Search

We provide an example of the application of quantitative techniques, tools, and topics from mathematics and data science to analyze the mathematics community itself in order to quantify and document inequity in our discipline. This work is a contribution to the new and growing interdisciplinary field recently termed "mathematics of Mathematics," or "MetaMath." Using data about PhD-granting institutions in the United States and publicly available funding data from the National Science Foundation, we highlight inequalities in departments at U.S. institutions of higher education that produce PhDs in the mathematical sciences. Specifically, we determine that a small fraction of mathematical sciences departments receive a large majority of federal funding awarded to support mathematics in the United States. Additionally, we identify the extent to which women faculty members are underrepresented in mathematical sciences PhD-granting institutions in the United States. We also show that this underrepresentation of women faculty is even more pronounced in departments that received more federal grant funding., Comment: 22 pages, five figures, four tables

We present and discuss a curated selection of recent literature related to the application of quantitative techniques, tools, and topics from mathematics and data science that have been used to analyze the mathematical sciences community. We engage in this project with a focus on including research that highlights, documents, or quantifies (in)equities that exist in the mathematical sciences, specifically, and STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) more broadly. We seek to enhance social justice in the mathematics and data science communities by providing numerous examples of the ways in which the mathematical sciences fails to meet standards of equity, equal opportunity and inclusion. We introduce the term ``mathematics of Mathematics" for this project, explicitly building upon the growing, interdisciplinary field known as ``Science of Science" to interrogate, investigate, and identify the nature of the mathematical sciences itself. We aim to promote, provide, and posit sources of productive collaborations and we invite interested researchers to contribute to this developing body of work., Comment: 18 pages, comments welcomed

The definition of who is or what makes a ``mathematician" is an important and urgent issue to be addressed in the mathematics community. Too often, a narrower definition of who is considered a mathematician (and what is considered mathematics) is used to exclude people from the discipline -- both explicitly and implicitly. However, using a narrow definition of a mathematician allows us to examine and challenge systemic barriers that exist in certain spaces of the community. This paper explores and illuminates tensions between narrow and broad definitions and how they can be used to promote both inclusion and exclusion simultaneously. In this article, we present a framework of definitions based on identity, function, and qualification and exploring several different meanings of ``mathematician". By interrogating various definitions, we highlight their risks and opportunities, with an emphasis on implications for broadening and/or narrowing participation of underrepresented groups., Comment: 21 pages, 2 figures