Affiliation:
1. 1 Wuhan Library, Chinese Academy of Sciences , Hubei , China
2. 2 Department of Information Resources Management, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences , Beijing , China
Abstract
Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to investigate the differences between conference papers and journal papers in the field of computer science based on Bayesian network.
Design/methodology/approach
This paper investigated the differences between conference papers and journal papers in the field of computer science based on Bayesian network, a knowledge-representative framework that can model relationships among all variables in the network. We defined the variables required for Bayesian networks modeling, calculated the values of each variable based Aminer dataset (a literature data set in the field of computer science), learned the Bayesian network and derived some findings based on network inference.
Findings
The study found that conferences are more attractive to senior scholars, the academic impact of conference papers is slightly higher than journal papers, and it is uncertain whether conference papers are more innovative than journal papers.
Research limitations
The study was limited to the field of computer science and employed Aminer dataset as the sample. Further studies involving more diverse datasets and different fields could provide a more complete picture of the matter.
Practical implications
By demonstrating that Bayesian networks can effectively analyze issues in Scientometrics, the study offers valuable insights that may enhance researchers’ understanding of the differences between journal and conference in computer science.
Originality/value
Academic conferences play a crucial role in facilitating scholarly exchange and knowledge dissemination within the field of computer science. Several studies have been conducted to examine the distinctions between conference papers and journal papers in terms of various factors, such as authors, citations, h-index and others. Those studies were carried out from different (independent) perspectives, lacking a systematic examination of the connections and interactions between multiple perspectives. This paper supplements this deficiency based on Bayesian network modeling.
Reference19 articles.
1. Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A., & Felici, G. (2019). Predicting publication long-term impact through a combination of early citations and journal impact factor. Journal of Informetrics, 13(1), 32-49.
2. Amjad, T., Shahid, N., Daud, A., & Khatoon, A. (2022). Citation burst prediction in a bibliometric network. Scientometrics, 127(5), 2773-2790.
3. Birman K, Schneider FB. Viewpoint Program committee overload in systems. Communications of the ACM. 2009, 52(5): 34-7.
4. Eckmann, M., Rocha, A., & Wainer, J. (2012). Relationship between high-quality journals and conferences in computer vision. Scientometrics, 90(2), 617-630.
5. Fernández Izquierdo, F., Roman-Roman, A., & Rubio Liniers, M. C. (2007). Bibliometric Study of Early Modern History in Spain based on Bibliographic References in Nacional Scientific Journals and Conference. Proceedings of ISSI 2007. 11th. International Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics Madrid, CSIC vol. I., 266-271.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献