Research

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014: 100 TOP RANKED SPECIALTIES IN THE SCIENCES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

The National Science Library, Chinese Academy of Sciences Thomson Reuters IP & Science The Joint Research Center of Emerging Technology Analysis

December 2014

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

RESEARCH FRONT DATA REVEAL LINKS AMONG RESEARCHERS WORKING ON RELATED THREADS OF SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY, BUT WHOSE BACKGROUND MIGHT NOT SUGGEST THAT THEY BELONG TO THE SAME "INVISIBLE COLLEGE."

2

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

BACKGROUND The 2013 Thomson Reuters Research Fronts report gained widespread attention. It identified current key research topics and provided research managers and policy makers with a data-driven perspective on important trends and emerging fields to assist them in making strategic plans.

This year, Research Fronts 2014 was undertaken as a collaborative project by the Joint Research Center of Emerging Technology Analysis established by Thomson Reuters and the National Science Library, Chinese Academy of Sciences.

In this report, 100 hot research fronts and 44 emerging ones were identified based on cocitation analysis that generated more than 9,700 research fronts in the Thomson Reuters database Essential Science Indicators (ESI).

METHODOLOGY AND PRESENTATION OF DATA The study was conducted in two parts. Thomson Reuters selected research fronts and provided data on the core papers and citing papers of the selected research fronts. Final selection of key research fronts and the interpretation of these were completed by the National Science Library, Chinese Academy of Sciences. For the 2014 update, the research fronts drew on ESI data from 2008 to 2013, which were obtained in March 2014.

RESEARCH FRONTS SELECTION AND DATA PROVIDED Research Fronts 2014 presents a total of 144 research fronts, including 100 hot and 44 emerging ones. The research fronts are classified into 10 broad research areas in the sciences and social sciences, as they were in the 2013 report.

The objective was to discover which research fronts were most active or developing most rapidly.

The specific methodology used for identifying the research fronts is described as follows.

HOW TO SELECT THE HOT RESEARCH FRONTS First, more than 9,700 research fronts in 21 ESI fields were classified into 10 broad research areas. Research fronts assigned to each of the 10 areas were ranked by total citations and the top 10 percent of the fronts in each area were extracted. These research fronts were then reranked according to the average (mean) year of their core papers to produce a top 10 list in each broad area. There were 100 hot research fronts in total. These 10 fronts selected for each of 10 highly aggregated, main areas of science and social sciences represent the hottest of the largest fronts, not necessarily the hottest research fronts across the database (all disciplines). Due to the different characteristics and citation behaviors in various disciplines, some fronts are much smaller than others in terms of number of core and citing papers.

3

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

HOW TO SELECT THE EMERGING RESEARCH FRONTS

FINAL SELECTION OF KEY RESEARCH FRONTS

A research front with core papers of recent vintage indicates a specialty with a young foundation that is rapidly growing. We call these "hot." To identify emerging specialties, extra preference, or weight, was given to the currency of the foundation literature: only research fronts whose core papers dated, on average, to the second half of 2012 or more recently were considered, and then these were sorted in descending order by their total citations. There were 44 fronts whose total citations amounted to 100 or more ( see appendix). As the selection was not limited to any research area, the 44 fronts are distributed unevenly in the 10 fields. For example, there are 14 research fronts in chemistry but there is none in agricultural sciences.

CPT, an index, was designed to select key research fronts. Nineteen key fronts were selected from the 144 on the basis of CPT. CPT: C represents the number of citing articles, i.e. the amount of articles citing core papers; P the number of core papers; T means the age of citing articles, which is the number of citing years, from the earliest year of a citing paper to present.

Based on the above two methods, the report presents the top 10 hot fronts in 10 broad areas (in total 100 fronts) and 44 emerging ones.

FINAL SELECTION AND INTERPRETATION OF KEY RESEARCH FRONTS On the basis of 144 research fronts provided

by Thomson Reuters, analysts at the National Science Library, Chinese Academy of Sciences, conducted a detailed analysis and interpretation to highlight 19 research fronts of particular interest.

As indicated, a research front consists of a group of highly cited papers and their citing papers that have frequently co-cited these so-called core papers. In other words, core papers are all highly cited papers in ESI, papers that rank in top one percent in terms of citations in the same ESI field and in the same publication year. Since the authors, institutions and countries/territories listed on the core papers have made significant contributions in the particular specialty, a tabulation of these appears in the analysis of the research fronts.

By reading the full text of the citing articles, greater precision can be obtained in specifying the topic of the research front, especially in terms of its recent or leading edge. In this case, it is not necessary that the citing papers are themselves highly cited.

4

CPT=((C/P)/ T) CPT is the ratio of the average citation impacts of a research front to the age/occurrence of its citing papers, meaning the higher the number, the hotter the topic. It measures how extensive and immediate a research front is; the degree of citation impact can also be seen from it. It takes the publication years of citing papers into account and demonstrates the trend and extent of attention on certain research fronts across years.

Given the condition that a particular research front was cited continuously: When P as well as T is equal in two fronts, the bigger C, the bigger CPT, indicates broader citation influence of the research front with bigger C. When C as well as P is equal in two fronts, the smaller T, the bigger CPT, indicates the hotter research front with smaller T. When C as well as T is equal in two fronts, the smaller P, the bigger CPT, indicates broader citation influence of the research front with smaller P.

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

INTERPRETATION OF KEY RESEARCH FRONTS INTERPRETATION OF HOT RESEARCH FRONTS The first table under each discipline section in the report lists 10 top-ranked fronts for each of the 10 broad areas. A particular front in each field, selected by the CPT index, is highlighted, noted in gray in the table. Key data are also shown, such as the number of core papers, total citations and the average publication year of the core papers. Average publication year of the core papers ranged from 2008 to 20131. For example, if the average publication year of a research front is 2009.6, the core papers were published, as an average, around August 2009.

A bubble diagram shows the age distribution of the citing articles in the 10 research fronts listed for each broad field. Hot fronts were marked in a red bubble. Size represents the amount of citing papers per year. In this figure, hot fronts can be easily seen particularly when a large amount of citing papers appear in only a few publication years (i.e. the first two conditions in Final Selection criteria). But other data must be considered when the number of core papers (“P”) is small. For example, the topic “The application of regional climate change models in regional climate change projections of terrestrial precipitation and temperature, as well as bias and error correction of the models” was selected as a key research front in geosciences. As shown in Figure 3, its citing year started from 2007, the same as other research fronts in the same discipline, and its bubble size or the number of citing papers is not the biggest in the area.

But because of the fewer core papers, the CPT index of this particular front is the biggest one in geosciences and thus it was selected as the key research front for further analysis.

The bubble diagram also helps the reader understand the development of a research front. Generally speaking, the amount of citing articles in most fronts will grow with time. But an exception was observed in one front in clinical medicine: “Intensive insulin therapy and fluid resuscitation with hydroxyethyl starch in critically ill patients.” It is shown in Figure 4 that the age

1

distribution of citing articles has been declining since 2010. On further exploration, two topics were found within this front: “Intensive insulin therapy in critically ill patients” and “Fluid resuscitation with hydroxyethyl starch in critically ill patients.” In the topic of “Intensive insulin therapy in critically ill patients,” the Leuven scheme of intensive insulin therapy suggested in 2001 was put in doubt by results of the NICESUGAR study published in 2009, which sparked a fierce debate about the accepted therapy. The NICE-SUGAR paper has been cited 1,171 times.

