Capturing new developments in an emerging technology: an updated search strategy for identifying nanotechnology research outputs

Bibliometric analysis of publication metadata is an important tool for investigating emerging fields of technology. However, the application of field definitions to define an emerging technology is complicated by ongoing and at times rapid change in the underlying technology itself. There is limited prior work on adapting the bibliometric definitions of emerging technologies as these technologies change over time. The paper addresses this gap. We draw on the example of the modular keyword nanotechnology search strategy developed at Georgia Institute of Technology in 2006. This search approach has seen extensive use in analyzing emerging trends in nanotechnology research and innovation. Yet with the growth of the nanotechnology field, novel materials, particles, technologies, and tools have appeared. We report on the process and results of reviewing and updating this nanotechnology search strategy. By employing structured text-mining software to profile keyword terms, and by soliciting input from domain experts, we identify new nanotechnology-related keywords. We retroactively apply the revised evolutionary lexical query to 20 years of publication data and analyze the results. Our findings indicate that the updated search approach offers an incremental improvement over the original strategy in terms of recall and precision. Additionally, the updated strategy reveals the importance for nanotechnology of several emerging cited-subject categories, particularly in the biomedical sciences, suggesting a further extension of the nanotechnology knowledge domain. The implications of the work for applying bibliometric definitions to emerging technologies are discussed.

[1]  Andrei Mogoutov,et al.  Data search strategy for science and technology emergence: A scalable and evolutionary query for nanotechnology tracking , 2007 .

[2]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Nanotechnology as a field of science: Its delineation in terms of journals and patents , 2007, Scientometrics.

[3]  J. Youtie,et al.  Nanodistricts in the United States: Metropolitan Trajectories and Clustering (December 2007) , 2007, 2007 Atlanta Conference on Science, Technology and Innovation Policy.

[4]  Philip Shapira,et al.  From lab to market? Strategies and issues in the commercialization of nanotechnology in China , 2009 .

[5]  Imre Lakatos,et al.  The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes , 1978 .

[6]  J. Youtie,et al.  How interdisciplinary is nanotechnology? , 2009, Journal of nanoparticle research : an interdisciplinary forum for nanoscale science and technology.

[7]  P. Shapira,et al.  Follow the money , 2010, Nature.

[8]  M. Markus,et al.  Fluctuation theorem for a deterministic one-particle system. , 2004, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[9]  Minghua Zhang,et al.  Nanoscience and nanotechnology: evolving definitions and growing footprint on the scientific landscape. , 2011, Small.

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

[11]  Mihail C. Roco,et al.  Nanoscale Science and Engineering: Unifying and Transforming Tools , 2004 .

[12]  J. Youtie,et al.  Nanotechnology publications and citations by leading countries and blocs , 2008 .

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

[14]  Ivan Amato,et al.  Report to the President and Congress on the Third Assessment of the National Nanotechnology Initiative. , 2010 .

[15]  A. Porter,et al.  Profiling Leading Scientists in Nanobiomedical Science: Interdisciplinarity and Potential Leading Indicators of Research Directions , 2011 .

[16]  Phillip Bonacich,et al.  Some unique properties of eigenvector centrality , 2007, Soc. Networks.

[17]  J D Beckham Follow the money. , 1995, The Healthcare Forum journal.

[18]  Fredric C. Gey,et al.  The Relationship between Recall and Precision , 1994, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[19]  Minghua Zhang,et al.  The ongoing proliferation of nano journals. , 2012, Nature nanotechnology.

[20]  Ismael Rafols,et al.  Global maps of science based on the new Web-of-Science categories , 2012, Scientometrics.

[21]  Can Huang,et al.  Nanoscience and technology publications and patents: a review of social science studies and search strategies , 2011 .

[22]  Britta Ruhnau,et al.  Eigenvector-centrality - a node-centrality? , 2000, Soc. Networks.

[23]  Jingjing Zhang,et al.  Language trends in nanoscience and technology: The case of Chinese-language publications , 2007, Scientometrics.

[24]  Jan Youtie,et al.  Emergence of Nanodistricts in the United States , 2008 .

[25]  Alan L. Porter,et al.  Bibliometric discovery of innovation and commercialization pathways in nanotechnology , 2011, 2011 Proceedings of PICMET '11: Technology Management in the Energy Smart World (PICMET).

[26]  Alan L. Porter,et al.  Science overlay maps: A new tool for research policy and library management , 2009, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[27]  Nathan A. Baker,et al.  NanoParticle Ontology for cancer nanotechnology research , 2011, J. Biomed. Informatics.

[28]  Michel Zitt,et al.  Hybrid citation-word representations in science mapping: Portolan charts of research fields? , 2011, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[29]  Alan L. Porter,et al.  Is there a shift to “active nanostructures”? , 2009, Journal of nanoparticle research : an interdisciplinary forum for nanoscale science and technology.

[30]  Fredric C. Gey,et al.  The relationship between recall and precision , 1994 .

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

[32]  J. Nicolaisen Bibliometrics and Citation Analysis: From the Science Citation Index to Cybermetrics , 2010 .

[33]  M. Newman Analysis of weighted networks. , 2004, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.