Analisis de la producción científica basado en las tendencias en temas de investigación. Un estudio de caso sobre inteligencia artificial

Jesús Bobadilla; Abraham Gutiérrez; Miguel Ángel Patricio; Rodolfo Xavier Bojorque

doi:10.3989/redc.2019.1.1583

Autores/as

Jesús Bobadilla Universidad Politécnica de Madrid https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0619-1322
Abraham Gutiérrez Universidad Politécnica de Madrid https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6974-7514
Miguel Ángel Patricio Universidad Carlos III https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9304-826X
Rodolfo Xavier Bojorque Universidad Politécnica Salesiana https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6045-8692

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2019.1.1583

Palabras clave:

Temas de investigación, producción científica, Documentación Científica, aprendizaje automático, recogida de datos, Scopus, procesamiento de lenguaje natural, inteligencia artificial

Resumen

La investigación en el campo de la documentación científica nos lleva hacia un procesamiento automático de grandes cantidades de información proveniente de los trabajos publicados por la comunidad científica. Resulta necesario explicar estos procesos y crear sistemas que los lleven a cabo. En este artículo se proporciona: a) Un Sistema de Información diseñado para extraer información científica a partir del texto que proporcionan los artículos publicados, b) Explicaciones de las etapas fundamentales de procesamiento: minería de datos, procesamiento del lenguaje natural, aprendizaje automático, y c) Resultados categorizados y explicados de nuestro caso de estudio: el área Artificial Intelligence. Los resultados de este artículo incluyen: a) Ranking de temas y ranking de áreas de investigación, y b) Comparativa entre cantidad y calidad de los temas y de las áreas de investigación.

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Citas

Abramo, G.; Cicero, T.; D'Angelo, C. (2014). Are the authors of highly cited articles also the most productive ones?. Journal of Informetrics, 8 (1), 89-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2013.10.011

Aguillo, I. F.; Ortega, J.; Fernández, M.; Utrilla, A. (2010). Indicators for a webometric ranking of open access repositories. Scientometrics, 82 (3), 477-486. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0183-y

Aksnes, D. W. (2003). Characteristics of highly cited papers. Research Evaluation, 12 (3), 159-170. https://doi.org/10.3152/147154403781776645

Aksnes, D. W.; Sivertsen, G. (2004). The effect of highly cited papers on national citation indicators. Scientometrics, 59 (2), 213-224. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SCIE.0000018529.58334.eb

Altszyler, E.; Sigman, M.; Slezak, D. F. (2016). Comparative study of LSA vs Word2vec embeddings in small corpora: a case study in dreams database. arXiv preprint arXiv:1610.01520.

Anicic, K.; Divjac, B.; Arbanas, K. (2016). Preparing ICT Graduates for Real-World Challenges: Results of a Meta-Analysis. IEEE Transactions on Education, 60 (3), 191-197. https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2016.2633959

Bleu, D.M.; Ng, A.Y., Jordan, M.I. (2003). Latent dirichlet allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3, 993-1022.

Bobadilla, J.; Bojorque, R.; Hernando, A.; Hurtado, R. (2017). Recommender systems clustering using Bayesian non negative matrix factorization. IEEE Access, 6, 3549-3564, https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2017.2788138

Bobadilla, J.; Ortega, F.; Hernando, A.; Gutierrez, A. (2013). Recommender Systems Survey. Knowledge Based Systems, 46, 109-132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2013.03.012

Bornmann, L.; Mutz, R. (2011). Further steps towards an ideal method of measuring citation performance: the avoidance of citation (ratio) averages in field-normalization. Journal of Informetrics, 5 (1), 228- 230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.10.009

Haustein, S.; Peters, I.; Bar-Ilan, J.; Priem, J.; Shema, H.; Terliesner, J. (2014). Coverage and adoption of altmetrics sources in the bibliometric community. Scientometrics, 101 (2), 1145-1163. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1221-3

Hayati, Z. (2009). Correlation between quality and quantity in scientific production: A case study of Iranian organizations from 1997 to 2006. Scientometrics, 80 (3), 625-636. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-2094-3

Hernando, A.; Bobadilla, J.; Ortega, F. (2016). A non negative matrix factorization for collaborative filtering recommender systems based on a Bayesian probabilistic model. Knowledge Based Systems, 97, 188-202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2015.12.018

Hindle, A.; Bird, C.; Zimmermann, T.; Nagappan, N. (2015). Do topics make sense to managers and developers? Empirical Software Engineering, 20 (2), 479-515. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-014-9312-1

Karlsson, A.; Hammarfelt, B.; Steinhauer, H.J.; Nolin, J. (2014). Modeling uncertainty in bibliometrics and information retrieval: an information fusion approach. Scientometrics, 102 (3), 2255-2274. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1481-6

Kaya, M.; Cetin, E.; Socery, A. (2010). Introduction to Webometrics: quantitative Web research for the ranking of world universities; research centers and hospitals. ICEGEG-2010, Antalya, Turkey.