On Feb 15, 2011, clinical guidelines of intensive insulin therapy for inpatients issued by American College of Physicians (ACP) were published in Annals of Internal Medicine, and this opposed “the utility of intensive insulin therapy program will control SICU/MICU patients’ blood sugar to normal levels.” The guideline also became one of core papers in the front. In fact, the ACP guidelines had the effect of stopping the wrong clinical treatment. After that, no papers related to intensive insulin therapy came into the core papers of this research front. This is the reason why a declining trend in citing papers occurs after 2010 in Figure 4.

The second and third table in each research area presents data about countries, institutions and authors of the core papers, which reveals those making the greatest contributions in the foundation literature of the hot fronts. Countries and institutions of the citing papers are also analyzed in the fourth table in each discipline section.

INTERPRETATION OF EMERGING FRONTS The emerging fronts identified were generally small in terms of number of core and citing papers. Information professionals examined and interpreted the data in these fronts to better understand their content and describe their very recent development.

Note: at times a publication year 2007 paper may be included because the year of its indexing, or its database year, was 2008.

5

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

AGRICULTURAL, PLANT AND ANIMAL SCIENCES HOT RESEARCH FRONT DEVELOPMENTAL TREND OF THE TOP 10 RESEARCH FRONTS IN AGRICULTURAL, PLANT AND ANIMAL SCIENCES Table 1: Top 10 research fronts in agricultural, plant and animal sciences

Rank

Research Fronts (changed)

Core Papers

Citations

Mean Year of Core Papers

1

Statistics of foodborne disease in the USA and evaluation of economic loss

6

873

2011.7

2

Regulation of circadian clock in Arabidopsis

20

998

2011.1

3

Auxin biosynthesis and regulation

18

855

2011

4

Phylogenetic analysis of endophytic fungal species in plant

31

1150

2010.8

5

Identification, growth and toxin production of Aspergillus niger

18

973

2010.8

6

Genetic theory of speciation

12

1061

2010.7

7

Organelles RNA editing

27

1473

2010.6

8

Analysis of rhizosphere fungal communities using DNA sequencing

18

1040

2010.6

9

C-4 photosynthesis evolution and the effect of CO2 concentration on mesophyll conductance

22

1171

2010.5

10

Biological control of invasive crop pest using predators

14

953

2010.5

Figure 1: Citing articles for the top 10 research fronts in agricultural, plant and animal sciences

6

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

HOT RESEARCH FRONT – “STATISTICS OF FOODBORNE DISEASE IN THE USA AND EVALUATION OF ECONOMIC LOSS”

ANALYSIS OF THE ACTIVE STATUS OF COUNTRIES AND INSTITUTIONS

Foodborne disease refers to infection or intoxication caused by pathogenic factors entering into human bodies through food. Most foodborne diseases are caused by bacteria, viruses, helminthes, and fungi. According to epidemiological survey data, the incidence of foodborne diseases in the world has continued to increase in the past decade, and a severe outbreak trend has been observed. Currently, only a limited number of countries in the world have established annual reporting systems for foodborne disease, including the USA, UK, Canada, and Japan, This important front of science mainly studies the reasons for the occurrence of foodborne diseases, methods for monitoring and assessing such diseases, the effect of pathogens in food supply chains on public health in the USA, and economic burdens caused by major foodborne diseases.

The countries that have produced the six core papers that have contributed to the “Statistics of foodborne diseases in the USA and evaluation of economic loss” are the USA and Denmark (Table 2), with researchers from the USA publishing five papers and from Denmark publishing one paper. The influential institutions in this key research front include the Colorado School of Public Health, Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, National Bureau of Economic Research, and the University of Florida, which are all in the USA. Thus, the USA has been influential in directing this research, and this influence has benefited, to a certain extent, from the establishment of a comprehensive monitoring system for foodborne disease in the USA.

Table 2: Top countries and institutions producing the six core papers in the research front “Statistics of foodborne disease in the USA and evaluation of economic loss” Country Ranking

Country

Core Papers

Proportion

Institution Ranking

Core Papers

Proportion

1

USA

5

83.3%

1

Colorado School of Public Health (USA)

2

33.3%

2

Denmark

1

16.7%

1

Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (USA)

2

33.3%

1

Economic Research Service, USDA (USA)

2

33.3%

1

University of Florida (USA)

2

33.3%

5

Ohio State University (USA)

1

16.7%

5

Resources for the Future (USA)

1

16.7%

5

Technical University of Denmark (Denmark)

1

16.7%

Institution

7

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

ANALYSIS OF THE ACTIVE STATUS OF AUTHORS In the scientific front “Statistics of foodborne diseases in the USA and evaluation of economic loss," the top influential authors include researchers from the Colorado School of Public Health, University of Florida, Technical University of Denmark, Economic Research Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and Ohio State University (Table 3). The contributions from Elaine Scallan, an assistant professor at the Colorado School of Public Health, have been the most prominent. Her major research interests include foodborne and enteric disease metrics, foodborne disease attributions and risk factors, foodborne disease surveillance and epidemiology, and enteric disease outbreak investigation and response. Scallan has contributed two of the six

core papers, which were published in 2011 in the same issue of Emerging Infectious Diseases. In addition, these papers have been cited more than any other core papers. One of Scallan's papers used data from surveillance and other sources to evaluate the conditions of 31 major pathogens of foodborne disease that occurred in the USA and performed a modification of the evaluation method. This paper has been cited 694 times.

Another of Scallan's papers used data from surveys, hospital records, and death certificates to evaluate the conditions that produced foodborne diseases caused by unspecified agents not included in the above 31 major pathogens. This paper has been cited 98 times, which is greater than the sum of the other four papers.

Table 3: Top corresponding authors of the six core papers in the research front “Statistics of foodborne disease in the USA and evaluation of economic loss”

8

Ranking

Reprint Author

1

Scallan, E

2

Batz, MB

2

Domingues, AR

2

Hoffmann, S

2

Scharff, RL

Country

Core Papers

Colorado School of Public Health

USA

2

University of Florida

USA

1

Denmark

1

Economic Research Service, USDA

USA

1

Ohio State University

USA

1

Reprint Institution

Technical University of Denmark

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

ANALYSIS OF THE DEVELOPMENTAL STATUS OF COUNTRIES AND INSTITUTIONS From the subsequent number of articles citing these six core papers, the USA has produced the greatest number of citing articles (Table 4) with 457 publications, which accounts for 79.6 percent of the total citing articles. China has produced 28 citing articles, which is the second highest and accounts for 4.9 percent of the total citing articles, followed by Canada, UK, Belgium, Netherlands, Poland, Germany, France, and Spain. Among the top institutions with citing articles, 12 institutions are in the USA, and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has produced the greatest number of citing articles with 77 papers, which

accounts for 13.4 percent of the total citing articles. The U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Food and Drug Administration have produced the second and third highest number of citing articles. A comprehensive analysis of the core papers and citing articles that have been published in this front shows that the USA has a strong influence on the research of “Statistics of foodborne diseases in the USA and evaluation of economic loss.” Although China is not a producing country of core papers, the amount of citing articles places the nation in a leading position, which reflects China’s attention and follow-up on this research front.

