Recherche scientifique (14/01/09)

- Top 20 Countries in ALL FIELDS, 1998-August 31, 2008
- Most-Cited Paper From the Top 20 Countries, 1998-August 31, 2008
(source: Science Watch / via Stephen's Lighthouse, 08/01/09)
- Funding UK Research
(source: The Scholarly Kitchen, 12/01/09)
"The Research Assessment Exercise is slow and expensive. Abandoning peer-review for quantitative assessment may lead to excessive gaming and corrupt the indicators of quality."
- Développement des indicateurs bibliométriques de qualité de recherche au Royaume-Uni
(source: ambassade de France à Londres / via Prosper, 12/01/09)
"Le Service pour la science et la technologie, de l'ambassade de France à Londres, publie un article sur le projet de réforme du Research Asessment Exercice (RAE), qui a démarré à la fin de l'année 2006. Le RAE évalue périodiquement la recherche universitaire britannique. Cet article « expose une étude ayant cherché à explorer et tenter de résoudre une série de problèmes techniques dans l'optique de développer des méthodes bibliographiques permettant de produire les indicateurs appropriés de qualité de recherche. L'objectif est de conseiller l'organisme en charge du RAE sur les choix et l'utilisation de tels indicateurs lors d'un exercice pilote qui sera mis en place dans un avenir proche. »"
- Publication du rapport "Indicateurs de sciences et de technologies"
(source OST (France) / via Prosper, 12/01/09)
Document payant.
- Content-based and Algorithmic Classifications of Journals: Perspectives on the Dynamics of Scientific Communication and Indexer Effects
(source: arXiv, 12/01/09)
"The aggregated journal-journal citation matrix -based on the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) of the Science Citation Index- can be decomposed by indexers and/or algorithmically. In this study, we test the results of two recently available algorithms for the decomposition of large matrices against two content-based classifications of journals: the ISI Subject Categories and the field/subfield classification of Glaenzel & Schubert (2003). The content-based schemes allow for the attribution of more than a single category to a journal, whereas the algorithms maximize the ratio of within-category citations over between-category citations in the aggregated category-category citation matrix. By adding categories, indexers generate between-category citations, which may enrich the database, for example, in the case of inter-disciplinary developments. The consequent indexer effects are significant in sparse areas of the matrix more than in denser ones. Algorithmic decompositions, on the other hand, are more heavily skewed towards a relatively small number of categories, while this is deliberately counter-acted upon in the case of content-based classifications. Because of the indexer effects, science policy studies and the sociology of science should be careful when using content-based classifications, which are made for bibliographic disclosure, and not for the purpose of analyzing latent structures in scientific communications. Despite the large differences among them, the four classification schemes enable us to generate surprisingly similar maps of science at the global level. Erroneous classifications are cancelled as noise at the aggregate level, but may disturb the evaluation locally."
- Un nouveau projet pour permettre aux scientifiques d’accéder librement à la littérature sur la physique des particules
(source: Intellectual Property Watch, 13/01/09)
"Alors que le prix des abonnements aux revues de physique des particules ne cesse d’augmenter, rendant difficile pour certains chercheurs de pouvoir accéder à des articles importants relus par des pairs, de grands physiciens ont mis en place un modèle alternatif de diffusion en libre accès []."
- Validating Multiple Metrics As Substitutes for Expert Evaluation of Research Performance
(source: Open Access Archivangelism, 13/10/09)