2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.ipm.2016.06.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Measuring the social influences of scientist groups based on multiple types of collaboration relations

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Two parts of social influence, the possibility of impact between two users and the importance of each user, were discussed . Social influence of scientist groups was analyzed considering two general group types (hierarchical and nonhierarchical) and two general collaboration situations (the independently multiplex collaboration relationships and the correlated multiplex collaboration relationships) . Evental Affinity Propagation (TAP) was proposed to model the event‐level social influence on co‐author network …”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Two parts of social influence, the possibility of impact between two users and the importance of each user, were discussed . Social influence of scientist groups was analyzed considering two general group types (hierarchical and nonhierarchical) and two general collaboration situations (the independently multiplex collaboration relationships and the correlated multiplex collaboration relationships) . Evental Affinity Propagation (TAP) was proposed to model the event‐level social influence on co‐author network …”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…15 Social influence of scientist groups was analyzed considering two general group types (hierarchical and nonhierarchical) and two general collaboration situations (the independently multiplex collaboration relationships and the correlated multiplex collaboration relationships). 16 Evental Affinity Propagation (TAP) was proposed to model the event-level social influence on co-author network. 17 Most of previous methods only studied user network, eg, follower and followee network, and user behavior network.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In previous works ( [22,23]), we present a collaboration network analysis as a management tool using publication data available in Lattes Platform from one Computer Science graduate program in Brazil, including a recommendation module for scientific partnerships. Besides, many international works are leading to interesting findings as in [24] that explores how collaboration in Computer Science evolved since 1960, measuring influences of scientist groups based on multiple types of collaboration [25], and a cross-disciplinary research work presenting a survey of scientific teamwork collaboration [26]. Nevertheless, there is a research gap concerning the Brazilian Computer Science graduate programs with intra-and inter-scientific collaboration analysis.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Researchers have utilized patent documents to analyze technology trends (Khasseh et al, 2017;Kim, Suh, & Park, 2008;Yoon & Park, 2004), perform tasks of technology forecasting (Chen et al, 2017;Daim et al, 2006;G. Kim & Bae, 2017;Kyebambe et al, 2017;Yoon & Park, 2005), investigate relations among scientists (Jiang et al, 2017), and undertake strategic technology planning (Joung & Kim, 2017;Lee, Kim, & Shin, 2017;Yu & Zhang, 2017). However, we still lack in a holistic understanding of technological change that considers four distinct but interrelated dimensions and evolutionary paths that lead to advances in a specific technology sector, i.e.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%