Sha Yuan
Wendy Hall
ABSTRACT
In this era of interdisciplinary science, Web science and artificial intelligence (AI), have brought dramatic revolutions to human society. The increasing availability of structured and unstructured information on the Web has become a critical research resource and offers unprecedented opportunities to explore the science of science (SciSci). SciSci use science technique to study the past, current, and evolving scientific discovery. Although many significant SciSci works study the patterns of international scientific collaboration, the relevant knowledge in AI is sorely lacking. In this work, we study the evolution of the international scientific collaboration patterns in the AI field. By graphing the entities and relationships in the international collaboration pattern, we make multiple multidimensional statistical analyses from the perspectives of institutions and countries.
Supplemental Material
- Giovanni Abramo, Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo, and Marco Solazzi. 2011. The relationship between scientists’ research performance and the degree of internationalization of their research. Scientometrics 86, 3 (2011), 629–643.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Daniele Archibugi and Alberto Coco. 2004. International partnerships for knowledge in business and academia: A comparison between Europe and the USA. Technovation 24, 7 (2004), 517–528.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mario Coccia and Lili Wang. [n.d.]. Evolution and convergence of the patterns of international scientific collaboration. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America ([n. d.]), 201510820.Google Scholar
- Jean-Christophe Doré, Tiiu Ojasoo, Yoshiko Okubo, Thomas Durand, Gérard Dudognon, and Jean-François Miquel. 1996. Correspondence factor analysis of the publication patterns of 48 countries over the period 1981–1992. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 47, 8(1996), 588–602.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Henry Etzkowitz and Loet Leydesdorff. 2000. The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and ”Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations. Research policy 29, 2 (2000), 109–123.Google Scholar
- Luke Georghiou. 1998. Global cooperation in research. Research policy 27, 6 (1998), 611–626.Google Scholar
- Carlos Gershenson. 2013. Collaborations: The fourth age of research. 19, 1 (2013), 1–5.Google Scholar
- Wolfgang Glänzel. 2001. National characteristics in international scientific co-authorship relations. Scientometrics 51, 1 (2001), 69–115.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Vicente P. Guerrero Bote, Carlos Olmeda-Gómez, and Félix de Moya-Anegón. [n.d.]. Quantifying the benefits of international scientific collaboration. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology 64, 2([n. d.]), 392–404.Google Scholar
- John Ioannidis, Kevin W Boyack, Henry Small, Aaron A Sorensen, and Richard Klavans. 2014. Bibliometrics: Is your most cited work your best?Nature News 514, 7524 (2014), 561.Google Scholar
- Terttu Luukkonen, Olle Persson, and Gunnar Sivertsen. 1992. Understanding patterns of international scientific collaboration. Science, Technology, & Human Values 17, 1 (1992), 101–126.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Yifang Ma and Brian Uzzi. 2018. Scientific prize network predicts who pushes the boundaries of science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115, 50(2018), 12608–12615.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lars Mathiassen. 2002. Collaborative practice research. Information Technology & People(2002).Google Scholar
- Francis Narin, Kimberly Stevens, and Edith S Whitlow. 1991. Scientific co-operation in Europe and the citation of multinationally authored papers. Scientometrics 21, 3 (1991), 313–323.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Gary M Olson, Stephanie Teasley, Matthew J Bietz, and Derrick L Cogburn. 2002. Collaboratories to support distributed science: the example of international HIV/AIDS research. In Proceedings of the 2002 annual research conference of the South African institute of computer scientists and information technologists on enablement through technology. South African Institute for Computer Scientists and Information Technologists, 44–51.Google Scholar
- Olle Persson. 2010. Are highly cited papers more international?Scientometrics 83, 2 (2010), 397–401.Google Scholar
- Olle Persson, Wolfgang Glänzel, and Rickard Danell. 2004. Inflationary bibliometric values: The role of scientific collaboration and the need for relative indicators in evaluative studies. Scientometrics 60, 3 (2004), 421–432.Google ScholarCross Ref
- András Schubert and Tibor Braun. 1990. International collaboration in the sciences 1981–1985. Scientometrics 19, 1-2 (1990), 3–10.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Donald E Stokes. 2011. Pasteur’s quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation. Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
- Jie Tang, Jing Zhang, Limin Yao, Juanzi Li, Li Zhang, and Zhong Su. 2008. Arnetminer: extraction and mining of academic social networks. In Proceedings of the 14th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining. ACM, 990–998.Google ScholarDigital Library
- A Van Raan. 1998. The influence of international collaboration on the impact of research results: Some simple mathematical considerations concerning the role of self-citations. Scientometrics 42, 3 (1998), 423–428.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Caroline S Wagner and Loet Leydesdorff. 2005. Mapping the network of global science: comparing international co-authorships from 1990 to 2000. International journal of Technology and Globalisation 1, 2(2005), 185–208.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Caroline S. Wagner, Travis A. Whetsell, and Loet Leydesdorff. 2016. Growth of International Collaboration in Science: Revisiting Six Specialties. Scientometrics Forthcoming, 3 (2016).Google Scholar
Recommendations
Artificial intelligence in the field of economics
AbstractThe history of AI in economics is long and winding, much the same as the evolving field of AI itself. Economists have engaged with AI since its beginnings, albeit in varying degrees and with changing focus across time and places. In this study, we ...
Scientific collaboration in Brazilian researches: a comparative study in the information science, mathematics and dentistry fields
This study attempts to describe, in a comparative way, scientific collaboration and co-authoring activities and understanding of Brazilian researchers of productivity level 1 at the National Counsel of Technological and Scientific Development (CNPq). In ...
Important institutions of interinstitutional scientific collaboration networks in materials science
Interinstitutional scientific collaboration plays an important role in knowledge production and scientific development. Together with the increasing scale of scientific collaboration, a few institutions that positively participate in interinstitutional ...
Comments