Table 4: Top countries and institutions producing citing articles in the research front “Statistics of foodborne disease in the USA and evaluation of economic loss”

Country Ranking

Country

Citing Papers

Proportion

Institution Ranking

Institution (all USA)

Citing Papers

Proportion

1

USA

457

79.6%

1

Centers for Disease Control & Prevention

77

13.4%

2

China

28

4.9%

2

United States Department of Agriculture

76

13.2%

3

Canada

27

4.7%

3

U.S. Food & Drug Administration

74

12.9%

4

UK

23

4.0%

4

North Carolina State University

23

4.0%

5

Belgium

12

2.1%

5

Ohio State University

22

3.8%

6

Netherlands

12

2.1%

6

University of Arkansas

21

3.7%

7

Poland

10

1.7%

7

Minnesota Department of Health

18

3.1%

8

Germany

10

1.7%

8

University of Georgia

16

2.8%

9

France

10

1.7%

9

Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment

15

2.6%

10

Spain

10

1.7%

10

Tennessee Department of Health

14

2.4%

10

University of Tennessee Knoxville

14

2.4%

10

Cornell University

14

2.4%

9

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

ECOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES HOT RESEARCH FRONT DEVELOPMENTAL TREND OF THE TOP 10 RESEARCH FRONTS IN ECOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Table 5: Top 10 research fronts in Ecology and Environmental Sciences

Rank

Research Fronts (changed)

Core Papers

Citations

Mean Year of Core Papers

1

Drought- and heat-induced tree mortality

21

1889

2011.3

2

Shifting plant phenology in response to global change

15

1154

2010.1

3

Effects of ocean acidification on marine ecosystems

24

2186

2009.8

4

Predicting species potential distributions with Maxent

36

5614

2009.6

5

Diversification rates and adaptive radiation

28

2554

2009.4

6

Landscape genetic studies

13

1077

2009.4

7

Biochar amendment impacts environment

19

1538

2009.3

8

Ecological communities of ammoniaoxidizing archaea and bacteria

30

3865

2009.2

9

Plant-animal mutualistic networks

11

1176

2009.2

10

Stable isotope ecology

12

1654

2009.1

Figure 2: Citing articles for the top 10 research fronts in ecology and environmental sciences

10

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

HOT RESEARCH FRONT – “PREDICTING SPECIES POTENTIAL DISTRIBUTIONS WITH MAXENT” Species distribution models (SDMs) primarily utilize species distribution data (mainly occurrence data) and environmental data to estimate an ecological niche of species based on specific algorithms, and the results are projected onto landscapes to reflect the preference of species for habitats in the form of probabilities.

The results can explain the probability of species occurrence, habitat suitability, and species abundance, and SDMs have important application values for research in environmental sciences, management of natural resources, and protection of biodiversity. These applications include the evaluation of biodiversity, design of nature reserves, selection of species in ecological restoration, screening of habitats for ex situ conservation of species, assessments of environmental risk, management of invasive species, and simulations of community and ecosystem distributions; in addition, such models can predict the influence of global environmental changes on species and ecosystems.

SDM research originated in early studies on the relationship between plant communities and environmental gradients, especially studies on the response curves of species to environmental factors. In the 1980s, the development of computer technology and statistical sciences gradually shifted SDM research to studies on improving their prediction capabilities. After the

1990s, the rapid development of geographic information system technology and increasingly improved access to remote sensing data greatly increased the application capabilities of SDMs; therefore, a large amount of SDMs and related software emerged.

The Maxent model is an SDM that has provided the most extensive applications in recent years.

This model was developed by Steven J. Phillips et al. at the AT&T Laboratories in 2006, and it has been applied extensively for the design of species protection areas, prediction of potential distributions of invasive species, and simulation of species spatial distribution in response to climate change (see: http://archive.sciencewatch. com/ana/st/climate/09novSTClimPhilET/). The paper by Phillips et al. published in Ecological Modelling has been cited 2,158 times to date, which indicates the degree of recognition of this model in related research fields. Of the 36 core papers in this field, another paper published by Phillips in 2008 has received 687 citations and is considered the most influential. This paper included new developments and comprehensive evaluations of the Maxent model.

Table 6 and Table 8 summarize the countries and institutions that have provided the most important contributions to the core papers and citing articles and show that the USA has been the most active country in the research front

Table 6: Top countries and institutions producing the 36 core papers in the research front “Predicting species potential distributions with Maxent” Country Ranking

Country

Core Papers

Proportion

Institution Ranking

Institution

Core papers

Proportion

1

USA

28

77.8%

1

University of Kansas (USA)

11

30.6%

2

Australia

10

27.8%

2

University of Lausanne (Switzerland)

6

16.7%

3

Switzerland

7

19.4%

3

University of Melbourne (Australia)

5

13.9%

4

Spain

5

13.9%

4

AT&T Labs (USA)

4

11.1%

5

New Zealand

4

11.1%

4

SUNY Stony Brook (USA)

4

11.1%

4

CSIC (SPAIN)

4

11.1% 11

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

“PREDICTING SPECIES POTENTIAL DISTRIBUTIONS WITH MAXENT.” The USA has produced 28 of the 36 core papers, which account for 77.8 percent, and Australia, Switzerland, Spain, and New Zealand have each contributed 10, 7, 5, and 4 core papers, respectively.

The University of Kansas (USA) has produced the greatest number of both core papers and citing articles, contributing 30.6 percent of the core papers (11 papers) and 83 citing articles. A. Townsend Peterson of the Biodiversity Institute of the University of Kansas is considered the leading researcher in this field. His studies have focused on ecological niche models, and Peterson has co-authored seven core papers and is the corresponding author of four papers. In addition, Peterson is the corresponding author with the most citing articles at 16 papers (Table 7).

Jane Elith of the University of Melbourne, Australia is also active in the field, and her research interests involve simulating biodiversity using quantitative methods. She is currently studying the application of climate change and invasive species. From 2009-2011, the University of Melbourne contributed five core papers that were all authored or co-authored by Elith. During these three years, she was listed as a corresponding author on one paper in each year that it was selected as a core paper. The frequency at which these three core papers have been cited ranks these first among the other papers published in the same year. One of Elith's papers, which was published in 2009, has received 483 citations, which is the second highest number of citations after the paper published by Phillips in 2008.

Jorge M. Lobo of the Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales and Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC) of Spain has published three core papers (Table 3). Compared to other papers in the same year, his papers have high frequency of citations, especially the paper “AUC: a misleading measure of the performance of predictive distribution models,” which has received extensive attention and 401 citations.

Table 7: Top corresponding authors of the 36 core papers in the research front “Predicting species potential distributions with Maxent”

12

Ranking

Reprint Author

1

Peterson, AT

2

Elith, J

3

Lobo, JM

Reprint Institution University of Kansas University of Melbourne CSIC

Country

Core Papers

USA

4

Australia

3

Spain

3

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

The distribution of countries that have produced articles citing the 36 core papers in this front (Table 8) shows that the top countries are divided into three tiers. The first tier only includes the USA, which has 768 citing articles and accounts for 41.2 percent of the total, which is 3.3 times more than that of the UK, which ranks second.

