The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration
Open accessAbstract
By using data from three bibliographic databases in biology, physics, and mathematics, respectively, networks are constructed in which the nodes are scientists, and two scientists are connected if they have coauthored a paper. We use these networks to answer a broad variety of questions about collaboration patterns, such as the numbers of papers authors write, how many people they write them with, what the typical distance between scientists is through the network, and how patterns of collaboration vary between subjects and over time. We also summarize a number of recent results by other authors on coauthorship patterns.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Emergence of Scaling in Random Networks
Barabási, A.-L., & Albert, R. (1999) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.286.5439.509 · Cited by 36,135
Cited by
Statistical physics of social dynamics
Castellano, C., Fortunato, S., & Loreto, V. (2009) · Reviews of Modern Physics · doi:10.1103/revmodphys.81.591 · Cited by 4,119
Past, present and future of Industry 4.0—A systematic literature review and research agenda proposal
Liao, Y., Deschamps, F., Loures, E. D. F. R., & Ramos, L. F. P. (2017) · International Journal of Production Research · doi:10.1080/00207543.2017.1308576 · Cited by 2,036
Evolutionary dynamics of group interactions on structured populations: a review
Perc, M., Gómez-Gardeñes, J., Szolnoki, A., Floría, L. M., & Moreno, Y. (2013) · Journal of The Royal Society Interface · doi:10.1098/rsif.2012.0997 · Cited by 1,340
Team Assembly Mechanisms Determine Collaboration Network Structure and Team Performance
Guimerà, R., Uzzi, B., Spiro, J., & Amaral, L. A. N. (2005) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1106340 · Cited by 1,126
Koseoglu, M. A. (2016) · BRQ Business Research Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.brq.2016.02.001 · Cited by 242
The incidence and role of negative citations in science
Catalini, C., Lacetera, N., & Oettl, A. (2015) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1502280112 · Cited by 189
Persistence and uncertainty in the academic career
Petersen, A. M., Riccaboni, M., Stanley, H. E., & Pammolli, F. (2012) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1121429109 · Cited by 188
Network Effects on Scientific Collaborations
Uddin, S., Hossain, L., & Rasmussen, K. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0057546 · Cited by 160
Toward the discovery of citation cartels in citation networks
Fister, I., Fister, I., & Perc, M. (2016) · Frontiers in Physics · doi:10.3389/fphy.2016.00049 · Cited by 149
Structure and evolution of co-authorship network in an interdisciplinary research field
Liu, P., & Xia, H. (2015) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-014-1525-y · Cited by 84
Researcher Effects on Mortality Salience Research: A Meta-Analytic Moderator Analysis
Yen, C.-L., & Cheng, C.-P. (2013) · Death Studies · doi:10.1080/07481187.2012.682290 · Cited by 30
Cooperation and coauthorship in scientific publishing
Wardil, L., & Hauert, C. (2015) · Physical Review E · doi:10.1103/physreve.91.012825 · Cited by 22
Metadata
- Authors
- Newman, M. E. J.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 2004-04-06
- Volume
- 101
- Issue
- suppl_1
- Pages
- 5200-5205
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- OpenAlex
- W2097777089
- Cited by
- 1,931
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 53.77
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.