Bibliometrics Study and Network Analysis of Co-authorship and Thematic Clusters of Ontology Researches

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 PHD in Linguistic; Assistant Professor,Iranian Research Institute for Information Science and Technology; Tehran, Iran

2 Ph.D. Candidate of Knowledge and Information Science, University of Tehran.

3 Master of Knowledge and Information Science, University of Tehran.

Abstract

Purpose: The increasing growth of Ontology Studies in the world has created the need to target scientific research in this field; By using various scientometrics techniques, the status of these studies should be investigated and studied from different points of view. This study aimed to analyze bibliometrics and co-authorship networks, and thematic clusters of ontology studies in the Scopus database during 1996-2020.
Methodology: This study in terms of purpose is an applied and descriptive scientometrics, which has been done methodologically with co-word analysis and network analysis. The collected data (on December 10, 2020) were analyzed using Excel software. To analyze the data, VOSviewer, Pajek, and UCINet Software were used.
Findings: The bibliometric study and analysis of the co-authorship network and thematic clusters of ontology studies in the Scopus database indicates that 0.91% of the articles in this field are written in English and Since 2002, the scientific productions of this field have started their growth period and in 2012, they have reached their growth period. "Expert Systems with Applications" Journal with the publication of 101 articles, the “Journal of Web Semantics” with 80 articles, and “Semantic Web” with 74 articles, are considered the core Journals for the researchers of the Ontology field.  The field of computer science with 3941 articles has the largest share in scientific productions. Zhejiang University with the production of 69 articles (1.32%), Academy of Sciences Research Center and Universidad de Murcia with the production of 68 (1.30%) and 66 articles (1.26%), respectively, are among the most productive research centers in the field of ontology.  R. Valencia-García with 27 articles (0.51%) J.T. Fernández-Breis with 26 articles (0.49%) and M. Dumontier with 23 articles (0.44%) are among the most productive researchers in the field of ontology in the world. the most cooperation in the production of ontology research has been done by the countries of China, the United States, and the United Kingdom. In the study of the co-occurrence network of the Ontology field in the Scopus database, 5 topic clusters were identified which include the semantic web, ontology infrastructure, machine learning, linked data in the data web, and semantic description framework the semantic web cluster is the largest. In terms of the centrality index, Zhang, Y. with a centrality score of 74, Li, J. with a centrality score of 62, and Wang, Y. with a centrality score of 54 are in the first to third ranks. Also, in terms of the closeness centrality index, Stellato, A. with a centrality score of 5640 had the highest degree of closeness. According to the centrality index, Decker, S. with a centrality score of 7037.317, Horrocks, I. with a centrality score of 6686.898, and Wang, Z. with a centrality score of 6217.040 are in a good position in the network. In terms of the centrality index of the special vector, Valencia-García, R. with a centrality score of 1, Garcia Sanchez, F. with a centrality score of 0.868, and Colomo-Palacios, R. with a centrality score of 0.798 were ranked first to third.
Conclusion: Drawing maps of the scientific structure of different disciplines, including ontology, can be useful from different points of view. The analysis of the field of ontology can help researchers to know the scientific limits and boundaries, the general understanding of the scientific structure for beginners, and the choice of the research field, and it can also serve as a guide map for researchers and decision-makers in the field of existence. Science should be used to identify the priorities of research and adapt it to the future needs of society.