The UK, Australia, Spain, and Germany each have 198-230 citing articles, and they form the second tier. France, Switzerland, Portugal, and Brazil each have 97-142 citing articles, forming the third tier.

Among the top institutions with the most citing articles, the CSIC of Spain and the University of Kansas of the USA are the top institutions with 95 and 83 citing articles, respectively. The third place, the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) of Australia, has contributed 57 citing articles, and the U.S. Geological Survey, University of Lausanne of Switzerland, and University of Melbourne of Australia have each produced approximately 50 citing articles. The Chinese Academy of Sciences ranks seventh of the top institutions in citing articles at 44, indicating that the Chinese Academy of Sciences has a significant interest in this research front (Table 8).

Table 8: Top countries and institutions producing citing articles in the research front “Predicting species potential distributions with Maxent�

Country Ranking

Country

Citing Papers

Proportion

Institution Ranking

Institution

Citing Papers

Proportion

1

USA

768

41.2%

1

CSIC (SPAIN)

95

5.1%

2

UK

230

12.3%

2

University of Kansas (USA)

83

4.5%

3

Australia

228

12.2%

3

CSIRO (Australia)

57

3.1%

4

Spain

210

11.3%

4

US Geophysical Survey (USA)

50

2.7%

5

Germany

198

10.6%

5

University of Lausanne (Switzerland)

49

2.6%

6

France

142

7.6%

6

University of Melbourne (Australia)

48

2.6%

7

Switzerland

125

6.7%

7

Chinese Academy of Sciences (China)

44

2.4%

8

Canada

104

5.6%

8

University of California at Berkeley (USA)

41

2.2%

9

Portugal

99

5.3%

9

University of California at Davis (USA)

40

2.1%

10

Brazil

97

5.2%

9

USDA (USA)

40

2.1%

9

University of Trier (Germany)

40

2.1%

9

National Autonomous University of Mexico (Mexico)

40

2.1%

13

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

EMERGING RESEARCH FRONT - “UTILIZATION OF AQUATIC BIOLOGICAL COMMUNITIES TO ASSESS THE ECOLOGICAL STATUS OF EUROPEAN SURFACE WATERS” On October 23, 2000, the European Parliament and European Council formulated the “EU Water Framework Directive (WFD),” which was formally implemented on December 22, 2000.

This directive is the most important directive promulgated by the EU in the water resource field in recent decades. All the EU Member States and countries that are prepared to join the EU should have domestic water resource management systems that meet the requirements of the WFD and introduce joint participation in watershed management.

In recent years, the major task for water and environment management in Europe is to implement the WFD. The overall goal of this directive is for the number and quality of all water bodies in Europe to meet the standards before 2015. Therefore, methods are required that can resolve many of the technical issues, including the ability to describe the characteristics of water management districts and water bodies, classify and group characteristics, assess human impacts, determine developmental trends, assess pressures and impacts, and formulate and evaluate action plans. In addition, the WFD also proposes comprehensive water management that includes the participation of interested parties and the public. The successful implementation of the WFD requires suitable tools and models to support the management of a variety of technical and social issues at each stage.

In 2012, Sebastian Birk and colleagues at the University of Duisburg-Essen of Germany published a review paper on the utilization of aquatic biological communities to assess the surface waters in European countries that have implemented the WFD. These researchers

14

summarized 297 assessment methods from 28 countries, and the application rates of these methods for rivers, coastal waters, lakes, and transitional waters were 30, 26, 25 and 19 percent respectively. The implementation of the EU WFD strongly supports studies on transitional waters. Three of the eight papers of this front have discussed the management and assessment of ecological statuses in transitional waters in estuaries and coastal waters. The paper published

by Mike Elliott of the University of Hull of the UK in 2011 on estuarine ecology and management paradigm shifts has been cited 37 times, which is the highest number of citations among the eight core papers. Thus, the ecological and economic value of transitional waters has begun to gain attention.

The derivation, performance, sensitivity, and inherent uncertainty of ecological quality indices have become a main topic in the development of management tools for oceans and transitional and coastal waters. This research front consists of eight core papers, and five of the core papers that were published in 2013 primarily focus on this topic. To resolve future challenges for the EU WFD, new biological indices have been continuously proposed for assessment.

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

GEOSCIENCES HOT RESEARCH FRONT DEVELOPMENTAL TREND OF THE TOP 10 RESEARCH FRONTS IN GEOSCIENCES Table 9: Top 10 research fronts in geosciences

Rank

Research Fronts (changed)

Core Papers

Citations

Mean Year of Core Papers

1

Source characterization, operational prediction and evaluation of 2009 Redoubt and 2010 Eyjafjallajokull volcanic eruptions

31

1035

2011.9

2

The exchange of carbon dioxide (CO2) between the deep sea and the atmosphere formed global climate change during the last deglaciation

25

1326

2011.1

3

2011 Tohoku earthquake and tsunami

35

2311

2010.7

4

Tectonic models of the North China Craton

34

2188

2010.5

5

Greenland ice sheet dynamics-increasing rates of ice mass loss from Greenland outlet glaciers

29

2533

2010.3

6

Application of regional climate models in the prediction of surface temperature and precipitation and studies on model optimization

14

1086

2010.2

7

Zircon U-Pb geochronology in southern Tibet

25

1636

2010.1

8

Global sea level change

42

3870

2010

9

Atmospheric aerosol nucleation and growth

33

2502

2010

10

Atmospheric secondary organic aerosol formation from isoprene

18

1647

2009.9

Figure 3: Citing articles for the top 10 research fronts in geosciences

15

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

HOT RESEARCH FRONT – “APPLICATION OF REGIONAL CLIMATE MODELS IN THE PREDICTION OF SURFACE TEMPERATURE AND PRECIPITATION AND STUDIES ON MODEL OPTIMIZATION” The assessment report2 released by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in 2013 indicated that global warming is an indisputable fact. Determining global and regional climate change and predicting future climate change are issues that concern scientists, the public, and policy-makers and are closely associated with the formulation of longterm socio-economic development plans in a country or region. Thus, the tools of “climate models” have emerged. With the continuous improvements of the Global Climate Observing System and computer performance, these models are continuing to improve.

Regional climate is determined by multifaceted factors. Large-scale influences are important; however, specific terrain and underlying surface features usually cause the specific variability in regional climate. Climate anomalies have continuously occurred in recent years, and these climate anomalies usually have regional characteristics. Although they are associated with large-scale climate changes, they may be more closely associated with climate formation and changes on a regional scale. During mid-to lateJanuary and early February in 2008, there was

a historically rare large-scale disaster of icy rain and snow in southern China that caused severe impacts to and loss of local transportation, energy and electricity supplies, agriculture, ecology, and social life. This storm provides an example of the sensitivity and vulnerability of regional climate environments to external forces.

