Exploring the legacy and impact of historical IJRB articles and contributions to ICRP publications and Radiation Research articles through graphical reference mapping
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The International Journal of Radiation Biology (IJRB) celebrates its 60th birthday this year. Ahead of this very special issue, we wanted to produce strong representations of the journal's publication history in order to celebrate the current status of the journal and to look forward to its future. This was accomplished using 'reference maps'. Reference data were used from 1959 onward from the highest-cited paper in IJRB, for each respective year, to create a figure displaying when those articles were cited in IJRB since their publication. This was done to show the relative impact of historical IJRB papers to future research. Common themes of research were also examined by decade. Additionally, to show the historical impact of the journal outside of its immediate area of research and its practical applications, information on IJRB articles cited by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) was collected. It was in 1959 when IJRB published the first issue, and when ICRP also issued Publication 1. Among all Publications (1-139), 43 publications have thus far cited 320 IJRB papers and each of which have been cited 1-7 times. Most notably, Publications 90, 99, 118, and 131 cited more than 40 IJRB papers. Further research was done into references for IJRB's contemporary journal: Radiation Research. The most highly cited IJRB articles for each year together since its inception were cited 16,760 times since they were published and cited 1385 times in Radiation Research. Together, these three datasets and their representations show the diversity of historical IJRB publications, the impact of historical IJRB articles in both future research in the journal and outside of it, and articles which new prospective authors contributing to IJRB might find useful in their own research.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".