Keywords

References

حسینی، الهه، غائبی، امیر و برادر، رؤیا. (1400). کتاب‌سنجی و نگاشت هم‌رخدادی واژگان در حوزه داده‌های پیوندی. پژوهشنامه علم‌سنجی، 7 (1)، 91-116.
حسینی بهشتی، ملوک‌السادات و اژه‌ای، فاطمه. (1394). طراحی و پیاده‌سازی هستی‌شناسی علوم پایه بر اساس مفاهیم و روابط موجود در اصطلاح‌نامه‌های مرتبط. پژوهشنامه پردازش و مدیریت اطلاعات، ۳۰ (۳) ،۶۷۷-۶۹۶.
ژاکوب، الین ک. (1384). هستان‌شناسی‌ها و وب معنایی. ترجمه فاطمه شیخ شعاعی. فصلنامه کتاب، 64، 189-194.
سهیلی، ف.، خاصه، ع. ا.، و کرانیان، پ. (1397). روند موضوعی مفاهیم حوزه علم اطلاعات و دانش‌شناسی ایران بر اساس تحلیل هم‌رخدادی واژگان. مطالعات ملی کتابداری و سازمان‌دهی اطلاعات، 29 (2)، 171-190.
سهیلی، فرامرز و عصاره، فریده. (1391). مفاهیم مرکزیت و تراکم در شبکه‌های علمی و اجتماعی. مطالعات ملی کتابداری و سازمان‌دهی اطلاعات، 95، 92-108.
شادگار، بیتا، عصاره، علیرضا و هراتیان نژادی، آزاده. (1393). وب معنایی: مفاهیم و تکنیک‌ها. تهران: ارمغان.
شریفی، ش.، شعبان‌زاد، م.، و فیاض، س. (1390). نقش وب معنایی در بازیابی اطلاعات. دانش‌شناسی (علوم کتابداری و اطلاع‌رسانی و فناوری اطلاعات), 3 (12), 41-52.
شمس‌فرد، مهرنوش و عبداله‌زاده بارفروش، احمد. (۱۳۸۱). استخراج دانش مفهومی از متن با استفاده از الگوهای زبانی و معنایی. فصلنامه تازه‌های علوم‌شناختی، ۴ (۱)، ۴۸-۶۶.
طاهری، مهدی. (1394). ذخیره و بازیابی اطلاعات و دانش با تأکید بر رویکردهای نوین. تهران: کتابدار: کنسرسیوم محتوای ملی.
علیپورحافظی، مهدی، رمضانی، هادی و مؤمنی، عصمت. (1396). ترسیم نقشه دانش حوزه کتابخانه‌های دیجیتالی در ایران: تحلیل هم‌رخدادی واژگان. پژوهشنامه پردازش و مدیریت اطلاعات، ۳۳ (۲) ،۴۵۳-۴۸۸.
قربانی بوساری، رقیه، قیاسی، میترا و رضوی، علی‌اصغر. (1400). مرور نظام‌مند پژوهش‌های داده‌های پیوندی. فصلنامه مطالعات ملی کتابداری و سازمان‌دهی اطلاعات، 32 (2)، 105- 123.
کفاشان, مجتبی, فتاحی, رحمت‌الله. (1390). نظام‌های نوین سازمان‌دهی دانش: وب معنایی، هستی‌شناسی و ابزارهای سازمان‌دهی دانش عینی. کتابداری و اطلاع‌رسانی, 14 (2 (54)), 45-70.
عرفان‌منش، محمدامین. (1396). تأثیر همکاری‌های بین‌المللی پژوهشی بر کیفیت تولیدات علمی دانشگاه علوم پزشکی تهران. فصلنامه مدیریت سلامت، ۲۰ (۶۹) ،۴۲-۵۶.
کوکبی، م.، فرج‌پهلو، ع.، عصاره، ف. و زرداری، س. (1396). مروری بر مفهوم هستی‌نگاری در وب معنایی. تحقیقات کتابداری و اطلاع‌رسانی دانشگاهی، 51 (3)، 83-100.
گویلی کیلانه، ناهید و کلوانی، عارفه. (1398). بررسی تحلیلی برون‌دادهای علمی پژوهشگران جهان با تأکید بر وضعیت تولیدات علمی ایران در حوزه وب معنایی در پایگاه استنادی اسکوپوس طی سال‌های 1999 تا 2018. کنفرانس بین‌المللی وب‌پژوهی 4 و 5 اردیبهشت، تهران، ایران.
محمدی کنگرانی، حنانه، شامخی، تقی و حسین‌زاده، مهناز. (1390). بررسی و تحلیل شبکه روابط رسمی و غیررسمی میان سازمانی با استفاده از رویکرد تحلیل شبکه‌ای. مدیریت دولتی، 3 (6)، 149-164.
یوسفی‌راد، ابراهیم. (1388). آر.دی.اف.: الگویی برای توصیف منابع در وب معنایی. فصلنامه کتاب، 3، 9-22.
 
