MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3093804023 · doi:10.1108/lht-06-2020-0131

A bibliometric analysis and science mapping of scientific publications of Alzahra University during 1986–2019

2020· article· en· W3093804023 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Abbas Doulani

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary Hi Tech · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
Topicscientometrics and bibliometrics research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBibliometricsScopusOriginalityRanking (information retrieval)Library scienceScientific literatureData scienceComputer scienceMedicineInformation retrievalMEDLINESocial scienceSociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose Currently, the evaluation of scientific performance of universities is one of the important indicators in various ranking systems. One way to evaluate the academic performance of universities is to analyze the scientific documents of universities in reputable international databases. The purpose of this article is to analyze and evaluate the scientific publications of Alzahra University (Iran) as the top 100–200 universities during 1986–2019. Design/methodology/approach This study was performed using bibliometrics and visualization techniques. The Scopus database was used to collect data. Affiliation search and advanced search were used to retrieve the data. Excel, VOSviewer and CRExplorer software were used to analyze the data. Findings The results showed that the scientific publications and received citations by Alzahra University documents during the time have been upward. At the national level, it was the most scientific collaboration with researchers at the University of Tehran. Also at the international level, the most scientific collaboration has been with the United States, Canada and Germany. In total, 80% of scientific publications were published by 20% of authors. Also, 70% of the highly cited articles were published in journals with quartile 1. Finally, clustering results showed that Alzahra University's scientific publications are in five main categories, including “chemistry,” “physics,” “biology,” “psychology and educational sciences” and “accounting sciences, management, and computer science.” Originality/value This study could be a good model for evaluating the performance of scientific productions of universities and scientific institutions with bibliometrics and visualization approaches.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmaBibliometrics
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptBibliometrics
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.951
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0490.055
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.334
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.104 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations47
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibrary Hi TechSame topicscientometrics and bibliometrics researchCategoryBibliometricsFrench-language works237,207