Computer science fields as ground-truth communities: Their impact, rise and fall

Study of community in time-varying graphs has been limited to its detection and identification across time. However, presence of time provides us with the opportunity to analyze the interaction patterns of the communities, understand how each individual community grows/shrinks, becomes important over time. This paper, for the first time, systematically studies the temporal interaction patterns of communities using a large scale citation network (directed and unweighted) of computer science. Each individual community in a citation network is naturally defined by a research field - i.e., acting as ground-truth - and their interactions through citations in real time can unfold the landscape of dynamic research trends in the computer science domain over the last fifty years. These interactions are quantified in terms of a metric called inwardness that captures the effect of local citations to express the degree of authoritativeness of a community (research field) at a particular time instance. Several arguments to unveil the reasons behind the temporal changes of inwardness of different communities are put forward using exhaustive statistical analysis. The measurements (importance of field) are compared with the project funding statistics of NSF and it is found that the two are in sync. We believe that this measurement study with a large real-world data is an important initial step towards understanding the dynamics of cluster-interactions in a temporal environment. Note that this paper, for the first time, systematically outlines a new avenue of research that one can practice post community detection.

[1]  Jie Tang,et al.  ArnetMiner: extraction and mining of academic social networks , 2008, KDD.

[2]  M E J Newman,et al.  Community structure in social and biological networks , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[3]  Jure Leskovec,et al.  Overlapping community detection at scale: a nonnegative matrix factorization approach , 2013, WSDM.

[4]  Claudio Castellano,et al.  Defining and identifying communities in networks. , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[5]  John D. Lafferty,et al.  Dynamic topic models , 2006, ICML.

[6]  R. Rousseau,et al.  The R- and AR-indices: Complementing the h-index , 2007 .

[7]  Derek Greene,et al.  Tracking the Evolution of Communities in Dynamic Social Networks , 2010, 2010 International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining.

[8]  Yoshiyuki Takeda,et al.  Detecting emerging research fronts based on topological measures in citation networks of scientific publications , 2008 .

[9]  William W. Cohen,et al.  Proceedings of the 23rd international conference on Machine learning , 2006, ICML 2008.

[10]  Jure Leskovec,et al.  Defining and evaluating network communities based on ground-truth , 2012, Knowledge and Information Systems.

[11]  C. Lee Giles,et al.  Efficient identification of Web communities , 2000, KDD '00.

[12]  Christos Faloutsos,et al.  Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining , 2013, ASONAM 2013.

[13]  Myra Spiliopoulou,et al.  MONIC: modeling and monitoring cluster transitions , 2006, KDD '06.

[14]  Vikas Kawadia,et al.  Sequential detection of temporal communities by estrangement confinement , 2012, Scientific Reports.

[15]  S Bornholdt,et al.  Emergence and decline of scientific paradigms. , 2011, Physical review letters.

[16]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  The relation between Pearson's correlation coefficient r and Salton's cosine measure , 2009, ArXiv.

[17]  Boleslaw K. Szymanski,et al.  Overlapping community detection in networks: The state-of-the-art and comparative study , 2011, CSUR.

[18]  A. Clauset.  Finding local community structure in networks. , 2005, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[19]  Ronald Rousseau,et al.  Real and rational variants of the h-index and the g-index , 2009, J. Informetrics.

[20]  Ralf Klamma,et al.  The Structure of the Computer Science Knowledge Network , 2010, 2010 International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining.