Three-dimensional visualization and animation of emerging patterns by the process of self-organization in collaboration networks
Abstract
The "Social Gestalt" model is a new parametric model visualizing 3-D graphs, using animation to show these graphs from different points of view. A visible 3-D graph image is the emerging pattern at the macro level of a system of co-authorships by the process of self-organization. Well-ordered 3-D computer graphs are totally rotatable and their shapes are visible from all possible points of view. The objectives of this paper are the description of several methods for three-dimensional modelling and animation and the application of these methods to two co-authorship networks selected for demonstration of varying 3-D graph images. This application of the 3-D graph modelling and animation shows for both the journal "NATURE" and the journal "Psychology of Women Quarterly" that at any time and independently on the manifold visible results of rotation, the empirical values nearly exactly match the theoretical distributions (Called "Social Gestalts") obtained by regression analysis. In addition the emergence of different shapes between the 3-D graphs of "NATURE" and "Psychology of Women Quarterly" is explained.
References
[1]
Albert, R., & Barabási, A. (2002). Statistical mechanics of complex networks. Reviews of Modern Physics, 74, 47-97.
[2]
Barabási, A.-L., Albert, R., & Jeong, H. (2000). Scale-free characteristics of random networks: The topology of the world-wide web. Physica A, 281, 69-77.
[3]
Bordons, M., Aparicio, J., González-Albo, B., & Díaz-Faes, A. A. (2015). The relationship between the research performance of scientists and their position in co-authorship networks in three fields. Journal of Informetrics., 9(1), 135-144.
[4]
Borgatti, S. P., Mehra, A., Brass, D. J., & Labianca, G. (2009). Network analysis in the social sciences. Science, 323, 892.
[5]
Chen, Ch., & Hicks, D. (2003). Tracing knowledge diffusion. Scientometrics, 59(2), 199-211.
[6]
Chen, Ch., & Morris, S. (2003). Visualizing evolving networks: Minimum spanning trees versus pathfinder networks. IEEE symposium on information visualization, October 2003, Washington, USA
[7]
De Solla Price, D. J. (1963). Little science, big science. New York: Columbia University Press.
[8]
Egghe, L. (2008). A model for the size-frequency function of co-author pairs. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(13), 2133-2137.
[9]
Gershenson, C., & Heylighen, F. (2003). When can we call a system self-organizing? In W. Banzhaf, T. Christaller, P. Dittrich, J. T. Kim & J. Ziegler (Eds.), Advances in artificial life, 7th European conference, ECAL 2003, pp. 606-614. Springer, LNAI 2801
[10]
Glänzel, W., & de Lange, C. (1997). Modelling and measuring multilateral co-authorship in international scientific collaboration. Part II. A comparative study on the extent and change of international scientific collaboration links. Scientometrics, 40, 605-626.
[11]
Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2005). Analysing scientific networks through co-authorship. In H. Moed, W. Glänzel & U. Schmoch (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative science and technology research (pp. 257-276). ISBN: 978-1-4020-2702-4 (Print) 978-1-4020-2755-0
[12]
Hanning, Guo., Kretschmer, Hildrun., & Liu, Zeyuan. (2008). Distribution of co-author pairs' frequencies of the Journal of Information Technology. COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management., 2(1), 73-81.
[13]
Heylighen, F. (2001). The science of self-organization and adaptivity. In L. D. Kiel, (Ed.), Knowledge management, organizational intelligence and learning, and complexity. In: The Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS). Oxford: Eolss. http://www.eolss.net
[14]
Heylighen, F. (2009). Complexity and self-organization. In M. J. Bates & M. N. Maack (Eds.), Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. Boca Raton: CRC Press.
[15]
Heylighen, F., & Gershenson, C. (2003). The meaning of self-organization in computing. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 18(4), 72-75.
[16]
Katz, J. S., & Martin, B. R. (1997). What is research collaboration? Research Policy, 26(1997), 1-18.
[17]
Kretschmer, H. (1999). A new model of scientific collaboration. Part I: Types of two-dimensional and three-dimensional collaboration patterns. Scientometrics, 46(3), 501-518.
[18]
Kretschmer, H. (2002, Invited Paper). Similarities and dissimilarities in co-authorship networks; Gestalt theory as explanation for well-ordered collaboration structures and production of scientific literature. Library Trends, 50(3), 474-497.
[19]
Kretschmer, H., de Beaver, D. B., Ozel, B., & Kretschmer, T. (2015a). Who is collaborating with whom? Part I. Mathematical model and methods for empirical testing. Open Access.
[20]
Kretschmer, H., de Beaver, D. B., Ozel, B. & Kretschmer, T. (2015b). Who is collaborating with whom? Part II. Application of the methods to male and to female networks. 009. Open Access.
[21]
Kretschmer, H., & Kretschmer, T. (2007). Lotka's distribution and distribution of co-author pairs' frequencies. Journal of Informetrics, 1, 308-337.
