Co-ranking Authors and Documents in a Heterogeneous Network

Recent graph-theoretic approaches have demonstrated remarkable successes for ranking networked entities, but most of their applications are limited to homogeneous networks such as the network of citations between publications. This paper proposes a novel method for co-ranking authors and their publications using several networks: the social network connecting the authors, the citation network connecting the publications, as well as the authorship network that ties the previous two together. The new co-ranking framework is based on coupling two random walks, that separately rank authors and documents following the PageRankparadigm. As a result, improved rankings of documents and their authors depend on each other in a mutually reinforcing way, thus taking advantage of the additional information implicit in the heterogeneous network of authors and documents.

[1]  E. Garfield.  Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation. , 1972, Science.

[2]  Gabriel Pinski,et al.  Citation influence for journal aggregates of scientific publications: Theory, with application to the literature of physics , 1976, Inf. Process. Manag..

[3]  Sheldon M. Ross,et al.  Stochastic Processes , 2018, Gauge Integral Structures for Stochastic Calculus and Quantum Electrodynamics.

[4]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  Journal citation measures: a concise review , 1988, J. Inf. Sci..

[5]  Sergey Brin,et al.  The Anatomy of a Large-Scale Hypertextual Web Search Engine , 1998, Comput. Networks.

[6]  C. Lee Giles,et al.  CiteSeer: an automatic citation indexing system , 1998, DL '98.

[7]  M. KleinbergJon.  Authoritative sources in a hyperlinked environment , 1999 .

[8]  Jaana Kekäläinen,et al.  IR evaluation methods for retrieving highly relevant documents , 2000, SIGIR '00.

[9]  Matthew Richardson,et al.  Mining the network value of customers , 2001, KDD '01.

[10]  Hongyuan Zha,et al.  Generic summarization and keyphrase extraction using mutual reinforcement principle and sentence clustering , 2002, SIGIR '02.

[11]  Padhraic Smyth,et al.  Algorithms for estimating relative importance in networks , 2003, KDD '03.

[12]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  Latent Dirichlet Allocation , 2001, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[13]  Allan Borodin,et al.  Link analysis ranking: algorithms, theory, and experiments , 2005, TOIT.

[14]  Sune Lehmann,et al.  Measures and Mismeasures of Scientific Quality , 2005 .

[15]  Johan Bollen,et al.  Co-authorship networks in the digital library research community , 2005, Inf. Process. Manag..

[16]  Peter Weingart,et al.  Impact of bibliometrics upon the science system: Inadvertent consequences? , 2005, Scientometrics.

[17]  Franco Scarselli,et al.  Inside PageRank , 2005, TOIT.

[18]  Foster Provost,et al.  Suspicion scoring of networked entities based on guilt-by-association, collective inference, and focused data access 1 , 2005 .

[19]  J. E. Hirsch,et al.  An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output , 2005, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA.

[20]  Foster Provost,et al.  Suspicion scoring based on guilt-by-association, colle ctive inference, and focused data access 1 , 2005 .

[21]  Yannis Manolopoulos,et al.  A new perspective to automatically rank scientific conferences using digital libraries , 2005, Inf. Process. Manag..

[22]  Johan Bollen,et al.  Journal status , 2006, Scientometrics.

[23]  Dale Schuurmans,et al.  Information Marginalization on Subgraphs , 2006, PKDD.

[24]  Sergei Maslov,et al.  Finding scientific gems with Google's PageRank algorithm , 2006, J. Informetrics.

[25]  Stanley Wasserman,et al.  Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications , 1994, Structural analysis in the social sciences.

[26]  Aaas News,et al.  Book Reviews , 1893, Buffalo Medical and Surgical Journal.