Alipour-Hafezi, M., Ramezani, H., & Momeni, E. (2022). Knowledge map of digital libraries in Iran: a co-word analysis. Iranian Journal of Information Processing and Management, 33(2), 453-488. doi: 10.35050/JIPM010.2018.069. [In Persian]
Antoniou, G., Van Harmelen, F. (2004). A Semantic Web Primer: MIT Press.
Bansal, M., Bansal, J., & Kumar, A. (2017). Semantic web research in India: A scientometric study of 2007-16. International Journal of Information Dissemination and Technology, 7(4), 253.
Berners-Lee, T., Hendler, J. A. M. E. S., & Lassila, O. (2002). A new form of Web content that is meaningful to computers will unleash a revolution of new possibilities. Scientific American.
Bonacich, P. (2007). Some unique properties of eigenvector centrality. Social networks, 29(4), 555-564.
Erfanmanesh M. (2017). The Impact of International Research Collaboration on the Quality of Scholarly Output of Tehran University of Medical Sciences. jha 2017; 20 (69) :42-56. [In Persian]
Ghorbani Bousari, R., Ghiasi, M., & Razavi, S. (2021). Linked Data Research Literature: A Systematic Review. Librarianship and Information Organization Studies, 32(2), 105-123. doi: 10.30484/nastinfo.2021.2821.2034. [In Persian]
Govili Kilane, N. & Kelvani, A. (2018). Analytical review of the scientific outputs of the world's researchers with an emphasis on the status of Iran's scientific productions in the domain of the semantic web in the Scopus citation database during the years 1999 to 2018. International Web-Research Conference on April 4 and 5, Tehran, Iran. [In Persian]
Heath, T., & Bizer, C. (2011). Linked data: Evolving the web in to a global data space. Synthesis lectures on the semantic web: theory and technology, 1 (1), 1-136.
Hosseini, E., Ghaebi, A., & Baradar, R. (2021). Bibliometrics and Mapping of Co-words in the Field of Linked Data. Scientometrics Research Journal, 7(13), 91-116.
 doi: 10.22070/rsci.2020.4904.1333 [In Persian]
Hosseini Beheshti, M. S., & Ejei, F. (2022). Designing and Implementing Basic Sciences Ontology Based on Concepts and Relationships of Relevant Thesauri. Iranian Journal of Information Processing and Management, 30(3), 677-696. [In Persian]
Ikeda, M., Hayashi, Y., Lai, J., Chen, W., Bourdeau, J., Seta, K., & Mizoguchi, R. (1999). An ontology more than a shared vocabulary. In Proc. of AIED99 Workshop on Ontologies for Intelligent Educational Systems, 1-10.
Jacob, E. K (2006). Ontologies and Semantic Web. Translated by Fatima Sheikh Shuai., Book Quarterly, 64. 189-194. [In Persian]
Kafashan, M., Fatahi, R. (1390). New knowledge organization systems: semantic web, ontology and objective knowledge organization tools. Library and Information, 14(2 (54)), 45-70. [In Persian]
Kirrane, S., Sabou, M., Fernández, J. D., Osborne, F., Robin, C., Buitelaar, P., ... & Polleres, A. (2020). A decade of Semantic Web research through the lenses of a mixed methods approach. Semantic Web, 11(6), 979-1005.
Kyaw, W. (2018). Mapping the Intellectual Structure of the Linked Data Field: A Co-Word Analysis and Social Network Analysis. International Journal of Advanced Research in Science, Engineering and Technology, 5(8), 6632-6647.
kokabi, M., & Zardary, S. (2017). A review of Ontology concept in semantic web. Academic Librarianship and Information Research, 51(3), 83-100. doi: 10.22059/jlib.2016.61270. [In Persian]
Lassila, O., & McGuinness, D. (2001). The role of frame-based representation on the semantic web. Linköping Electronic Articles in Computer and Information Science, 6(5), 2001.
Liu, G. Y., Hu, J. M., & Wang, H. L. (2012). A co-word analysis of digital library field in China. Scientometrics, 91(1), 203-217.
Liu, Y., Li, L., Shen, H., Yang, H., & Luo, F. (2018). A co-citation and cluster analysis of scientometrics of geographic information ontology. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 7(3), 120.
Mohammadi Kangarani, H., Shamekhi, T., & Hosseinzadeh, M. (2011). Investigation and analysis of formal and informal organizational interrelationship networks through Network Analysis Approach (Case study: Kohgiloye va Boyerahmad Province). Journal of Public Administration, 3(6), 149-312. [In Persian]
Newman, M. E. (2004). Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 101(suppl 1), 5200-5205.
Niknia, M., & Mirtaheri, S. L. (2015). Mapping a decade of linked data progress through co-word analysis. Webology, 12(2), Article 141.
Ramezani, H. (2014). Map of Science: Techniques & Methods. Journal of Science Promotion, 5(6), 53-84.
Shadgar, B., Osareh, A. and Heratiannejadi, A. (2014). The Semantic Web: Concepts and Techniques. Tehran: Armaghan. [In Persian]
Shamsfard M, Abd Elahzade Barfroush A.(2002). Extracting Conceptual Knowledge From Text: Using Linguistic and Semantic Templates . Advances in Cognitive Sciences; 4 (1) :48-66. [In Persian]
sharifi, S., shabanzad, M., & fayyaz, S. (2011). The role of semantic web in information retrieval. Journal of Knowledge Studies, 4(12), 41-52. [In Persian]
Soheili, F., Khasseh, A., & Koranian, P. (2018). Thematic Trends of Concepts in Knowledge and Information Science Based on Co-word Analysis in Iran. Librarianship and Information Organization Studies (Journal of National Studies on Librarianship and Information Organization), 29(2 (114)), 171-190. [In Persian]
Soheili, F., & Osareh, F. (2013). Concepts of Centrality and Density in Scientific and Social Networks. Librarianship and Information Organization Studies, 24(3), 92-108. [In Persian]
Taheri, M. (2014). Storing and retrieving information and knowledge with emphasis on new approaches. Tehran: Librarian: National Content Consortium. [In Persian]
Yousefi Rad, I. (2008). RDF: A Model for Describing Resources in the Semantic Web. Book Quarterly, 3, 9-22. [In Persian]
Zhong, B., Wu, H., Li, H., Sepasgozar, S., Luo, H., & He, L. (2019). A scientometric analysis and critical review of construction related ontology research. Automation in Construction, 101, 17-31.
 
 

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics