman, J. (1999). Evaluating Computer Scientists and Engineers For Promotion and Tenure. Computing Research News (September 1999). http://www.cra.org/resources/bp-view/evaluating_computer_scientists_and_engineers_for_promotion_and_tenure/
Rahman, M., & Fukui, T. (2003). Biomedical research productivity: factors across the countries. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 19, 249–252.
Singh, V., Uddin, A., & Pinto, D. (2015). Computer science research: The top 100 institutions in India and in the world. Scientometrics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1612-8
Singh, V. K., Banshal, S. K., Singhal, K., & Uddin, A. (2015). Scientometric Mapping of Research on ‘Big Data’. Scientometrics, 105, 727–741. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1729-9
Singhal, K., Banshal, S. K., Uddin, A., & Singh, V. K. (2015). A Scientometric analysis of computer science research in India. In 2015 Eighth International Conference on Contemporary Computing (IC3) (pp. 177–182). https://doi.org/10.1109/IC3.2015.7346675
Smith, K. M., Crookes, E., & Crookes, P. A. (2013). Measuring research ‘impact’ for academic promotion: Issues from the literature. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 35, 410–420. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2013.812173
Stuart, D. (2015). Finding “good enough’’ metrics for the UK’s Research Excellence Framework. Online Information Review, 39, 265–269.
Subramanyam, K. (1984). Research productivity and breadth of interest of computer scientists. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 3, 369–371. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630350609
Uddin, A., Singh, V., Pinto, D., & Olmos, I. (2015). Scientometric mapping of computer science research in Mexico. Scientometrics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1654-y
Vardi, M. Y. (2009). Conferences vs. Journals in Computing Research. Communication on ACM 52, 5. https://doi.org/10.1145/1506409.1506410
Vrettas, G., & Sanderson, M. (2015). Conferences versus Journals in Computer Science. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66, 2674–2684. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23349
Wang, L. (2016). The structure and comparative advantages of China’s scientific research: quantitative and qualitative perspectives. Scientometrics, 106, 435–452. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1650-2
Zhang, J., Chen, X., Gao, X., Yang, H., Zhen, Z., Li, Y. L., & Zhao, X. (2017). Worldwide research productivity in the field of psychiatry. International Journal of Mental Health Systems. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13033-017-0127-5
Zhou, P., & Leydesdorff, L. (2006). The emergence of China as a leading nation in science. Research Policy, 35, 83–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.08.006
Funding
Prof. Demetrescu, Prof. Finocchi and Dr. Ribichini were partially supported for this work by MIUR, the Italian Ministry of Education, University and Research, under PRIN Project n. 20174LF3T8 AHeAD (Efficient Algorithms for HArnessing Networked Data).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Demetrescu, C., Finocchi, I., Ribichini, A. et al. On computer science research and its temporal evolution. Scientometrics 127, 4913–4938 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04445-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04445-z