Análisis de la presencia bibliométrica y webmétrica de los autores de nanociencia y nanotecnología: Web Of Science-2012 / web-2014. = Bibliometric and webmetric presence of nanoscience and nanotechnology authors: web of science-2012 / web-2014
Bibliographic record
Abstract
espanolRESUMEN La nanociencia y nanotecnologia (N&N) se constituye como una ciencia emergente y disruptiva. Con esta tesis se pretende realizar un analisis de la presencia de los 50 autores mas destacados de N&N en 2012 a traves de la base de datos Web of Science (WoS) utilizando tecnicas bibliometricas y realizar una imagen de estos mismos autores en la web con datos recogidos en 2014 utilizando tecnicas webmetricas. De esta forma se comprueba y propone la realizacion de un mapa combinando las dos tecnicas anteriores para la caracterizacion de este dominio cientifico con esta tecnica que denominamos bibliowebmetria. Se pretende investigar sobre la utilidad de la webmetria como fuente de informacion valiosa para la realizacion de mapas del conocimiento y aportar un aspecto mas a la evaluacion y descripcion de la actividad cientifica y la ciencia en su evolucion y desarrollo. Este analisis bibliometrico se realizar a traves de las cocitaciones y el webmetrico a traves de las comenciones, que aparecen como paralelas. Se utiliza el test Quadratic Assignment Procedure (QAP), util para la integracion de la informacion bibliometrica con la webmetrica. De esta manera, ademas de la exploracion de nuevas tecnicas, se persigue caracterizar, ademas de a los 50 autores mas destacados, la N&N como disciplina. Es decir, lineas de investigacion, importancia de estas, autores mas destacados dentro de cada linea y un analisis de contenido de los resultados bibliometricos, webmetricos y bibliowebmetricos La investigacion cientifica y la tecnologica no estan sistematicamente divididas en la web tan claramente como en la representacion de WoS, pero se puede apreciar la relacion clara entre las lineas de investigacion aparecidas en el cienciograma bibliometrico y en el webmetrico. La informacion recogida en la web es menor que la recogida en la WoS, puesto que hay autores que no se han comencionado en la web. En otro sentido, la presencia de los autores que si se han comencionado es ligeramente diferente al analisis bibliometrico, aunque aquellos que son importantes en la red bibliometrica tienen trascendencia en la web. En el analisis bibliowebmetrico se recuperan las lineas de investigacion aparecidas a traves de las cocitaciones, pero en cada una de ellas aparecen autores de lineas basicas y tecnologicas, con lo que se supera esta separacion tipica entre el conocimiento y se aporta una division mas realista o practica de las lineas de investigacion. Los dominios mayoritarios en los que aparecen las comenciones de los autores objeto de estudio son .com, .org y .edu. En cuanto a los dominios por paises son los de China y Alemania donde aparecen los autores comencionados seguidos por Reino Unido, Canada y Taiwan. EEUU tiene la mayor presencia desde sudomino .gov. Entre los dominios de segundo nivel encontramos academia.edu, aas.org, 4shared.com y science.gov. Las tipologias de paginas que recogen las comenciones o la presencia webmetrica de los autores son mayoritariamente paginas de asociaciones cientificas oficiales, seguidas por las plataformas para contenidos cientificos y divulgativos y los congresos. Estos ultimos reflejan informacion muy actualizada sobre N&N. Traspasando este dominio cientifico, existe representacion de informacion divulgativa sobre N&N en las plataformas de contenidos divulgativos. Finalmente, la N&N, y nuevamente con caracter cientifico, se refleja en la pagina cientifica del gobierno de EEUU. PALABRAS CLAVE Cienciometria, Bibliometria, Webmetria, Nanociencia y nanotecnologia (N&N), Analisis de cocitacion de autores (ACA). EnglishABSTRACT Nanoscience and nanotecnology (N&N) is an emerging and disruptive science. Within the thesis it is expected to achieve an analysis of the 50 more remarkable authors in N&N in 2012 througth Web of Science (WoS) data. In order to achieve this goal, bibliometrics and webmetrics techniques are used, analysing data from 2012 and 2014 respectively. In this sense, a combinated map of this two techniques is checked to characterize this scientific domain. This new technique will be named as bibliowebmetrics. In this way, webmetric techniques are verified as a valuable source of information to visualizate knowledge maps and provide the evaluation and descripcion of the scientific activity and its development. This bibliometric analysis is done through cocitation and the webmetic one through comentions, that seem paralels. QAP test is used to fuse both bibliometric and webmetric information. Besides the exploration of new techniques, it is possible to characterize the 50 most important autors and the N&N as a discipline. Which means clarifying the lines of research, their importance, the most featured authors in its lines and also a content analysis of the bibliometric, webmetric and bibliowebmetrics results. Scientific and technological research are not sistematically divided on the web as clear as at the WoS representation. On the other hand, it is easy to appreciate the relation between lines of research at bibliometric and webmetric maps. The information collected from WoS is more numerous than the one collected on the web, there are a few authors that are not comentioned on the web. In other sense, the presence of the authors comentioned is slightly different than the one they obtain through cocitations, but the relevant ones are also noticeable on the web. The lines of research appeared through cocitations are recovered, which means both bibliometric and bibliowebmetric lines of research are the same, but in each of them there is a mix of authors that belong to technical and to scientifical lines. The usual distinction between science and technology is overtaken and a new and more realistic and pragmatic vision of the knowledge given. The main domains, where the comentions of the authors of the study appear, are .com, .org and .edu. Regarding to the country domains, the rank is China, Germany, United Kingdom, Canada and Taiwan. EEUU has strong presence from its domain .gov. Among the second level domains academia.edu, aas.org, 4shared.com and science.gov.are found. The tipologies of the hosting web comentions are principally scientific societies pages and scientific sharing platforms followed by congress webpages, divulgative sharing platforms and finally on the scientific EEUU govern webpage. So that, the information of N&N on de web is scientifical and original, due to its presence at congress web pages, what suggest its constant and quick evolution. In addition there is also a representation of divulgative information on N&N. KEYWORDS Scientometrics, bibliometrics, webmetrics, Nanoscience and nanotechnology (N&N), Author cocitation analysis (ACA).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.020 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.412 | 0.499 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.060 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".