Thematic bibliometric analysis of 37 specialized journals in mathematical education research indexed in <i>Scopus</i> or <i>Web of Science</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This bibliometric study examines the scientific production in mathematical education of 23,094 articles from 37 specialized mathematical education journals, indexed in <i>Scopus</i> and <i>Web of Science</i>, considering all records up to the year 2022. The analysis was conducted globally and regionally, including Latin America, Africa, Europe, the United States, and Canada. Articles were analyzed using <i>rhizomatic conceptual spaces</i>, which allow the representation of relationships between words present in the titles and keywords of articles through graphs, thereby identifying thematic nodes and connections, as well as visible and invisible peripheral elements. The results reveal the diversity of terms used in the field and the difficulties in capturing a disciplinary field using certain keywords. Common thematic nodes such as teaching, learning, knowledge, problem-solving, curriculum, assessment, and technology were observed, as well as regional differences in focus areas and theoretical currents. The study also highlights underexplored areas and suggests possible future research paths, including expanding searches in specialized sources, bibliometric analysis of specific topics, and temporal comparison of trends in the field.
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 arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | Bibliometrics Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | Bibliometrics Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Other design | high |
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 | 0.021 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.146 | 0.267 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".