Science Forecasts: Measuring, Predicting, and
Communicating Scientific Developments
Katy Börner
Victor H. Yngve Distinguished Professor of Information Science
Director, Cyberinfrastructure for Network Science Center
School of Informatics and Computing and
Indiana University Network Science Institute
Indiana University, USA
Deutsche Physikalische Gesellschaft (DPG) Symposium on “Scientometric Maps
and Dynamic Models of Science and Scientific Collaboration Networks”
Regensburg, Germany
Thursday, March 10, 2016
Descriptive Models
TheGlobal'ScientificFoodWeb'
Mazloumian,Amin,DirkHelbing,Sergi Lozano,RobertLight,andKatyBörner.2013."GlobalMultiͲLevel
Analysisofthe'ScientificFoodWeb'".ScientificReports3,1167.
http://cns.iu.edu/docs/publications/2013ͲmazloumianͲfoodͲweb.pdf
Contributions:
Comprehensiveglobalanalysisof
scholarlyknowledgeproductionand
diffusiononthelevelofcontinents,
countries,andcities.
Quantifyingknowledgeflows
between2000and2009,we
identifyglobalsourcesandsinksof
knowledgeproduction.Our
knowledgeflowindexreveals,
whereideasarebornand
consumed,therebydefiningaglobal
‘scientificfoodweb’.
WhileAsiaisquicklycatchingupin
termsofpublicationsandcitation
rates,wefindthatitsdependence
onknowledgeconsumptionhas
furtherincreased.
3
4
LongͲDistanceInterdisciplinarity LeadstoHigherScientificImpact
Larivière,Vincent,StefanieHaustein,andKatyBörner.2015.PLOSONEDOI:10.1371.
Data: 9.2 million
interdisciplinary
research papers published
between 2000 and 2012.
Results: majority (69.9%) of
co-cited interdisciplinary pairs
are “win-win” relationships,
i.e., papers that cite them
have higher citation impact
and there are as few as 3.3%
“lose-lose” relationships.
UCSD map of science is
used to compute “distance.”
5
6
7
Descriptive Models
Science7February2014:Vol.343no.6171p.598
DOI:10.1126/science.343.6171.598
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/343/6171/598.full?sid=4f40a7f0Ͳ6ba2Ͳ4ad8Ͳa181Ͳ7ab394fe2178
Fromfundingagenciestoscientificagency:Collectiveallocationof
sciencefundingasanalternativetopeerreview
Bollen,Johan,DavidCrandall,DamionJunk,YingDing,andKatyBörner.2014.EMBOReports15(1):1Ͳ121.
Existing(left)andproposed(right)fundingsystems.Reviewersinblue;investigatorsinred.
Intheproposedsystem,allscientistsarebothinvestigatorsandreviewers:everyscientistreceivesafixed
amountoffundingfromthegovernmentanddiscretionarydistributionsfromotherscientists,buteachis
requiredinturntoredistributesomefractionofthetotaltheyreceivedtootherinvestigators.
10
Assume
Totalfundingbudgetinyearyisty
Numberofqualifiedscientistsisn
Eachyear,
thefundingagencydepositsafixedamountinto
eachaccount,equaltothetotalfundingbudget
dividedbythetotalnumberofscientists:ty/n.
Eachscientist mustdistributeafixedfractionof
receivedfundingtootherscientists(noselfͲ
funding,COIsrespected).
Result
Scientistscollectivelyassesseachothers’merit
basedondifferentcriteria;they“fundͲrank”
scientists;highlyrankedscientistshaveto
distributemoremoney.
11
Example:
Totalfundingbudgetinyearis2012NSFbudget
GiventhenumberofNSFfundedscientists,each
receivesa$100,000basicgrant.
Fractionissetto50%
In2013,scientistSreceivesabasicgrantof$100,000
plus$200,000fromherpeers,i.e.,atotalof
$300,000.
In2013,S canspend50%ofthattotalsum,
$150,000,onherownresearchprogram,butmust
donate50%tootherscientistsfortheir2014budget.
Ratherthansubmittingandreviewingproject
proposals,S donatesdirectlytootherscientistsby
loggingintoacentralizedwebsiteandenteringthe
namesofthescientiststodonatetoandhowmuch
eachshouldreceive.
12
ModelRunandValidation:
Modelispresentedinhttp://arxiv.org/abs/1304.1067
Itusescitationsasaproxy forhoweachscientistmight
distributefundsintheproposedsystem.
Using37MarticlesfromTR1992to2010WebofScience
(WoS)database,weextracted770Mcitations.Fromthe
sameWoS data,wealsodetermined4,195,734unique
authornamesandwetookthe867,872nameswhohad
authoredatleastonepaperperyearinanyfiveyearsof
theperiod2000–2010.
Foreachpairofauthorswedeterminedthenumberof
timesonehadcitedtheotherineachyearofourcitation
data(1992–2010).
