ScienceGeist

Google Scholar presents a broader view of the academic world because it has brought to light a great number of sources that were not previously visible.

The role of faculty hiring networks in shaping the spread of ideas in computer science, and the importance of where in the network an idea originates: research from prestigious institutions spreads more quickly and completely than work of similar quality originating from less prestigious institutions.

Preprint showing that ethnic diversity consistently leads to higher scientific impact.

When citation-based indicators are applied at the institutional or departmental level, rather than at the level of individual papers, surprisingly large correlations with peer review judgments can be observed.

We call for bringing sanity back into scientific judgment exercises. Despite all number crunching, many judgments - be it about scientific output, scientists, or research institutions - will neither be unambiguous, uncontroversial, or testable by external standards nor can they be otherwise validated or objectified.

For the USA, the entire history of science Noble prizes is described on a per capita basis to an astonishing accuracy by a single large productivity boost decaying at a continuously accelerating rate since its peak in 1972.

Study aims to provide a detailed description of the free version of Dimensions (the new bibliographic database produced by Digital Science). An analysis of its coverage is carried out (comparing it Scopus and Google Scholar) in order to determine whether the bibliometric indicators offered by Dimensions have an order of magnitude significant enough to be used. 

This article explores the value of the scholarly database Dimensions from an impact assessment perspective. The results include high correlations between citation counts from Scopus and Dimensions.

Article underlines the risks of distributing excessive honors or resources to people who, at the end of the day, could have been simply luckier than others. Policy hypotheses are addressed to show the most efficient strategies for public funding of research in order to improve meritocracy, diversity and innovation.

The Journal Impact Factor is, by far, the most discussed bibliometric indicator. Since its introduction over 40 years ago, it has had enormous effects on the scientific ecosystem. This paper by Cassidy R. Sugimoto provides a brief history of the indicator and highlights well-known limitations.

Automatic identification of topics from the classification of research publications.

International collaboration improves the impact of average research papers, whereas more government funding tends to have a small adverse effect when comparing OECD countries.

Proposing and testing a new indicator, the Mantel-Haenszel quotient.

A  large-scale empirical study based on F1000Prime, altmetrics, and citation  data.

In theoretical computer science and machine learning, over 60% of published papers are on arXiv.

Increasing portability, scaling, reproducibility, and convenience of R users and developers.

No generalizable gold OA citation advantage at journal level.

The landscape of the cash-per-publication reward policy in China and reveal its trend since the late 1990s.