Currently, the climate models used to describe climate changes can be divided into general circulation models (GCMs) and regional climate models (RCMs). GCMs can describe climate change on a larger scale. However, they have a decreased resolution, and the average climate and variability of temperature and precipitation at a regional scale cannot be simulated. Therefore, it is difficult to estimate the possible impacts of interannual climate variability on regional water resources, ecological environments, and large scale circulation. RCMs have higher resolution and can perform detailed descriptions of complex topography and curved coastlines and provide detail features of underlying surfaces. Therefore, they can reflect climate features caused by localized forces and have been applied extensively in limited regional climate studies. Many areas of China are in the East Asian monsoon region, and they have complex topography and underlying surfaces and are densely populated, therefore, these areas have some of the greatest variability of climate in the world. RCMs are especially important in studying climate changes in areas with uneven underlying surface properties that are influenced by atmospheric circulation with different scales of variability. Surface temperature and precipitation are two major elements in the study of climate changes. Under the above

Table 10: Top countries and institutions producing the 14 core papers in the research front “Application of regional climate models in the prediction of surface temperature and precipitation and studies on model optimization” Country Ranking

Country

Core Papers

Proportion

Institution Ranking

Institution

Core Papers

Proportion

1

UK

8

57.1%

1

Met Office – UK (UK)

5

35.7%

2

Germany

6

42.9%

2

Max Planck Society (Germany)

4

28.6%

3

France

4

28.6%

3

Danish Meteorology Institute (Denmark)

3

21.4%

4

Denmark

3

21.4%

3

Universidade de Lisboa (Portugal)

3

21.4%

4

Netherlands

3

21.4%

3

Centre for Ecology and Hydrology (UK)

3

21.4%

4

Portugal

3

21.4%

2

ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_data_reports.shtml

16

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

conditions, the “Application of regional climate models in the prediction of surface temperature and precipitation and studies on model optimization” has become an important scientific front.

ANALYSIS OF THE ACTIVE STATUS OF COUNTRIES AND INSTITUTIONS The analysis of countries and institutions producing core papers (Table 10) in this field showed that the performance of the UK is the most prominent and has contributed eight of the 14 core papers. In addition, this field is not dominated by any single country, and Germany, France, Denmark, Norway, and Portugal have provided considerable contributions. The percentage of countries represented in these core papers also shows that international collaboration in this field is common, with many of the core papers co-authored by researchers in multiple countries. However, the institutions and countries producing these 14 core papers are all in Europe, which indicates the strength of European countries in RCM studies. Indeed, the establishment and optimization of climate

models require observation data with high spatial and temporal resolution as the foundation. The construction of observational capacity, including the construction of ground observatories for wind measurement and air sounding, satellites, radar, regional grid observation databases and optimized computational grids, require longterm commitments and the accumulation of data, which may be why emerging countries such as China have so far experienced difficulty standing out in this field.

ANALYSIS OF THE ACTIVE STATUS OF AUTHORS Among the corresponding authors of the 14 core papers in this field, 12 persons have each contributed one core paper, whereas Claudio Piani of the Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics has published two; thus, different authors have provided an equal share (Table 11). However, there are four authors in the UK at different institutions and two authors in Denmark who are both at the Danish Meteorological Institute. Therefore, there are a large number of active corresponding authors in this field, however, they are still concentrated in a few countries and institutions in Europe.

Table 11: Top corresponding authors of the 14 core papers in the research front “Application of regional climate models in the prediction of surface temperature and precipitation and studies on model optimization”

Ranking

Reprint Author

Reprint Institution

Country

Core Papers

1

Piani, C

Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics

Italy

2

2

Best, MJ

Met Office – UK

UK

1

2

Boberg, F

Danish Meteorological Institute

Denmark

1

2

Christensen, JH

Danish Meteorological Institute

Denmark

1

2

Clark, DB

Centre for Ecology & Hydrology

UK

1

2

Deque, M

Meteo France

France

1

2

Fowler, HJ

University of Newcastle

UK

1

2

Haddeland, I

Norwegian Water Resources & Energy Directorate

Norway

1

2

Leander, R

Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute (KNMI)

Netherlands

1

2

Maraun, D

Justus Liebig University Giessen

Germany

1

2

Quesada, B

University of Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines

France

1

2

Themessl, MJ

University of Graz

Austria

1

2

Weedon, GP

NERC Centre for Ecology & Hydrology

UK

1 17

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

ANALYSIS OF THE DEVELOPMENTAL STATUS OF COUNTRIES AND INSTITUTIONS A comparison between the top producing countries and institutions for citing articles, and top producing countries and institutions for core papers shows a significant difference. Although the top producing countries for core papers do not include countries outside of Europe, the country with the highest number of citing papers is the USA, with Canada and Australia ranking fifth and sixth, respectively. In addition, Australia has two

institutions in the top institutions producing citing articles. These results reflect that RCM studies show a trend of spreading from Europe to North America and Oceania (Table 12). In the future, RCM studies will be developed to acquire higher spatial resolution, establish better regional grid observation databases, and provide more accurate simulations of spatial and temporal variability of ground climate processes. Thus, this field has the potential to become a promising research field.

Table 12: Top countries and institutions producing citing articles in the research front “Application of regional climate models in the prediction of surface temperature and precipitation and studies on model optimization” Country Ranking

Country

Citing Papers

Proportion

Institution Ranking

Institution

Citing Papers

Proportion

1

USA

138

22.3%

1

Max Planck Society (Germany)

37

6.0%

2

UK

137

22.1%

2

Met Office – UK (UK)

30

4.8%

3

Germany

107

17.3%

3

Centre for Ecology & Hydrology (UK)

28

4.5%

4

Netherlands

75

12.1%

3

CSIRO (Australia)

28

4.5%

5

Canada

60

9.7%

5

Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich (Switzerland)

24

3.9%

6

Australia

59

9.5%

6

Wageningen University & Research Centre (Netherlands)

22

3.5%

7

France

56

9.0%

7

Deltares (Netherlands)

18

2.9%

8

Switzerland

40

6.5%

7

University of Oslo (Norway)

18

2.9%

9

Italy

38

6.1%

7

University of Reading (UK)

18

2.9%

10

Spain

32

5.2%

10

University of New South Wales (Australia)

17

2.7%

18

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

EMERGING RESEARCH FRONT – “MODEL ANALYSIS OF NON-CO2 GREENHOUSE GASES, SUCH AS OZONE, METHANE, AND BLACK CARBON, AS WELL AS HYDROXYL GROUPS AND ANTHROPOGENIC SOURCES OF SULFUR DIOXIDE IN THE ATMOSPHERE” The simulation studies implemented in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project have provided valuable information resources for research on climate sensitivity, historical climate, and climate predictions in the 4th assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. However, different models include completely different assumptions during the simulation of radioactive forcings, including assumptions on the physical process and atmospheric components, especially aerosols or gases other than CO2, which have not been thoroughly considered. In addition, biosphererelated information must also be included in the climate models. Furthermore, new types of observation data related to atmospheric chemistry may also help to deepen our understanding of chemistry and climate.