[22]
Kretschmer, H., & Kretschmer, T. (2009, Invited Keynote Speech). Who is collaborating with whom? Explanation of a fundamental principle. In H. Hou, B. Wang, S. Liu, Z. Hu, X. Zhang & M. Li (Eds.) Proceedings of the 5th international conference on webometrics, informetrics and scientometrics and 10th COLLNET meeting, 13-16 September 2009, Dalian, China (CD-ROM for all participants and for libraries)
[23]
Kretschmer, H., & Kretschmer, T. (2013, Invited Paper, open access). Who is collaborating with whom in science? Explanation of a fundamental principle. Social Networking, 2, 99-137. Published online July 2013.
[24]
Kretschmer, H., Kundra, R., de B. Beaver, D., & Kretschmer, T. (2012). Gender bias in Journals of Gender Studies. Scientometrics, 93, 135-150.
[25]
Kundra, Ramesh., de B. Beaver, D., Kretschmer, H., & Kretschmer, T. (2008). Co-author pairs' frequencies distribution in journals of gender studies. COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management, 2(1), 63-71.
[26]
Lu, H., & Feng, Y. (2009). A measure of authors' centrality in co-authorship networks based on the distribution of collaborative relationships. Scientometrics., 81(2), 499-511.
[27]
McGrath, E. W. (2002). Introduction. Library Trends, 50(3), 309-316.
[28]
Melin, G. (2000). Pragmatism and self-organization: Research collaboration at the individual level. Research Policy, 29(1), 31-40.
[29]
Metzger, W. (1986). Gestalt-Psychologie. Ausgewählte Werke aus den Jahren 1950 bis 1982 herausgegeben und eingeleitet von Michael Stadler und Heinrich
[30]
Milgram, S. (1967). The small world problem. Psychology Today, 2, 60-67.
[31]
Miquel, J. F., & Okubo, Y. (1994). Structure of international collaboration in science: Comparisons of profiles in countries using a link indicator. Scientometrics, 29(2), 271-294.
[32]
Morris, S. A., & Goldstein, M. L. (2007). Manifestation of research teams in journal literature: A growth model of papers, authors, collaboration, coauthorship, weak ties, and Lotka's law. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(12), 1764-1782.
[33]
Newman, M. E. J. (2001). The structure of scientific collaboration networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 98, 404-409.
[34]
Newman, M. E. J. (2002). Assortative mixing in networks. Physical Review Letters, 89, 208701.
[35]
Newman, M. E. J. (2005). Power laws, Pareto Distributions and Zipf's law. Contemporary Physics, 46(5), 323-351.
[36]
Olmeda-Gómez, C., Perianes-Rodriguez, A., & OvallePerandones, M. A. (2009). Visualization of scientific co-authorship in Spanish universities: From regionalization to internationalization. Aslib Proceedings, 61(1), 83-100.
[37]
Otte, E., & Rousseau, R. (2002). Social network analysis: A powerful strategy, also for the information sciences. Journal of Information Science, 28, 443-455.
[38]
Ozel, B., Kretschmer, H., & Kretschmer, Th. (2014). Co-authorship pair distribution patterns by gender. Scientometrics, 98(1), 703-723.
[39]
Pepe, A., & Rodriguez, M. A. (2009). Collaboration in sensor network research: An in-depth longitudinal analysis of assortative mixing patterns. Scientometrics. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com
[40]
Rosseau, R., & Zhao, S. X. (2015). A general conceptual framework for characterizing the ego in a network. Journal of Informetrics, 9(1), 145-149.
[41]
Wagner, C. S., & Leydesdorff, L. (2005). Network structure, self-organization and the growth of international collaboration in science. Research Policy, 34(10), 1608-1618.
[42]
Watts, D. J., & Strogatz, S. H. (1998). Collective dynamics of 'small-work' networks. Nature, 393(6684), 440-442.
[43]
Yamashita, Y., & Okubo, Y. (2005). Patterns of scientific collaboration between Japan and France. In P. Ingwersen & B. Larsen (Eds.), Proceedings of ISSI 2005 (Vol. 2, pp. 517-526). Solna: Karolinska University Press.
[44]
Yin, L., Kretschmer, H., Hanneman, R. A., & Liu, Z. (2006). Connection and stratification in research collaboration: An analysis of the COLLNET network. Information Processing and Management., 42(6), 1599-1613.
[45]
Zitt, M., Bassecoulard, E., & Okubo, Y. (2000). Shadows of the past in international cooperation: Collaboration profiles of the top five producers of science. Scientometrics, 47, 627-657.
Recommendations
Sixty-four years of informetrics research: productivity, impact and collaboration
This paper analyses the information science research field of informetrics to identify publication strategies that have been important for its successful researchers. The study uses a micro-analysis of informetrics researchers from 5,417 informetrics ...
The strength of strong ties: How co-authorship affect productivity of academic economists?
Increased specialization and extensive collaboration are common behaviours in the scientific community, as well as the evaluation of scientific research based on bibliometric indicators. This paper aims to analyse the effect of collaboration (co-...
Artist friendly facial animation retargeting
This paper presents a novel facial animation retargeting system that is carefully designed to support the animator's workflow. Observation and analysis of the animators' often preferred process of key-frame animation with blendshape models informed our ...
Comments
Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
Copyright © Copyright © 2015 Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary.
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Berlin, Heidelberg
Publication History
Published: 01 July 2015
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Article
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 0Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)0
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 29 Nov 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
View options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in