Assessing the profile of top Brazilian computer science researchers

Quantitative and qualitative studies of scientific performance provide a measure of scientific productivity and represent a stimulus for improving research quality. Whatever the goal (e.g., hiring, firing, promoting or funding), such analyses may inform research agencies on directions for funding policies. In this article, we perform a data-driven assessment of the performance of top Brazilian computer science researchers considering three central dimensions: career length, number of students mentored, and volume of publications and citations. In addition, we analyze the researchers’ publishing strategy, based upon their area of expertise and their focus on venues of different impact. Our findings demonstrate that it is necessary to go beyond counting publications to assess research quality and show the importance of considering the peculiarities of different areas of expertise while carrying out such an assessment.

[1]  M. Lamont.  Toward a Comparative Sociology of Valuation and Evaluation , 2012 .

[2]  Roberto de Camargo Penteado Filho,et al.  Comments on the article “Brazil’s growing production of scientific articles-how are we doing with review articles and other qualitative indicators?” by Elenara Chaves Edler de Almeida and Jorge Almeida Guimarães: Scientometrics (2013) 97:287–315. doi: 10.1007/s11192-013-0967-y , 2014, Scientometrics.

[3]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  A new classification scheme of science fields and subfields designed for scientometric evaluation purposes , 2004, Scientometrics.

[4]  Eduardo A. Oliveira,et al.  Comparison of Brazilian researchers in clinical medicine: are criteria for ranking well-adjusted? , 2011, Scientometrics.

[5]  魏屹东,et al.  Scientometrics , 2018, Encyclopedia of Big Data.

[6]  Aziz Kutlar,et al.  Contributions of Turkish academicians supervising PhD dissertations and their universities to economics: an evaluation of the 1990–2011 period , 2013, Scientometrics.

[7]  J. Lane.  Let's make science metrics more scientific , 2010, Nature.

[8]  Paolo Giudici,et al.  On a statistical h index , 2013, Scientometrics.

[9]  Peter Ingwersen,et al.  Influence of a performance indicator on Danish research production and citation impact 2000–12 , 2014, Scientometrics.

[10]  Clément Bosquet,et al.  Are academics who publish more also more cited? Individual determinants of publication and citation records , 2013, Scientometrics.

[11]  Luciano A. Digiampietri,et al.  Brazilian bibliometric coauthorship networks , 2014, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[12]  Wagner Meira,et al.  Analyzing the Coauthorship Networks of Latin American Computer Science Research Groups , 2014, 2014 9th Latin American Web Congress.

[13]  Rodrygo L. T. Santos,et al.  Aggregating productivity indices for ranking researchers across multiple areas , 2013, JCDL '13.

[14]  Carlos José Pereira de Lucena,et al.  Assessing the research and education quality of the top Brazilian Computer Science graduate programs , 2008, SGCS.

[15]  Benedetto Torrisi.  A multidimensional approach to academic productivity , 2013, Scientometrics.

[16]  Marcos André Gonçalves,et al.  A brief survey of automatic methods for author name disambiguation , 2012, SGMD.

[17]  Marcos André Gonçalves,et al.  An unsupervised heuristic-based hierarchical method for name disambiguation in bibliographic citations , 2010, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

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

[19]  Elenara Chaves Edler de Almeida,et al.  Brazil’s growing production of scientific articles—how are we doing with review articles and other qualitative indicators? , 2013, Scientometrics.

[20]  Cinzia Daraio,et al.  Age effects in scientific productivity , 2003, Scientometrics.

[21]  Simone Diniz Junqueira Barbosa,et al.  INTERACTING WITH PUBLIC POLICYAre HCI researchers an endangered species in Brazil? , 2011, INTR.

[22]  Keith H. Coble,et al.  Evaluating top faculty researchers and the incentives that motivate them , 2013, Scientometrics.

[23]  Jacques Wainer,et al.  How productivity and impact differ across computer science subareas , 2013, CACM.

[24]  Mauno Vihinen,et al.  National research contributions: A case study on Finnish biomedical research , 2008, Scientometrics.

[25]  Byung-Won On,et al.  Are your citations clean? , 2007, CACM.

[26]  Giovanni Abramo,et al.  National research assessment exercises: the effects of changing the rules of the game during the game , 2011, Scientometrics.

[27]  Jacques Wainer,et al.  Scientific production in Computer Science: A comparative study of Brazil and other countries , 2009, Scientometrics.

[28]  Mohammed J. Zaki,et al.  Multi-label Lazy Associative Classification , 2007, PKDD.

[29]  Virgílio A. F. Almeida,et al.  A geographical analysis of knowledge production in computer science , 2009, WWW '09.

[30]  Cassidy R. Sugimoto,et al.  Biobibliometric profiling: An examination of multifaceted approaches to scholarship , 2012, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[31]  Jayshree Mamtora,et al.  Environmental sciences research in northern Australia, 2000–2011: a bibliometric analysis within the context of a national research assessment exercise , 2013, Scientometrics.

[32]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  Science in Brazil. Part 1: A macro-level comparative study , 2006, Scientometrics.

[33]  Jirí Vanecek.  The effect of performance-based research funding on output of R&D results in the Czech Republic , 2013, Scientometrics.

[34]  Asao Ando,et al.  The relationship between research performance and international collaboration in chemistry , 2013, Scientometrics.

[35]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  Science in Brazil. Part 2: Sectoral and institutional research profiles , 2006, Scientometrics.

[36]  Concha Bielza,et al.  Cluster methods for assessing research performance: exploring Spanish computer science , 2013, Scientometrics.