Under the support of the International Global Atmospheric Chemistry project, which is a subproject of the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme, and the Atmospheric Chemistry and Climate research plan of Stratospheric Processes

and their Role in Climate, which is a sub-project of the World Climate Research Programme, the first workshop was held in 2009 to determine an optimized definition for the “Atmospheric Chemistry and Climate Model Intercomparison Project” (ACCMIP). The first and second ACCMIP forums were held in 2011 and 2012, respectively.

The ACCMIP will perform extensive evaluations of climate models and simulate tropospheric ozone and aerosol to fully utilize the above measurement results. Under this project, studies analyzing models of non-CO2 greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, such as ozone, methane and black carbon, have rapidly developed, and atmospheric chemistry simulations and observation studies on aerosols, such as hydroxyl groups, and anthropogenic sources of sulfur dioxide, as well as their precursors, have been promoted. Therefore, this field has become an emerging research front in the field of geosciences. At a country scale, the response of the USA to this project has been the greatest, and the corresponding authors of six out of the nine core papers are working in research institutions in the USA.

19

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

CLINICAL MEDICINE HOT RESEARCH FRONT DEVELOPMENTAL TREND OF THE TOP 10 RESEARCH FRONTS IN CLINICAL MEDICINE Table 13: Top 10 research fronts in clinical medicine

Rank

Research Fronts (changed)

Core Papers

Citations

Mean Year of Core Papers

1

Catheter-based renal sympathetic denervation for resistant hypertension

19

1707

2011.7

2

Treatment and rapid diagnosis with XPERT MTB/RIF assay for tuberculosis, mainly HIV-associated tuberculosis and multidrug resistant pulmonary tuberculosis

47

2907

2011.4

3

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation

47

6255

2011

4

Fecal microbiota transplantation for recurrent Clostridium difficile infection

35

3509

2011

5

Deep brain stimulation for treatment of Parkinson's disease and resistant depression

32

2521

2011

6

Prostate cancer-associated mutations, gene fusions and outcomes

25

2443

2011

7

Intensive insulin therapy and fluid resuscitation with hydroxyethyl starch in critically ill patients

33

4876

2010.9

8

Clinical trials for immunotherapy of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

24

2030

2010.9

9

Enhanced depth imaging optical coherence tomography of the choroid

27

1869

2010.9

10

Relationship between benign prostatic hyperplasia and prostate cancer; drug therapy for lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia

22

1788

2010.9

Figure 4: Citing articles for the top 10 research fronts in clinical medicine

20

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

HOT RESEARCH FRONT — “INTENSIVE INSULIN THERAPY AND HYDROXYETHYL STARCH FLUID RESUSCITATION IN CRITICALLY ILL PATIENTS” Influenced by hormone stress due to insulin resistance and inflammatory factors, hyperglycemia is common in critically ill patients.

Significant hyperglycemic conditions will cause environmental disorders in the body, damage cellular immune functions, and present many severe complications. Maintaining reasonable control of the blood glucose levels of critically ill patients is one of the routine tasks in critical care medicine. In 2001, Van Den Berne and colleagues indicated that the standard blood glucose level to reduce the mortality of critically ill patients was 4.4-6.1 mmol/L (i.e., “the Leuven scheme”), therefore, they were the first to propose the concept of intensive insulin therapy to control blood glucose levels within 4.4-6.1 mmol/ L. They also confirmed that intensive insulin therapy significantly reduced the mortality and complications of critically ill patients. Although some studies have supported the Leuven scheme, other core publications regarding this front have questioned the significance of intensive insulin therapy for critically ill patients.

The other controversial issue regarding the treatment of critical illness is the safety of hydroxyethyl starch (HES) fluid resuscitation treatment. HES was already used extensively in the resuscitation treatment of many critical illnesses in the 1960s. The third generation HES 130/0.4 has a small molecular weight (130 kDa), a low substitution degree (0.4), and a fast renal metabolism and is unlikely to cause blood aggregation. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the clinical application of HES 130/0.4 in 2007. However, because of the different conclusions concerning the safety of HES 130/0.4, especially its effect on renal function, medical researchers have paid special attention to the safety and efficacy of the HES 130/0.4 fluid resuscitation treatment.

The paper “Intensive Insulin Therapy and Pentastarch Resuscitation in Severe Sepsis,” published in volume 358 of New England Journal of Medicine in 2008 by Konrad Reinhart (corresponding author) of the University of Jena, Germany, was selected as a core paper to represent this front. This paper has been cited 984 times. It questioned the significance of intensive insulin therapy for patients with severe sepsis and the safety of HES 200/0.4 fluid resuscitation treatment. Reinhart et al. argued that, compared with conventional insulin therapy, intensive insulin therapy did not reduce the mortality of patients. Rather, it significantly increased the risk of hypoglycemia (17.0 percent vs. 4.1 percent, P<0.001), which caused the premature termination of that clinical trial. In addition, HES fluid resuscitation also increased the risk of acute renal failure in patients (the control group received Ringer's fluid resuscitation).

In 2009, the project “Normoglycemia in Intensive Care Evaluation & Survival Using Glucose Algorithm Regulation” (NICE-SUGAR), led by the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre with the involvement of 42 medical institutions in Canada and Europe, also questioned the significance of intensive insulin therapy. The NICE-SUGAR study enrolled 6,104 patients. The paper “Intensive Versus Conventional Glucose Control in Critically Ill Patients,” published in the New England Journal of Medicine, was selected as a core paper to represent this front; it has been cited 1,171 times. The results of this paper showed that the mortality rate, the number of days in the intensive care unit (ICU), and the number of days on mechanical ventilation did not significantly differ between the intensive blood glucose control group (target blood glucose level=81~108 mg/dl [4.5~6.0 mmol/L]) and the conventional blood glucose control group (target blood glucose level=≤180 mg/dl [≤10.0 mmol/L]; 27.5 percent vs. 24.9 percent, P=0.02). However, the incidence of severe hypoglycemia among the intensive blood glucose control group was significantly higher than that among the conventional blood glucose control group (6.8 percent vs. 0.5 percent, P<0.001).

21

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

In 2011, Devan Kansagara and colleagues at Oregon Health & Science University in the USA published a systemic review of intensive insulin therapy among hospitalized patients. This article was selected as a core paper representing this front. In this review, the authors performed a meta-analysis of 21 trials in the ICU or perioperative care involving myocardial infarction, stroke, or brain injury. They found that intensive insulin therapy did not improve short-term mortality, long-term mortality, infection rates, length of stay, or the need for renal replacement therapy. The data of 10 trials showed that the risk for severe hypoglycemia increased six-fold.

In light of the above research regarding intensive insulin therapy, Annals of Internal Medicine published clinical practice guidelines regarding use of intensive insulin therapy among hospitalized patients issued by the American College of Physicians (ACP) on February 15, 2011.

These guidelines recommend against "using intensive insulin therapy to control blood glucose in non-surgical ICU (SICU)/medical ICU (MICU) patients” and “using intensive insulin therapy to normalize blood glucose in SICU/MICU patients."

These guidelines were selected as a core paper representing this front. Amir Qaseem, director of the Department of Clinical Policy at ACP, was the corresponding author (Table 15).

The ACP guidelines slowed the previously prevalent use of intensive insulin therapy among critically ill patients. Since then, no intensive insulin therapy articles have been selected as core papers in this front.