Khan, B.S.; Niazi, M.A. (2017). Emerging Topics in Internet Technology: A Complex Networks Approach, arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/1708.00578v1

Lis-Gutierrez, J.P.; Gaitan-Angulo, M.; Robayo, P.V.; Aguilera-Hernandez, D.; Viloria, A. (2017). Academic production patterns in public administration: An analysis based on scopus. Journal on Engineering and Applied Sciences, 12 (11), 2904-2909.

Lu, K.; Cai, X.; Ajiferuke, I.; Wolfram, D. (2017). Vocabulary size and its effect on topic representation. Information Processing and Management, 53 (3), 653- 665. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2017.01.003

Manolopoulus, Y.; Katsaros, D. (2017). Metrics and rankings: Myths and fallacies. Communications in computer and information science, 706, 265-280. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57135-5_19

Martín-Martín, A.; Orduna-Malea, E.; Ayllón, J:M.; López- Cózar, E.D. (2016). A two-sided academic landscape: snapshot of highly-cited documents in Google Scholar (1950-2013). Revista Espa-ola de Documentación Científica, 39 (4), e149. https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2016.4.1405

Mingers, J.; Leydesdorff, L. (2015). A review of theory and practice in scientometrics. European Journal of Operational Research, 246 (1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.04.002

Mustafee, N., Katsaliaki, K., Fishwick, P., (2014). Exploring the modelling and simulation knowledge base through journal co-citation analysis. Scientometrics, 98 (3), 2145-2159. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1136-z

Naili, M.; Chaibi, A.H.; Ghezala, H. (2017). Comparative study of word embedding methods in topic segmentation. Procedia computer science, 112, 340- 349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2017.08.009

Nedra, I.; Chaibi, A. H.; Ahmed, M. B. (2015). New scientometric indicator for the qualitative evaluation of scientific production. New Library World, 116 (11/12), 661-676. https://doi.org/10.1108/NLW-01-2015-0002

Nejati, A.; Hosseini Jenab, S.M. (2010). A two-dimensional approach to evaluate the scientific production of countries (case study: the basic sciences). Scientometrics, 84 (2), 357-364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0103-1

Orduna-Malea, E.; Martín-Martín, A.; Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2017). Google Scholar as a source for scholarly evaluation: a bibliographic review of database errors. Revista Espa-ola de Documentación Científica, 40 (4), e185. https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2017.4.1500

Ortoll, E.; Canals, A.; García, M.; Cobarsí, J. (2014). Main parameters for the study of scientific collaboration in big science. Revista Espa-ola de Documentación Científica, 37 (4), e069. https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2014.4.1142

Ravikumar, S.; Agrahari, A.; Singh, S.N. (2015). Mapping the intellectual structure of scientometrics: a co-word analysis of the journal Scientometrics. Scientometrics, 102 (1), 929-955. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1402-8

Sun, S.; Luo, Ch.; Chen, J. (2017). A review of natural language processing techniques for opinion mining systems. Information fusion, 36, 10-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2016.10.004

Wang, S.; Koopman, R. (2017). Clustering articles based on semantic similarity. Scientometrics, 111 (2), 1017- 1031. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2298-x

Xue, H.J.; Dai, X.Y.; Zhang, J.; Huang, S. (2017). Deep matrix factorization models for recommender systems, IJCAI, pp. 3203-3209. Melbourne, Australia. https://doi.org/10.24963/ijcai.2017/447

Yazdani, K; Nedjat, S; Rahimi-Movaghar, A; Ghalichee, L; Khalili, M. (2015). Scientometrics: Review of concepts, applications, and indicators. Iranian Journal of Epidemiology, 10 (4), 78-88.

Yu, D.J. (2015). A scientometrics review on aggregation operator research. Scientometrics, 105 (1), 115-133. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1695-2