It is examined whether the number (J) of (joint) publications of a "main scientist" with her/his coauthors ranked according to rank (r) importance, i.e. J ∝ 1/r, as found by Ausloos (Scientometrics 95:895–909, 2013) still holds for subfields, i.e. when the "main scientist" has worked on different, sometimes overlapping, subfields. Two cases are studied. It is shown that the law holds for large subfields. As shown, in an Appendix, is also useful to combine small topics into large ones for better statistics. It is observed that the sub-cores are much smaller than the overall coauthor core measure. Nevertheless, the smallness of the core and sub-cores may imply further considerations for the evaluation of team research purposes and activities
An important issue in bibliometrics is the weighing of co-authorship in the production of scientific...
THE PRESENT STUDY AIMS AT describing both the common and the distinguishing features of coauthorship...
We study the impact of research collaborations in coauthorship networks on total research output. Th...
It is examined whether the number (J) of (joint) publications of a "main scientist " with ...
It is examined whether the number (J) of (joint) publications of a ”main scientist ” with her/his co...
It is examined whether the relationship J ∝ A/rα, and the subse-quent coauthor core notion (Ausloos ...
The data and findings by Miskiewicz (2013) on the relationship between the number (J) of publication...
The aim of this paper is to investigate the relationship between scientific productivity and colla...
Following the work of Krumov et. al (2011) [1] we revisit the question whether the usage of large ci...
Abstract Purpose To give a theoretical framework...
The paper investigates core-periphery relations in the network of international scientific collabora...
Collaborations are pervasive in current science. Collaborations have been studied and encouraged in ...
THE PRESENT STUDY AIMS AT describing both the common and the distinguishing features of coauthorship...
This article examines the structure of co-authorship networks\u27 stability in time. The goal of the...
This paper uses panel data on 339 economists to evaluate the relationship between coauthorship and o...
An important issue in bibliometrics is the weighing of co-authorship in the production of scientific...
THE PRESENT STUDY AIMS AT describing both the common and the distinguishing features of coauthorship...
We study the impact of research collaborations in coauthorship networks on total research output. Th...
It is examined whether the number (J) of (joint) publications of a "main scientist " with ...
It is examined whether the number (J) of (joint) publications of a ”main scientist ” with her/his co...
It is examined whether the relationship J ∝ A/rα, and the subse-quent coauthor core notion (Ausloos ...
The data and findings by Miskiewicz (2013) on the relationship between the number (J) of publication...
The aim of this paper is to investigate the relationship between scientific productivity and colla...
Following the work of Krumov et. al (2011) [1] we revisit the question whether the usage of large ci...
Abstract Purpose To give a theoretical framework...
The paper investigates core-periphery relations in the network of international scientific collabora...
Collaborations are pervasive in current science. Collaborations have been studied and encouraged in ...
THE PRESENT STUDY AIMS AT describing both the common and the distinguishing features of coauthorship...
This article examines the structure of co-authorship networks\u27 stability in time. The goal of the...
This paper uses panel data on 339 economists to evaluate the relationship between coauthorship and o...
An important issue in bibliometrics is the weighing of co-authorship in the production of scientific...
THE PRESENT STUDY AIMS AT describing both the common and the distinguishing features of coauthorship...
We study the impact of research collaborations in coauthorship networks on total research output. Th...