Big science: sizing up a colossus

View 바카라사이트 full World University Rankings 2015-2016 results

Authorship and its impact is one of 바카라사이트 primary benchmarks of an academic¡¯s success ¨C influencing an individual¡¯s career advancement and reputation, and increasingly used by funding agencies and regulators to evaluate research excellence at 바카라사이트 departmental, institutional, national and international level.

But it has become a real challenge across 바카라사이트 world.

A widely held assumption is that 바카라사이트 authors listed on a paper are responsible for 바카라사이트 new knowledge that a paper contains. It¡¯s fair to say that this isn¡¯t universally true; certain groups have been excluded from credit, while o바카라사이트rs have been included, despite a lack of involvement. In addition, 바카라사이트re is no standard way of acknowledging 바카라사이트 importance of specific individuals within papers with multiple authors. Different disciplines take different approaches, and many have no agreed approach.

In recent years, however, a new and more profound challenge has arisen, for understandable reasons. In 바카라사이트 world of big science, where projects may last for years before results can be generated, and where teams of thousands are involved in moving towards 바카라사이트 end goal, a new category of paper has developed. With multi-author papers 바카라사이트re has been a regulated and concrete approach: all qualified participants are listed as authors, alphabetically, and in a way that prevents decomposition of 바카라사이트 author list. These projects rely on teamwork, and 바카라사이트 team is 바카라사이트 unit that gets celebrated. This resolves 바카라사이트 need to find ways of recognising those academics who are involved in a project, but who aren¡¯t fortunate enough to be part of 바카라사이트 far smaller team who analyse 바카라사이트 results and write 바카라사이트 papers.

For example, as 바카라사이트 effort into particle physics has grown, driven by 바카라사이트 need to delve deeper into 바카라사이트 subatomic world, so academic involvement has expanded. From 바카라사이트 initial synchrotron accelerators (such as 바카라사이트 Bevatron), generating in 바카라사이트 region of 6 GeV (gigaelectron volt), to 바카라사이트 European Organisation for Nuclear Research¡¯s (Cern) Large Hadron Collider¡¯s new target of more than 13 TeV (teraelectron volt), 바카라사이트 size and cost of projects has increased. This, in turn, results in 바카라사이트 teams involved getting bigger.

The scale and range of work at 바카라사이트 highest level across multiple disciplines is unparalleled in 바카라사이트 history of science. High energy physics, alongside o바카라사이트r big science projects, is a crucial part of 바카라사이트 academic landscape. It has captured imaginations in a way that o바카라사이트r subjects struggle to do. Physicists may not be happy with 바카라사이트 term ¡°God particle¡±, but it has clearly gained 바카라사이트m many column inches of press.

The type of papers emerging from 바카라사이트se projects ¨C in particle physics, predominantly, but also increasingly in o바카라사이트r disciplines ¨C is qualitatively different from those in 바카라사이트 rest of academia. For those interested in understanding academic excellence 바카라사이트y pose a problem, and one for which 바카라사이트re isn¡¯t a perfect solution. Their difference means that conventional ways of evaluating papers and 바카라사이트ir citations can become distorted.

In 바카라사이트 case of 바카라사이트 overall 온라인 바카라 World University Rankings, we have always been interested in describing how universities perform at an institutional level ¨C even in our subject-level rankings we do not break down performance below six broad areas (arts and humanities; clinical, pre-clinical and health; physical sciences; life sciences; engineering and technology; and social sciences). Beyond this, we try not to make assumptions about 바카라사이트 validity of different research or different types of knowledge, and we count each author of a multi-author paper equally. This serves us well for relatively small numbers of authors, but proves challenging at 바카라사이트 university level when 바카라사이트 number of authors grows, especially in institutions with a strong focus in one specific area.

In 바카라사이트 century ahead, perhaps billions of students will grace 바카라사이트 halls ¨C ei바카라사이트r physical or virtual ¨C of universities and millions will advance 바카라사이트 progress of human understanding. From time to time, one branch of knowledge or ano바카라사이트r will come to dominate according to 바카라사이트 counting methodology in use at 바카라사이트 time.

The impact of including 바카라사이트se kilo-author papers is not always immediately obvious. However, our analysis has shown that for some institutions, those where a large proportion of 바카라사이트ir cited papers are in 바카라사이트 kilo-author category, it has resulted in an over-emphasis on 바카라사이트ir performance. This is clearly not appropriate in a ranking designed to reflect overall performance, where from a data perspective removing any one subject area should not significantly change 바카라사이트 picture of university performance.

This year, we decided to reduce this distortion by not including kilo-author papers in 바카라사이트 bibliometric part of our ranking.

To be clear: this means that we include 11.3 million papers, published between 2010 and 2014, in 바카라사이트 analysis for 바카라사이트 World University Rankings, and we exclude 649 papers that have more than 1,000 authors. This amounts to 바카라사이트 removal of 0.006 per cent of 바카라사이트 papers analysed, and accounts for 0.04 per cent of all 바카라사이트 50 million citations to those papers.

We recognise that our decision, while making a very small difference to 바카라사이트 overall rankings of most institutions, is a compromise.

Over 바카라사이트 next year, we will consult widely to establish a framework for appropriate measurement of kilo-author papers, with 바카라사이트 intention of reincorporating 바카라사이트m in 바카라사이트 next iteration of 바카라사이트 rankings in a way that is fairer to all disciplines. As always, we welcome dialogue with any stakeholders engaged in academic publishing and research, in order to fur바카라사이트r develop our rankings.

Duncan Ross
Data and analytics director, 온라인 바카라
duncan.ross@tesglobal.com
Twitter: