Analysis of Computer Science Communities Based on DBLP

Abstract

It is popular nowadays to bring techniques from bibliometrics and scientometrics into the world of digital libraries to analyze the collaboration patterns and explore mechanisms which underlie community development. In this paper we use the DBLP data to investigate the author's scientific career and provide an in-depth exploration of some of the computer science communities. We compare them in terms of productivity, population stability and collaboration trends.Besides we use these features to compare the sets of topranked conferences with their lower ranked counterparts.Comment: 9 pages, 7 figures, 6 table

Network analysis of temporal trends in scholarly research productivity

“…In addition, citation graphs provide useful statistical information. For example, a set of journal/proceedings (or authors) can be grouped by using clustering algorithms (Biryukov & Dong, 2010;Zaane, Chen, & Goebel, 2009;Zhou, Ji, Zha, & Giles, 2006). Another branch of previous work focuses on finding the most important journal/proceedings (or authors) in the sense of citation (Nerur, Sikora, Mangalaraj, & Balijepally, 2005;Yan & Lee, 2007).…”

How healthy are software engineering conferences?

“…Similar in spirit, although not focusing on software engineering conferences 17 , Biryukov and Dong [49] investigate how the communities represented by different research subfields within computer science as well as the corresponding conferences are evolving and communicating to each other. They use DBLP data to survey the development of authors' careers, and extract features that can help distinguish between conferences of different rank.…”

Software engineering research in Brazil from the perspective of young researchers: a panorama of the last decade

“…DBLP [5] is an important and frequently adopted source of information to this end. Biryukov and Dong [6] have examined the average lifetime of researchers publishing in top computer science conferences and then investigated the career of longliving researchers with more than 10 years participating in such conferences. They discovered that most of these researchers have been engaged in two or more research areas and that most of their papers were published from 5 to 10 years of their first paper in a top venue.…”

“…5 Former LA-WASP. 6 DBLP Computer Science Bibliography: http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/ 7 The QUALIS system, managed by CAPES, classifies the most important computer science conferences and journals according to a ranking system consisting of the 7 levels: A1 (higher), A2, B1, B2, B3, B4, and B5 (lower). 8 Only papers published in venues classified by QUALIS system were considered in this analysis.…”

“…We used DBLP 6 to collect this information for each young researcher of the selected group. Aiming at differencing full and short papers in venues that accept papers with different number of pages, we considered as full paper all papers with at least eight pages.…”