-
Unraveling Retraction Dynamics in COVID-19 Research: Patterns, Reasons, and Implications
Authors:
Parul Khurana,
Ziya Uddin,
Kiran Sharma
Abstract:
Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, while the world sought solutions, some scholars exploited the situation for personal gains through deceptive studies and manipulated data. This paper presents the extent of 400 retracted COVID-19 papers listed by the Retraction Watch database until February 2024. The primary purpose of the research was to analyze journal quality and retraction trends. For all stakeholde…
▽ More
Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, while the world sought solutions, some scholars exploited the situation for personal gains through deceptive studies and manipulated data. This paper presents the extent of 400 retracted COVID-19 papers listed by the Retraction Watch database until February 2024. The primary purpose of the research was to analyze journal quality and retraction trends. For all stakeholders involved, such as editors, relevant researchers, and policymakers, evaluating the journal's quality is crucial information since it could help them effectively stop such incidents and their negative effects in the future. The present research results imply that one-fourth of publications were retracted within the first month of their publication, followed by an additional 6\% within six months of publication. One-third of the retractions originated from Q1 journals, with another significant portion coming from Q2 (29.8). A notable percentage of the retracted papers (23.2\%) lacked publishing impact, signifying their publication as conference papers or in journals not indexed by Scopus. An examination of the retraction reasons reveals that one-fourth of retractions were due to numerous causes, mostly in Q2 journals, and another quarter were due to data problems, with the majority happening in Q1 publications. Elsevier retracted 31 of the papers, with the majority published in Q1, followed by Springer (11.5), predominantly in Q2. Retracted papers were mainly associated with the USA, China, and India. In the USA, retractions were primarily from Q1 journals followed by no-impact publications; in China, it was Q1 followed by Q2, and in India, it was Q2 followed by no-impact publications. The study also examined author contributions, revealing that 69.3 were male contributors, with females (30.7) mainly holding middle author positions.
△ Less
Submitted 26 March, 2024;
originally announced April 2024.
-
Phylo2Vec: a vector representation for binary trees
Authors:
Matthew J Penn,
Neil Scheidwasser,
Mark P Khurana,
David A Duchêne,
Christl A Donnelly,
Samir Bhatt
Abstract:
Binary phylogenetic trees inferred from biological data are central to understanding the shared history among evolutionary units. However, inferring the placement of latent nodes in a tree is NP-hard and thus computationally expensive. State-of-the-art methods rely on carefully designed heuristics for tree search. These methods use different data structures for easy manipulation (e.g., classes in…
▽ More
Binary phylogenetic trees inferred from biological data are central to understanding the shared history among evolutionary units. However, inferring the placement of latent nodes in a tree is NP-hard and thus computationally expensive. State-of-the-art methods rely on carefully designed heuristics for tree search. These methods use different data structures for easy manipulation (e.g., classes in object-oriented programming languages) and readable representation of trees (e.g., Newick-format strings). Here, we present Phylo2Vec, a parsimonious encoding for phylogenetic trees that serves as a unified approach for both manipulating and representing phylogenetic trees. Phylo2Vec maps any binary tree with $n$ leaves to a unique integer vector of length $n-1$. The advantages of Phylo2Vec are fourfold: i) fast tree sampling, (ii) compressed tree representation compared to a Newick string, iii) quick and unambiguous verification if two binary trees are identical topologically, and iv) systematic ability to traverse tree space in very large or small jumps. As a proof of concept, we use Phylo2Vec for maximum likelihood inference on five real-world datasets and show that a simple hill-climbing-based optimisation scheme can efficiently traverse the vastness of tree space from a random to an optimal tree.
△ Less
Submitted 10 May, 2024; v1 submitted 25 April, 2023;
originally announced April 2023.
