Network of scientific concepts: empirical analysis and modeling

Concepts in a certain domain of science are linked via intrinsic connections reflecting the structure of knowledge. To get a qualitative insight and a quantitative description of this structure, we perform empirical analysis and modeling of the network of scientific concepts in the domain of physics. To this end we use a collection of manuscripts submitted to the e-print repository arXiv and the vocabulary of scientific concepts collected via the ScienceWISE.info platform and construct a network of scientific concepts based on their co-occurrences in publications. The resulting complex network possesses a number of specific features (high node density, dissortativity, structural correlations, skewed node degree distribution) that can not be understood as a result of simple growth by several commonly used network models. We show that the model based on a simultaneous account of two factors, growth by blocks and preferential selection, gives an explanation of empirically observed properties of the concepts network.

[1]  Albert,et al.  Emergence of scaling in random networks , 1999, Science.

[2]  Alexandru Constantin,et al.  Automatic structure and keyphrase analysis of scientific publications , 2014 .

[3]  Jari Saramäki,et al.  The evolution of interdisciplinarity in physics research , 2012, Scientific Reports.

[4]  Andrey Rzhetsky,et al.  Tradition and Innovation in Scientists’ Research Strategies , 2013, ArXiv.

[5]  David C. Roberts,et al.  Mapping the Evolution of Scientific Fields , 2009, PloS one.

[6]  P. McClintock.  Introduction to the theory of complex systems , 2019, Contemporary Physics.

[7]  S. Thurner,et al.  The role of mainstreamness and interdisciplinarity for the relevance of scientific papers , 2019, PloS one.

[8]  Marta Fehér,et al.  The essential tension , 1990 .

[9]  Scott A. Huettel,et al.  Mapping the Semantic Structure of Cognitive Neuroscience , 2014, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[10]  Stefan Thurner,et al.  Complex systems: physics beyond physics , 2016, 1610.01002.

[11]  Vito Latora,et al.  Network dynamics of innovation processes , 2017, Physical review letters.

[12]  Vittorio Loreto,et al.  Collective dynamics of social annotation , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[13]  R. Luce,et al.  A method of matrix analysis of group structure , 1949, Psychometrika.

[14]  Ginestra Bianconi,et al.  Scale-free networks with an exponent less than two. , 2006, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[15]  P. Wolfe,et al.  Nonparametric graphon estimation , 2013, 1309.5936.

[16]  R. Kenna,et al.  Ising model with variable spin/agent strengths , 2020, Journal of Physics: Complexity.

[17]  Jian-Wei Wang,et al.  Evolving hypernetwork model , 2010 .

[18]  Yurij Holovatch,et al.  Bipartite Graph Analysis as an Alternative to Reveal Clusterization in Complex Systems , 2018, 2018 IEEE Second International Conference on Data Stream Mining & Processing (DSMP).

[19]  Yurij Holovatch,et al.  Embedding technique and network analysis of scientific innovations emergence in an arXiv-based concept network , 2020, 2020 IEEE Third International Conference on Data Stream Mining & Processing (DSMP).

[20]  Ludo Waltman,et al.  Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping , 2009, Scientometrics.

[21]  Mario Krenn,et al.  Predicting research trends with semantic and neural networks with an application in quantum physics , 2019, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[22]  H. Stanley,et al.  The science of science: from the perspective of complex systems , 2017 .

[23]  Michel A. Picardo,et al.  GABAergic Hub Neurons Orchestrate Synchrony in Developing Hippocampal Networks , 2009, Science.

[24]  Stefan Thurner,et al.  Introduction to the Theory of Complex Systems , 2018, Oxford Scholarship Online.

[25]  Jeffrey Johnson,et al.  Hypernetworks in the Science of Complex Systems , 2013, Series on Complexity Science.

[26]  Emily B. Fox,et al.  Sparse graphs using exchangeable random measures , 2014, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B, Statistical methodology.

[27]  Diego Garlaschelli,et al.  Ground truth? Concept-based communities versus the external classification of physics manuscripts , 2016, EPJ Data Science.

[28]  A mechanism for evolution of the physical concepts network , 2021, 2106.01022.

[29]  Jacob G Foster,et al.  Choosing experiments to accelerate collective discovery , 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[30]  M E J Newman.  Assortative mixing in networks. , 2002, Physical review letters.

[31]  Chuang Liu,et al.  The aging effect in evolving scientific citation networks , 2021, Scientometrics.

[32]  Ginestra Bianconi,et al.  Dense Power-law Networks and Simplicial Complexes , 2018, Physical review. E.

[33]  P. Diaconis,et al.  Graph limits and exchangeable random graphs , 2007, 0712.2749.

[34]  Luciano da Fontoura Costa,et al.  Learning about knowledge: A complex network approach , 2006, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[35]  V. Sós,et al.  Convergent Sequences of Dense Graphs I: Subgraph Frequencies, Metric Properties and Testing , 2007, math/0702004.

[36]  L. D. Costa,et al.  Identifying the borders of mathematical knowledge , 2010 .

[37]  W. Myers,et al.  Atypical Combinations and Scientific Impact , 2013 .

[38]  John A. Barnden,et al.  Semantic Networks , 1998, Encyclopedia of Social Network Analysis and Mining.

[39]  Walter Dempsey,et al.  Edge exchangeable models for network data , 2016, ArXiv.

[40]  Andreas Abecker,et al.  Ontologies and the Semantic Web , 2011, Handbook of Semantic Web Technologies.

[41]  Giulio Cimini,et al.  Emergence of Scale-Free Leadership Structure in Social Recommender Systems , 2011, PloS one.