Static and Dynamic Aspects of Scientific Collaboration Networks

Collaboration networks arise when we map the connections between scientists which are formed through joint publications. These networks thus display the social structure of academia, and also allow conclusions about the structure of scientific knowledge. Using the computer science publication database DBLP, we compile relations between authors and publications as graphs and proceed with examining and quantifying collaborative relations with graph-based methods. We review standard properties of the network and rank authors and publications by centrality. Additionally, we detect communities with modularity-based clustering and compare the resulting clusters to a ground-truth based on conferences and thus topical similarity. In a second part, we are the first to combine DBLP network data with data from the Dagstuhl Seminars: We investigate whether seminars of this kind, as social and academic events designed to connect researchers, leave a visible track in the structure of the collaboration network. Our results suggest that such single events are not influential enough to change the network structure significantly. However, the network structure seems to influence a participant's decision to accept or decline an invitation.

[1]  P. Bonacich.  Factoring and weighting approaches to status scores and clique identification , 1972 .

[2]  M. Newman,et al.  The structure of scientific collaboration networks. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[3]  Schloss Dagstuhl , .

[4]  Marko A. Rodriguez,et al.  On the relationship between the structural and socioacademic communities of a coauthorship network , 2008, J. Informetrics.

[5]  Weimao Ke,et al.  Studying the emerging global brain: Analyzing and visualizing the impact of co-authorship teams , 2005, Complex..

[6]  Jean-Loup Guillaume,et al.  Fast unfolding of communities in large networks , 2008, 0803.0476.

[7]  Michael Johnston,et al.  Hyper-edges and multidimensional centrality , 2004, Soc. Networks.

[8]  Dongwon Lee,et al.  On six degrees of separation in DBLP-DB and more , 2005, SGMD.

[9]  Ulrik Brandes,et al.  On Modularity Clustering , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.

[10]  M E J Newman,et al.  Finding and evaluating community structure in networks. , 2003, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[11]  Dimitrios M. Thilikos,et al.  Evaluating Cooperation in Communities with the k-Core Structure , 2011, 2011 International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining.

[12]  Andreas Noack,et al.  Multilevel local search algorithms for modularity clustering , 2011, JEAL.

[13]  M. Newman,et al.  Scientific collaboration networks. II. Shortest paths, weighted networks, and centrality. , 2001, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[14]  Santo Fortunato,et al.  Limits of modularity maximization in community detection , 2011, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[15]  M. Newman.  Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[16]  John Scott.  Social Network Analysis , 1988 .

[17]  M E Newman,et al.  Scientific collaboration networks. I. Network construction and fundamental results. , 2001, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.