Search

Research publishing companies need to constantly monitor and compare scientific journals and conferences in order to inform critical business and editorial decisions. Semantic Web and Knowledge Graph technologies are natural solutions since they allow these companies to integrate, represent, and analyse a large quantity of information from heterogeneous sources. In this paper, we present the AIDA Dashboard 2.0, an innovative system developed in collaboration with Springer Nature to analyse and compare scientific venues, now also available to the public. This tool builds on a knowledge graph which includes over 1.5B RDF triples and was produced by integrating information about 25M research articles from Microsoft Academic Graph, Dimensions, DBpedia, GRID, CSO, and INDUSO. It can produce sophisticated analytics and rankings that are not available in alternative systems. We discuss the advantages of this solution for the Springer Nature editorial process and present a user study involving 5 editors and 5 researchers, which yielded excellent results in terms of quality of the analytics and usability.

Academia and industry are constantly engaged in a joint effort for producing scientific knowledge that will shape the society of the future. Analysing the knowledge flow between them and understanding how they influence each other is a critical task for researchers, governments, funding bodies, investors, and companies. However, current corpora are unfit to support large-scale analysis of the knowledge flow between academia and industry since they lack of a good characterization of research topics and industrial sectors. In this short paper, we introduce the Academia/Industry DynAmics (AIDA) Knowledge Graph, which characterizes 14M papers and 8M patents according to the research topics drawn from the Computer Science Ontology. 4M papers and 5M patents are also classified according to the type of the author's affiliations (academy, industry, or collaborative) and 66 industrial sectors (e.g., automotive, financial, energy, electronics) obtained from DBpedia. AIDA was generated by an automatic pipeline that integrates several knowledge graphs and bibliographic corpora, including Microsoft Academic Graph, Dimensions, English DBpedia, the Computer Science Ontology, and the Global Research Identifier Database.

In this paper, we present a preliminary approach that uses a set of NLP and Deep Learning methods for extracting entities and relationships from research publications and then integrates them in a Knowledge Graph. More specifically, we (i) tackle the challenge of knowledge extraction by employing several state-of-the-art Natural Language Processing and Text Mining tools, (ii) describe an approach for integrating entities and relationships generated by these tools, and (iii) analyse an automatically generated Knowledge Graph including 10,425 entities and 25,655 relationships in the field of Semantic Web.

In the last decade, research literature reached an enormous volume with an unprecedented current annual increase of 1.5 million new publications. As research gets ever more global and new countries and institutions, either from academia or corporate environment, start to contribute with their share, it is important to monitor this complex scenario and understand its dynamics.\ud \ud We present a study on a conference proceedings dataset extracted from Springer Nature Scigraph that illustrates insightful geographical trends and highlights the unbalanced growth of competitive research institutions worldwide. Results emerged from our micro and macro analysis show that the distributions among countries of institutions and papers follow a power law, and thus very few countries keep producing most of the papers accepted by high-tier conferences. In addition, we found that the annual and overall turnover rate of the top 5, 10 and 25 countries is extremely low, suggesting a very static landscape in which new entries struggle to emerge. Finally, we highlight the presence of an increasing gap between the number of institutions initiating and overseeing research endeavours (i.e. first and last authors' affiliations) and the total number of institutions participating in research. As a consequence of our analysis, the paper also discusses our experience in working with affiliations: an utterly simple matter at first glance, that is instead revealed to be a complex research and technical challenge yet far from being solved.