Know thy tools! Limits of popular algorithms used for topic reconstruction

IF 4.1 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Quantitative Science Studies Pub Date : 2022-10-10 DOI:10.1162/qss_a_00217
Matthias Held
{"title":"Know thy tools! Limits of popular algorithms used for topic reconstruction","authors":"Matthias Held","doi":"10.1162/qss_a_00217","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract To reconstruct topics in bibliometric networks, one must use algorithms. Specifically, researchers often apply algorithms from the class of network community detection algorithms (such as the Louvain algorithm) that are general-purpose algorithms not intentionally programmed for a bibliometric task. Each algorithm has specific properties “inscribed,” which distinguish it from the others. It can thus be assumed that different algorithms are more or less suitable for a given bibliometric task. However, the suitability of a specific algorithm when it is applied for topic reconstruction is rarely reflected upon. Why choose this algorithm and not another? In this study, I assess the suitability of four community detection algorithms for topic reconstruction, by first deriving the properties of the phenomenon to be reconstructed—topics—and comparing if these match with the properties of the algorithms. The results suggest that the previous use of these algorithms for bibliometric purposes cannot be justified by their specific suitability for this task.","PeriodicalId":34021,"journal":{"name":"Quantitative Science Studies","volume":"3 1","pages":"1054-1078"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quantitative Science Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00217","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Abstract To reconstruct topics in bibliometric networks, one must use algorithms. Specifically, researchers often apply algorithms from the class of network community detection algorithms (such as the Louvain algorithm) that are general-purpose algorithms not intentionally programmed for a bibliometric task. Each algorithm has specific properties “inscribed,” which distinguish it from the others. It can thus be assumed that different algorithms are more or less suitable for a given bibliometric task. However, the suitability of a specific algorithm when it is applied for topic reconstruction is rarely reflected upon. Why choose this algorithm and not another? In this study, I assess the suitability of four community detection algorithms for topic reconstruction, by first deriving the properties of the phenomenon to be reconstructed—topics—and comparing if these match with the properties of the algorithms. The results suggest that the previous use of these algorithms for bibliometric purposes cannot be justified by their specific suitability for this task.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
了解你的工具!主题重构常用算法的局限性
摘要要重构文献计量网络中的主题,必须使用算法。具体而言,研究人员经常应用网络社区检测算法类别中的算法(如Louvain算法),这些算法是通用算法,并非有意为文献计量任务编程。每种算法都有特定的“内接”属性,这些属性将其与其他算法区分开来。因此,可以假设不同的算法或多或少适合于给定的文献计量任务。然而,当特定算法应用于主题重构时,其适用性很少得到反映。为什么选择这个算法而不选择另一个?在这项研究中,我评估了四种社区检测算法对主题重建的适用性,首先推导出要重建的现象的性质——主题——并比较这些性质是否与算法的性质相匹配。结果表明,以前将这些算法用于文献计量目的并不能因为它们对这项任务的特定适用性而证明其合理性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Quantitative Science Studies
Quantitative Science Studies INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
12.10
自引率
12.50%
发文量
46
审稿时长
22 weeks
期刊介绍:
期刊最新文献
Technological Impact of Funded Research: A Case Study of Non-Patent References Socio-cultural factors and academic openness of world countries Scope and limitations of library metrics for the assessment of ebook usage: COUNTER R5 and link resolver The rise of responsible metrics as a professional reform movement: A collective action frames account New methodologies for the digital age? How methods (re-)organize research using social media data
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1