Hierarchical topic-based communities construction for authors in a literature database

From WikiPapers
Revision as of 20:54, November 7, 2014 by Nemo bis (Talk | contribs) (CSV import from another resource for wiki stuff; all data is PD-ineligible, abstracts quoted under quotation right. Skipping when title already exists. Sorry for authors and references to be postprocessed, please edit and create redirects.)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Hierarchical topic-based communities construction for authors in a literature database is a 2010 conference paper written in English by Wu C.-L., Koh J.-L. and published in Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics).

[edit] Abstract

In this paper, given a set of research papers with only title and author information, a mining strategy is proposed to discover and organize the communities of authors according to both the co-author relationships and research topics of their published papers. The proposed method applies the CONGA algorithm to discover collaborative communities from the network constructed from the co-author relationship. To further group the collaborative communities of authors according to research interests, the CiteSeerX is used as an external source to discover the hidden hierarchical relationships among the topics covered by the papers. In order to evaluate whether the constructed topic-based collaborative community is semantically meaningful, the first part of evaluation is to measure the consistency between the terms appearing in the published papers of a topic-based collaborative community and the terms in the documents related to the specific topic retrieved from other external source. The experimental results show that 81.61% of the topic-based collaborative communities satisfy the consistency requirement. On the other hand, the accuracy of the discovered sub-concept relationship is verified by checking the Wikipedia categories. It is shown that 75.96% of the sub-concept terms are properly assigned in the concept hierarchy.

[edit] References

This section requires expansion. Please, help!

Cited by

Probably, this publication is cited by others, but there are no articles available for them in WikiPapers. Cited 2 time(s)