-
Emerging trends and collaboration patterns unveil the scientific production in blockchain technology: A bibliometric and network analysis from 2014-2020
Authors:
Kiran Sharma,
Parul Khurana
Abstract:
Significant attention in the financial industry has paved the way for blockchain technology to spread across other industries, resulting in a plethora of literature on the subject. This study approaches the subject through bibliometrics and network analysis of 6790 records extracted from the Web of Science from 2014-2020 based on blockchain. This study asserts (i) the impact of open access publica…
▽ More
Significant attention in the financial industry has paved the way for blockchain technology to spread across other industries, resulting in a plethora of literature on the subject. This study approaches the subject through bibliometrics and network analysis of 6790 records extracted from the Web of Science from 2014-2020 based on blockchain. This study asserts (i) the impact of open access publication on the growth and visibility of literature, (ii) the collaboration patterns and impact of team size on collaboration, (iii) the ranking of countries based on their national and international collaboration, and (iv) the major themes in the literature through thematic analysis. Based on the significant momentum gained by the blockchain, the trend of open access publications has increased 1.5 times than no open access in 2020. This analysis articulates the numerous potentials of blockchain literature and its adoption by various countries and their authors. China and the USA are the top leaders in the field and applied blockchain more with smart contracts, supply chain, and internet of things. Also, results show that blockchain has attracted the attention of less than 1% of authors who have contributed to multiple works on the blockchain and authors also preferred to work in teams smaller in size.
△ Less
Submitted 5 October, 2021;
originally announced October 2021.
-
Proof of Reference(PoR): A unified informetrics based consensus mechanism
Authors:
Parul Khurana,
Geetha Ganesan,
Gulshan Kumar,
Kiran Sharma
Abstract:
Bibliometrics is useful to analyze the research impact for measuring the research quality. Different bibliographic databases like Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar etc. are accessed for evaluating the trend of publications and citations from time to time. Some of these databases are free and some are subscription based. Its always debatable that which bibliographic database is better and in w…
▽ More
Bibliometrics is useful to analyze the research impact for measuring the research quality. Different bibliographic databases like Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar etc. are accessed for evaluating the trend of publications and citations from time to time. Some of these databases are free and some are subscription based. Its always debatable that which bibliographic database is better and in what terms. To provide an optimal solution to availability of multiple bibliographic databases, we have implemented a single authentic database named as ``conflate'' which can be used for fetching publication and citation trend of an author. To further strengthen the generated database and to provide the transparent system to the stakeholders, a consensus mechanism ``proof of reference (PoR)'' is proposed. Due to three consent based checks implemented in PoR, we feel that it could be considered as a authentic and honest citation data source for the calculation of unified informetrics for an author.
△ Less
Submitted 1 July, 2021;
originally announced July 2021.
-
A weighted unified informetrics based on Scopus and WoS
Authors:
Parul Khurana,
Geetha Ganesan,
Gulshan Kumar,
Kiran Sharma
Abstract:
Numerous indexing databases keep track of the number of publications, citations, etc. in order to maintain the progress of science and individual. However, the choice of journals and articles varies among these indexing databases, hence the number of citations and h-index varies. There is no common platform exists that can provide a single count for the number of publications, citations, h-index,…
▽ More
Numerous indexing databases keep track of the number of publications, citations, etc. in order to maintain the progress of science and individual. However, the choice of journals and articles varies among these indexing databases, hence the number of citations and h-index varies. There is no common platform exists that can provide a single count for the number of publications, citations, h-index, etc. To overcome this limitation, we have proposed a weighted unified informetrics, named "conflate". The proposed system takes into account the input from multiple indexing databases and generates a single output. Here, we have used the data from Scopus and WoS to generate a conflate dataset. Further, a comparative analysis of conflate has been performed with Scopus and WoS at three levels: author, organization, and journal. Finally, a map** is proposed between research publications and distributed ledger technology in order to provide a transparent and distributed view to its stakeholders.
△ Less
Submitted 2 June, 2021;
originally announced June 2021.
