Nanotechnology as a field of science: Its delineation in terms of journals and patents

The Journal Citation Reports of the Science Citation Index 2004 were used to delineate a core set of nanotechnology journals and a nanotechnology-relevant set. In comparison with 2003, the core set has grown and the relevant set has decreased. This suggests a higher degree of codification in the field of nanotechnology: the field has become more focused in terms of citation practices. Using the citing patterns among journals at the aggregate level, a core group of ten nanotechnology journals in the vector space can be delineated on the criterion of betweenness centrality. National contributions to this core group of journals are evaluated for the years 2003, 2004, and 2005. Additionally, the specific class of nanotechnology patents in the database of the U. S. Patent and Trade Office (USPTO) is analyzed to determine if non-patent literature references can be used as a source for the delineation of the knowledge base in terms of scientific journals. The references are primarily to general science journals and letters, and therefore not specific enough for the purpose of delineating a journal set.

[1]  J. Youtie,et al.  Refining search terms for nanotechnology , 2008 .

[2]  Ronald Rousseau,et al.  Requirements for a cocitation similarity measure, with special reference to Pearson's correlation coefficient , 2003, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[3]  G. Gilbert.  Referencing as Persuasion , 1977 .

[4]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  The university-industry knowledge relationship: Analyzing patents and the science base of technologies , 2004, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[5]  Jean King.  A review of bibliometric and other science indicators and their role in research evaluation , 1987, J. Inf. Sci..

[6]  Satoru Kawai,et al.  An Algorithm for Drawing General Undirected Graphs , 1989, Inf. Process. Lett..

[7]  Harry Rothman,et al.  An experiment in science mapping for research planning , 1986 .

[8]  Jean Pierre Courtial,et al.  The use of patent titles for identifying the topics of invention and forecasting trends , 1993, Scientometrics.

[9]  Leonard M. Freeman,et al.  A set of measures of centrality based upon betweenness , 1977 .

[10]  G. Heimeriks,et al.  Disciplinary, Multidisciplinary, Interdisciplinary: Concepts and Indicators. , 2001 .

[11]  George W. Furnas,et al.  Pictures of relevance: A geometric analysis of similarity measures , 1987, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[12]  M. Meyer,et al.  Nanotechnology-interdisciplinarity, patterns of collaboration and differences in application , 1998, Scientometrics.

[13]  Chaomei Chen,et al.  CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature , 2006, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[14]  Tibor Braun,et al.  Nanoscience and nanotecnology on the balance , 1997, Scientometrics.

[15]  L. Freeman.  Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification , 1978 .

[16]  R. Kostoff.  The (scientific) wealth of nations , 2004 .

[17]  Deepak Hegde,et al.  Examiner Citations, Applicant Citations, and the Private Value of Patents , 2009 .

[18]  Martin Meyer,et al.  Patent Citations in a Novel Field of Technology — What Can They Tell about Interactions between Emerging Communities of Science and Technology? , 2000, Scientometrics.

[19]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Tracking areas of strategic importance using scientometric journal mappings , 1994 .

[20]  RousseauRonald,et al.  Requirements for a cocitation similarity measure, with special reference to Pearson's correlation coefficient , 2003 .

[21]  Vladimir Batagelj,et al.  Centrality in Social Networks , 1993 .

[22]  Loet Leydesdroff.  Words and co-words as indicators of intellectual organization , 1989 .

[23]  Michael McGill,et al.  Introduction to Modern Information Retrieval , 1983 .

[24]  Miranda Lee Pao,et al.  A discipline-specific journal selection algorithm , 1986, Inf. Process. Manag..

[25]  Michel Zitt,et al.  Delineating complex scientific fields by an hybrid lexical-citation method: An application to nanosciences , 2006, Inf. Process. Manag..

[26]  Manuel Trajtenberg,et al.  Patents, Citations, and Innovations: A Window on the Knowledge Economy , 2002 .

[27]  Henry Small,et al.  Cited Documents as Concept Symbols , 1978 .

[28]  R. May.  The Scientific Wealth of Nations , 1997, Science.

[29]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Dynamic and evolutionary updates of classificatory schemes in scientific journal structures , 2002, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[30]  John Phillip Immroth,et al.  A guide to Library of Congress classification , 1968 .

[31]  M. Callon,et al.  Is indexing trustworthy? Classification of articles through co-word analysis , 1984 .

[32]  Loet Leydesdorff.  Words and co-words as indicators of intellectual organization , 1989 .

[33]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Betweenness centrality as an indicator of the interdisciplinarity of scientific journals , 2007, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[34]  H. Kroto,et al.  C 60 Buckminsterfullerene , 1990 .

[35]  B. Sampat.  Patenting and US academic research in the 20th century: The world before and after Bayh-Dole , 2006 .

[36]  M. Scheu,et al.  Mapping nanotechnology patents: The EPO approach , 2006 .

[37]  P. Zhou,et al.  The Emergence of China as a Leading Nation in Science. Research Policy, 35(1), 2006, 83-104. , 2006, 0911.3421.

[38]  Robert T. Averitt.  The Economics and Management of Intellectual Property: Towards Intellectual Capitalism , 2000 .

[39]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  The delineation of specialties in terms of journals using the dynamic journal set of the SCI , 2005, Scientometrics.

[40]  Martin Meyer,et al.  Are patenting scientists the better scholars?: An exploratory comparison of inventor-authors with their non-inventing peers in nano-science and technology , 2006 .

[41]  C. Fox,et al.  A new Cold War , 2004 .

[42]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Can scientific journals be classified in terms of aggregated journal-journal citation relations using the Journal Citation Reports? , 2009, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[43]  Kimberly S. Hamilton,et al.  The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science , 1997 .

[44]  Robert L. Goldstone,et al.  The Import and Export of Cognitive Science , 2006, Cogn. Sci..