NIHandNSFfundingrecordsfromIU’sScholarly
Databaseprovided347,364grantamountsfor109,919
uniquescientistsforthattimeperiod.
Simulationrunbeginsinyear2000,inwhichevery
scientistwasgivenafixedbudgetofB=$100k.In
subsequentyears,scientistsdistributetheirfundingin
proportiontotheircitationsovertheprior5years.
ThemodelyieldsfundingpatternssimilartoexistingNIH
andNSFdistributions.
13
ModelEfficiency:
UsingdatafromtheTaulbee SurveyofSalaries
ComputerScience(http://cra.org/resources/taulbee )
andtheNationalScienceFoundation(NSF)thefollowing
calculationisilluminating:
IffourprofessorsworkfourweeksfullͲtimeona
proposalsubmission,laborcostsareabout$30k.With
typicalfundingratesbelow20%,aboutfivesubmissionͲ
reviewcyclesmightbeneededresultinginatotal
expectedlaborcostof$150k.
TheaverageNSFgrantis$128kperyear.
U.S.universitieschargeabout50%overhead(ca.$42k),
leavingabout$86k.
Inotherwords,thefourprofessorslose$150kͲ
$86k=$64kofpaidresearchtimebyobtainingagrantto
performtheresearch.
Thatis,U.S.universitiesshouldforbidprofessorsto
applyforgrants—iftheycanaffordtoforgotheindirect
dollars.
Toadd:Timespentbyresearcherstoreviewproposals.
In2012alone,NSFconvenedmorethan17,000
scientiststoreview53,556proposals.
14
Needed Models
OlivierH.Beauchesne,2011.MapofScientificCollaborationsfrom2005Ͳ2009
16
BrunoLatour andSteveWoolgar,1986.CycleofCredibility.
BrunoLatour andSteveWoolgar,1986.CycleofCredibility.
OlivierH.Beauchesne,2011.MapofScientificCollaborationsfrom2005Ͳ2009
OlivierH.Beauchesne,2011.MapofScientificCollaborationsfrom2005Ͳ2009
19
20
CouncilforChemicalResearch.2009.ChemicalR&DPowerstheU.S.InnovationEngine.
Washington,DC.CourtesyoftheCouncilforChemicalResearch.
Communicating Analytic and Predictive Models
21
Visualization Frameworks
Places&Spaces:MappingScienceExhibit,onlineathttp://scimaps.org
http://scimaps.org/call
24
http://scimaps.org/iteration/11
Places&SpacesExhibitattheDavidJ.Sencer CDCMuseum,Atlanta,GA
January25ͲJune17,2016
26
Seeingfor
ActionͲ Using
Mapsand
Graphs
toProtectthe
Public’sHealth.
CDCOpeningEvent:MapsofHealth
TutorialandSymposium
February4Ͳ5,2016
27
ScienceForecast
S1:E1,2015
ThisconferenceiscoͲfundedbytheNSFScienceofScienceandInnovationPolicy
(SciSIP)program.Itbringstogetherinternationalexpertsandpractitionersthat
developandapplymathematical,statistical,andcomputationalmodelsto
increaseourunderstandingofthestructureanddynamicsofscience,technology
andinnovation,seedetailsathttp://modsti.cns.iu.edu.
29
References
Börner,Katy,Chen,Chaomei,andBoyack,Kevin.(2003).
VisualizingKnowledgeDomains. InBlaise Cronin(Ed.),
ARIST,Medford,NJ:InformationToday,Volume37,Chapter
5,pp.179Ͳ255.http://ivl.slis.indiana.edu/km/pub/2003Ͳ
bornerͲarist.pdf
Shiffrin,RichardM.andBörner,Katy(Eds.)(2004).Mapping
KnowledgeDomains.ProceedingsoftheNationalAcademy
ofSciencesoftheUnitedStatesofAmerica,101(Suppl_1).
http://www.pnas.org/content/vol101/suppl_1/
Börner,Katy(2010)AtlasofScience:VisualizingWhatWe
Know.TheMITPress.http://scimaps.org/atlas
Scharnhorst,Andrea,Börner,Katy,vandenBesselaar,Peter
(2012)ModelsofScienceDynamics.SpringerVerlag.
KatyBörner,MichaelConlon,JonCorsonͲRikert,Cornell,
YingDing(2012)VIVO:ASemanticApproachtoScholarly
NetworkingandDiscovery.Morgan&Claypool.
KatyBörner andDavidEPolley (2014)VisualInsights:A
PracticalGuidetoMakingSenseofData.TheMITPress.
Börner,Katy(2015)AtlasofKnowledge:AnyoneCanMap.
TheMITPress.http://scimaps.org/atlas2
30
Allpapers,maps,tools,talks,pressarelinkedfromhttp://cns.iu.edu
Theseslidesareathttp://cns.iu.edu/docs/presentations
CNSFacebook:http://www.facebook.com/cnscenter
MappingScienceExhibitFacebook:http://www.facebook.com/mappingscience
31