-
Impact of $h$-index on authors ranking: An improvement to the h-index for lower-ranked author
Authors:
Parul Khurana,
Kiran Sharma
Abstract:
In academia, the research performance of a faculty is either evaluated by the number of publications or the number of citations. Most of the time h-index is widely used during the hiring process or the faculty performance evaluation. The calculation of the h-index is shown in various databases; however, there is no systematic evidence about the differences between them. Here we analyze the publica…
▽ More
In academia, the research performance of a faculty is either evaluated by the number of publications or the number of citations. Most of the time h-index is widely used during the hiring process or the faculty performance evaluation. The calculation of the h-index is shown in various databases; however, there is no systematic evidence about the differences between them. Here we analyze the publication records of 385 authors from Monash University (Australia) to investigate (i) the impact of different databases like Scopus and WoS on the ranking of authors within a discipline, and (ii) to complement the $h$-index, named $h_c$, by adding the weight of the highest cited paper to the $h$-index of the authors. The results show the positive impact of $h_c$ on the lower-ranked authors in every discipline. Also, Scopus provides an overall better ranking than WoS; however, the ranking varies among Scopus and WoS for disciplines.
△ Less
Submitted 18 May, 2021;
originally announced May 2021.
-
Impact of h-index on authors ranking: A comparative analysis of Scopus and WoS
Authors:
Parul Khurana,
Kiran Sharma
Abstract:
In academia, the research performance of the faculty members is either evaluated by the number of publications or the number of citations. Most of the time h-index is widely used during the hiring process or the faculty performance evaluation. The calculation of the h-index is shown in various databases; however, there is no recent or systematic evidence about the differences between them. In this…
▽ More
In academia, the research performance of the faculty members is either evaluated by the number of publications or the number of citations. Most of the time h-index is widely used during the hiring process or the faculty performance evaluation. The calculation of the h-index is shown in various databases; however, there is no recent or systematic evidence about the differences between them. In this study, we compare the difference in the h-index compiled with Scopus and Web of Science (WoS) with the aim of analyzing the ranking of the authors within a university. We analyze the publication records of 350 authors from Monash University (Australia). We also investigate the discipline wise variation in the authors ranking. 31% of the author's profiles show no variation in the two datasets whereas 55% of the author's profiles show a higher count in Scopus and 9% in WoS. The maximum difference in h-index count among Scopus and WoS is 3. On average 12.4% of publications per author are unique in Scopus and 4.1% in WoS. 53.5% of publications are common in both Scopus and WoS. Despite larger unique publications in Scopus, there is no difference shown in the Spearman correlation coefficient between WoS and Scopus citation counts and h-index.
△ Less
Submitted 13 February, 2021;
originally announced February 2021.
-
Growth and dynamics of Econophysics: A bibliometric and network analysis
Authors:
Kiran Sharma,
Parul Khurana
Abstract:
Digitization of publications, advancement in communication technology, and the availability of bibliographic data have made it easier for the researchers to study the growth and dynamics of any discipline. We present a study on "Econophysics" metadata extracted from the Web of Science managed by the Clarivate Analytics from 2000-2019. The study highlights the growth and dynamics of the discipline…
▽ More
Digitization of publications, advancement in communication technology, and the availability of bibliographic data have made it easier for the researchers to study the growth and dynamics of any discipline. We present a study on "Econophysics" metadata extracted from the Web of Science managed by the Clarivate Analytics from 2000-2019. The study highlights the growth and dynamics of the discipline by measures of a number of publications, citations on publications, other disciplines contribution, institutions participation, country-wise spread, etc. We investigate the impact of self-citations on citations with every five-year interval. Also, we find the contribution of other disciplines by analyzing the cited references. Results emerged from micro, meso and macro-level analysis of collaborations show that the distributions among authors collaboration and affiliations of authors follow a power law. Thus, very few authors keep producing most of the papers and are from a few institutions. We find that China is leading in the production of a number of authors and a number of papers; however, shares more of national collaboration rather than international, whereas the USA shares more international collaboration. Finally, we demonstrate the evolution of the author's collaborations and affiliations networks from 2000-2019. Overall the analysis reveals the "small-world" property of the network with average path length 5. As a consequence of our analysis, this study can serve as in-depth knowledge to understand the growth and dynamics of the Econophysics network both qualitatively and quantitatively.
△ Less
Submitted 3 November, 2020;
originally announced November 2020.
