MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Scientometric portrait of Professor CNR Rao using bibliometrix R package

2020· article· en· W3094013044 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Samir Kumar Jalal

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary Herald · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital Imaging for Blood Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScopusPortraitLibrary scienceCitationBibliographic couplingIndex (typography)Web of scienceMathematicsEngineeringComputer scienceHistoryPolitical scienceArt historyWorld Wide WebLawMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study reveals a long research experiences of Professor CNR Rao. In his 85 years of life and research experiences, he published 1648 articles, which are indexed in Scopus database during 1956-2019 with average citation per paper is 52.01. But, he might have published a few hundred more papers, which are not indexed in Scopus are not considered in this study for analysis. A collaboration co-authorship and co-occurrences networks of the author were built using Bibliometrix R Package. Author co-citation network, co-authorship and authors’ coupling were built using R Package. The major findings of the study show that the highest collaboration happened with the USA and UK, France, Canada and Japan. The result shows that he collaborated with 1156 unique authors from various countries with co-authors per document is 3.81 and collaborative index is 0.73. Rao is having 1,19,169 citations from Google Scholar with h-index (156) and i10-index (1325). The result shows that CNR Rao preferred to communicate most of his papers to the Chemical Physics Letters, Journals of Solid State Chemistry, Solid State Communications, Journal of Materials Chemistry etc.

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 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)0.030
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.962
Threshold uncertainty score0.181

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0380.091
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0540.022

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibrary HeraldSame topicDigital Imaging for Blood DiseasesFrench-language works237,207