Ranking and mappping of universities and research-focused institutions worldwide: The third release of excellencemapping.net

Abstract

Bornmann, Stefaner, de Moya Anegón, and Mutz (2014a) have introduced a web application (www.excellencemapping.net) which is linked to both academic ranking lists published hitherto (e.g. the Academic Ranking of World Universities) as well as spatial visualization approaches. The application visualizes the performance of institutions worldwide within specific subject areas (journal sets from Scopus) as institutional ranking lists and on custom tile-based maps. Scopus data were used which are also the base for the SCImago Institutions Ranking. The second, enhanced version of the excellencemapping.net is described in Bornmann, Stefaner, de Moya Anegón, and Mutz (2014b). In this version, the effect of covariates (such as the perceived corruption in a country in which a research institution is located) on two performance metrics (best paper rate and best journal rate) is examined and visualized. This paper describes the third version based on new data.

Making Scientometric Sense out of NIRF Scores

“…THE National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) has just released its maiden rankings of higher educational institutions across the country. Unlike other international university ranking schemes which are based on educational and research excellence [1][2][3][4] , here very broad but often fuzzy parameters are used which cover aspects classified broadly under the heads 'Teaching, Learning and Resources', 'Research and Professional Practices', 'Graduation Outcomes', 'Outreach and Inclusivity', and 'Perception'. These five broad heads are then elaborated through further sub-heads, with weights assigned to each broad head, and more weights assigned to the sub-heads within each head.…”

“…We use the bibliometric data that has been released through the NIRF 2016 rankings to see how the top twenty engineering institutions fare if only research excellence is considered as is done in major ranking exercises [1][2][3][4] . Unlike the NIRF score, which is one single number, we now decompose performance into a sizedependent exergy term and a size-independent productivity term.…”

Excellence and Diversity Mapping of Research in IISc, IITs, NUS and NTU

“…The present work attempts to use the ABCD matrix formulation to describe the Z-scan technique to determine the nonlinear response of a material. There are several methods to measure nonlinear refraction including nonlinear interferometry 3,4 , degenerate four-wave mixing 5 , degenerate three-wave mixing 6 , ellipse rotation 7 , and beam distortion measurements 8 and Zscan 9,10 . The first three methods are potentially sensitive techniques, but these require relatively complex experimental apparatus, whereas Z-scan is a simple technique to study nonlinear refraction and nonlinear absorption.…”

“…The latest and fourth release of the web application (http://www.excellencemapping.net/#/view/measure/top10/ calculation/a_ohne_kovariable/field/materials-science/significant/false/org/) based on articles during the five-year publication window 2008-12 visualizes scientific excellence worldwide in 22 major subject areas [2][3][4] . These subject areas are covered by Scopus data as collected for the SCImago Institutions Ranking (http://www.scimagoir.…”

“…BPR corresponds to PP (top 10%) used in the Leiden Ranking and the excellence rate used in the SCImago Institutions Ranking 6 . The excellence rate is a field-normalized sizeindependent indicator which serves as a measure of the high quality output of research institutions [2][3][4] . A singlevalued composite outcome indicator for the research performance of each unit of assessment can be computed as the second-order indicator 7 called the exergy term from the quantity (size) and quality (excellence) indicators, x = i 2 P. In the second stage we examine the variance in performance of the units within a larger aggregation.…”