Mapping the Scholarly publications of Central University of Gujarat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study attempts to analyze research publications of Central University of Gujarat (CUG) during the period of 2010 - 2020. The bibliographic data for this study was extracted from the Scopus database. This paper analyses 771 research papers published by Central University of Gujarat during the period under the study. The study examine the year-wise research publications, authorship pattern, degree of collaboration, types of document, preferred journals for publication, prolific author, h-index, most collaborating institutions and countries etc. Additionally, in this research paper different software used e.g. ‘MS-Excel’, ‘bibliometrix’ & ‘biblioshiny’ of R-Package, VOSviwer applied for the analysis and data visualizations. The research findings indicate that the growth of literature pattern is linear, and journals articles (561) are the most preferred form of publications by the researchers to communicate their research. Degree of Collaboration (DC) 0.728 indicates that the most research work jointly carried out by research scholars of Central University of Gujarat (CUG). Singh M. is found to be the most prolific author and the Journal of Molecular Liquids is the most preferred Journal. The top 10 most cited publications were used from that only one paper was two-authored and received highest 439 citations found and other 9 research papers were shown multiple-authored. In Jawaharlal Nehru University (60) and Banasthali Vidyapith (39) were the leading collaborating Institutions. The USA, Australia, South Africa, UK, and Canada were the top five most collaborative countries. The subject Chemistry was most prominent research area during the study period. The CUG has to make more effort to promote research and develop quality culture, attention of developing better policies to enhance and enrich the research performance.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".