The hot research front studies included in the discussion of intensive insulin therapy and hydroxyethyl starch fluid resuscitation among

critically ill patients underline the dominant status of American research; on average, one in three core papers involves research institutions and researchers in the U.S. (Table 14). Australia, Canada, Germany, and the UK have also made prominent contributions to the research in this field, commensurate with the medical research strength of these countries. Four Australian institutions occupy the top producing institutions of core papers, which demonstrates that these institutions have continuously maintained a high degree of focus on this front.

The corresponding authors of the 33 core papers listed in this hot research front are located throughout Europe, America, Australia, East Asia, and South Africa (Table 15). This distribution shows that the studies in this field have already concerned the majority of the world (Table 15).

The degree of attention in Europe is the highest; 21 of the corresponding authors are European.

Five of the first six countries in the top producing citing papers in those research front countries (Table 16) match the countries producing core papers (Table 14). This result shows that the USA, Canada, Germany, the UK, and Australia are the leading research locations for this front.

The number of citing articles from the USA is the largest and far more than the number of citing articles from other countries; this result is commensurate with the world-class medical research level of the USA. In addition, special attention should be paid to the University of Amsterdam. The number of its citing articles accounts for almost half of those in the Netherlands (52/113=46.02%). This result shows that the University of Amsterdam produced many papers related to this topic and has a strong domestic and international profile.

Table 14: Top countries and institutions producing the 33 core papers in the research front “Intensive insulin therapy and HES fluid resuscitation among critically ill patients” Country Ranking

Country

Core Papers

Proportion

Institution Ranking

Institution

Core Papers

Proportion

1

USA

12

36.4%

1

University of Sydney (Australia)

5

15.2%

2

Australia

7

21.2%

2

Royal North Shore Hospital (Australia)

4

12.1%

3

Canada

6

18.2%

3

Austin Hospital (Australia)

3

9.1%

4

Germany

5

15.2%

3

Saint George Hospital (Australia)

3

9.1%

4

UK

5

15.2%

3

University of Pittsburgh (USA)

3

9.1%

3

Friedrich Schiller University of Jena (Germany)

3

9.1%

22

3

cn-healthcare.com/news/qianyan/2013-06-03/content_424539.html

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

Table 15: Top corresponding authors of the 33 core papers in the research front “Intensive insulin therapy and HES fluid resuscitation among critically ill patients”

Ranking

Reprint Author

Reprint Institution

Country

Core Papers

1

Reinhart, K

Friedrich Schiller University of Jena

Germany

3

2

Shaw, AD

Duke University

USA

2

2

Gattas, DJ

University of Sydney

Australia

2

3

Zarychanski, R

University of Manitoba

Canada

1

4

Arabi, YM

King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Science

Saudi Arabia

1

4

Bellomo, R

Austin Health

Australia

1

4

Griesdale, DEG

University of British Columbia

Canada

1

4

Guidet, B

HÔpital Saint-Antoine

France

1

4

Haase, N

University of Copenhagen

Denmark

1

4

Hermanides, J

University of Amsterdam

Netherlands

1

4

James, MFM

University of Cape Town

South Africa

1

4

Kansagara, D

Oregon Health & Science University

USA

1

4

Krinsley, JS

Columbia University

USA

1

4

Lobo, DN

University of Nottingham

UK

1

4

Marik, PE

Eastern Virginia Medical School

USA

1

4

Martin, C

Assistance Publique-Hopitaux de Marseille

France

1

4

Moghissi, ES

Marina Del Rey Hospital

USA

1

4

Myburgh, JA

University of Sydney

Australia

1

4

Patel, A

The Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine

UK

1

4

Perel, P

University of London

UK

1

4

Perner, A

University of Copenhagen

Denmark

1

4

Preiser, JC

University of Liege

Belgium

1

4

Qaseem, A

American College of Physicians

USA

1

4

Spies, C

Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin

Germany

1

4

Van den Berghe, G

Catholic University of Louvain

Belgium

1

4

Weiskopf, RB

University of California at San Francisco

USA

1

4

Wiener, RS

Medical Centre, Department of Veterans Affairs, US

USA

1

4

Zarychanski, R

University of Manitoba

Canada

1

23

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

EMERGING RESEARCH FRONT – “DRUG PREVENTION OF RECURRENT VENOUS THROMBOSIS” Venous thromboembolism refers to a group of diseases associated with poor blood recirculation caused by abnormal coagulation and embolism in the venous lumen; these diseases primarily include deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. Venous thromboembolism is one of the three major causes of cardiovascular disease mortality. After the occurrence of thrombosis, the risk for rethrombosis increases, therefore, this condition requires long-term medication.

Venous thrombosis is typically treated with conventional anticoagulant drugs. The duration of anticoagulant therapy recommended by the American Association for Thoracic Surgery is more than three months. However, long-term anticoagulant therapies increase the risk of bleeding and require continuous monitoring as well as the adjustment of medication dosages.

Indefinite anticoagulant therapy is not the best choice. The medication associated with the continuous treatment period after anticoagulant therapy is an important issue in the prevention and treatment of venous thrombosis.

Only four core papers exist in the emerging front of the drug prevention of recurrent venous thrombosis. The University of Perugia in Italy has shown excellent performance in this front, contributing two of the publications. Four core papers have investigated the effects of recurrent thrombosis on prevention using the anti-platelet aggregation inhibitor aspirin and the new types of oral anti-coagulants apixaban and dabigatran.

These papers indicate that the pharmacological actions of all three drugs were safe and did not require routine anticoagulation monitoring. These medications reduced the risk for recurrent venous thrombosis and did not increase the incidence of bleeding events. They can be used as preventive medications for recurrent venous thrombosis.

Table 16: Top countries and institutions producing citing papers in the research front “Intensive insulin therapy and HES fluid resuscitation in critically ill patients”

Country ranking

Country

Citing Papers

Proportion

Institution Ranking

Institution

Citing Papers

Proportion

1

USA

716

41.9%

1

Harvard University (USA)

64

3.7%

2

Germany

190

11.1%

2

University of Amsterdam (Netherlands)

52

3.0%

3

UK

167

9.8%

3

University of Toronto (Canada)

47

2.8%

4

Canada

141

8.3%

4

Friedrich Schiller University of Jena (Germany)

44

2.6%

5

Belgium

121

7.1%

4

Emory University (USA)

44

2.6%

6

Australia

119

7.0%

6

Mayo Clinic (USA)

37

2.2%

7

Netherlands

113

6.6%

7

University of Pittsburgh (USA)

36

2.1%

8

France

94

5.5%

7

University of Sydney (Australia)

36

2.1%

9

Italy

85

5.0%

9

Université Libre de Brussels (Belgium)

34

2.0%

10

Switzerland

61

3.6%

10

McMaster University (Canada)

33

1.9%

24

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES HOT RESEARCH FRONT DEVELOPMENTAL TREND OF THE TOP 10 RESEARCH FRONTS IN BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES Table 17: Top 10 research fronts in biological sciences

Rank

Research Fronts (changed)

Core Papers

Citations

Mean Year of Core Papers

1

C9orf72 hexanucleotide repeat expansion and frontotemporal dementia and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

37

2285

2012.2

2

In vivo imaging and mapping of neurons using fluorescent indicator

48

2657

2011.8

3

Damage and detection of synthetic cannabinoids and cathinone derivatives in herbal products

39

1442

2011.6

4

Dendritic cell, macrophages and immunotherapy

18

1676

2011.3

5

Human disease analysis using genome-wide association studies

13

3492

2011.1

6

Direct reprogramming of fibroblasts into neurons and cardiomyocytes

15

3009

2011.1

7

Signaling pathways of sensor proteins in the immune system

36

4870

2011

8

Genome editing technologyâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;transcription activatorlike effectors nuclease (TALEN)

18

2098

2011

9

Melatonin and oxidative stress

20

1915

2011

10

Rapid antidepressive action of ketamine

21

1798

2011

Figure 5: Citing articles for the top 10 research fronts in biological sciences

25

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

HOT RESEARCH FRONT — “HUMAN DISEASES ANALYSIS USING GENOME-WIDE ASSOCIATION STUDIES” A genome-wide association study (GWAS) is a high-throughput method for analyzing the relationship between molecular markers and phenotypes that primarily uses the molecular markers (mainly single nucleotide polymorphisms [SNPs]) that are distributed throughout the entire genome and statistical tools to identify and analyze the genetic variations that affect complex traits. GWAS is currently being applied to analyze complex traits such as human diseases, which are controlled by multiple genes. This area of research has already identified many relevant genetic variations, and GWAS has become a key tool in studying human genomics. The papers in this research front have primarily investigated and studied GWAS methods as well as the relevant analytic tools and software from the perspective of genetic statistics. These papers have aimed to detect more new SNPs associated with complex traits, including height, intelligence, and diseases, with low cost and high efficiency.

Furthermore, they seek to resolve issues such as “missing heritability,” which occur in the analytic process of GWAS.

1.2.1 ANALYSIS OF THE ACTIVE STATUS OF COUNTRIES AND INSTITUTIONS Australia and the USA are the most active countries in this important hot research front; they are the major producers of core papers. Of the 13 core papers listed in Table 18, Australia and the USA each have nine papers, which accounts for 69.2 percent of all core papers. Of the top institutions with core papers, three institutions are in Australia: the Queensland Institute of Medical Research, the University of Melbourne, and the Australian Department of Primary Industries; their corresponding core papers account for 69.2, 53.8 and 46.2 percent of all papers, respectively.

Harvard University and Washington University at St. Louis also rank in the top, and their core papers account for 46.2 and 38.5 percent of all papers, respectively.

Table 18: Top countries and institutions producing the 13 core papers in the research front “Human diseases analysis using genome-wide association studies” Country Ranking

Country

Core Papers

Proportion

Institution Ranking

Institution

Core Papers

Proportion

1

Australia

9

69.2%

1

Queensland Institute of Medical Research (Australia)

9

69.2%

1

USA

9

69.2%

2

University of Melbourne (Australia)

7

53.8%

3

UK

7

53.8%

3

Harvard University (USA)

6

46.2%

4

Iceland

4

30.8%

3

Department of Environment and Primary Industry (Australia)

6

46.2%

4

Sweden

4

30.8%

5

Washington University at St. Louis (USA)

5

38.5%

26

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

ANALYSIS OF THE ACTIVE STATUS OF AUTHORS Of the top corresponding authors of the core papers in this hot research front, Australia, the USA, and the UK have three, four and three scientists listed, respectively (Table 19). Peter Visscher is the most influential researcher in this front field. He has written four core papers: three papers at the Queensland Institute of Medical Research and one paper at the University of Edinburgh. One paper was cited 539 times and published in Nature Genetics in 2010. This study confirmed that the phenomenon of “missing heritability” is caused by the incomplete linkage disequilibrium between causal variants and genotyped SNPs. This paper is ranked as the

second most influential core paper among the 13 papers in this front. Teri Manolio of the National Human Genome Research Institute in the USA is the most influential corresponding author in this front. She published a review paper in Nature in 2009 that has been cited over 1,712 times. This review article primarily analyzes the possible source of “missing heritability” and proposed relevant study strategies to elucidate the genetic mechanisms of complex diseases, thereby increasing the potential of GWAS with regard to the effective prevention and treatment of diseases.

Table 19: Top corresponding authors of the 13 core papers in the research front “Human diseases analysis using genome-wide association studies”

Ranking

Reprint Author

Reprint Institution

Country

Core Papers

1

Visscher, PM

Queensland Institute of Medical Research, University of Edinburgh

Australia, UK

4

2

Allen, HL

University of Exeter

UK

1

2

Benjamin, DJ

Cornell University

USA

1

2

Chabris, CF

Union College

USA

1

2

Eichler, EE

University of Washington Seattle

USA

1

2

Manolio, TA

NHGRI

USA

1

2

Plomin, R

Kings College London

UK

1

2

Vinkhuyzen, AAE

University of Queensland

Australia

1

2

Wray, NR

University of Queensland

Australia

1

2

Yang, JA

Queensland Institute of Medical Research

Australia

1

2

Yang, JA

Queensland Institute of Medical Research

Australia

1

27

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

ANALYSIS OF THE DEVELOPMENTAL STATUS OF COUNTRIES AND INSTITUTIONS An analysis of the countries and institutions producing citing articles in this hot research front (Table 20) showed that the USA had the most with 1,262 articles, followed by the UK, Germany, Australia, and the Netherlands. Of the top institutions with the most citing articles, six were American, three were British, and one was Australian. A comprehensive analysis of the production of these core papers and citing articles showed that the USA and Australia attach great importance to applying genome-wide association

studies to examine the complex traits of human diseases, and they have continuous research results. Harvard University and Washington University at St. Louis in the USA are influential institutions in this field. Researchers in European countries, including the UK, Germany, and the Netherlands, have also become involved in and actively follow the research in this hot front. Oxford University, the University of Edinburgh, and King's College London have shown outstanding recent performance and have become rising stars in this research field.

Table 20: Top countries and institutions producing citing articles in the research front “Human diseases analysis using genome-wide association studies” Country Ranking

Country

Citing Papers

Proportion

Institution Ranking

Institution

Citing Papers

Proportion

1

USA

1262

57.6%

1

Harvard University (USA)

257

11.7%

2

UK

516

23.6%

2

University of Oxford (UK)

121

5.5%

3

Germany

238

10.9%

3

University of Washington at Seattle (USA)

115

5.2%

4

Australia

228

10.4%

4

University of Edinburgh (UK)

109

5.0%

5

Netherlands

212

9.7%

5

Broad Institute of MIT & Harvard (USA)

105

4.8%

6

Canada

158

7.2%

6

Kings College London (UK)

98

4.5%

7

France

156

7.1%

7

Washington University at St. Louis (USA)

86

3.9%

8

Sweden

136

6.2%

8

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (USA)

83

3.8%

9

China

124

5.7%

9

Stanford University (USA)

82

3.7%

10

Italy

119

5.4%

9

University of Queensland (Australia)

82

3.7%

EMERGING RESEARCH FRONT – “CRISPR/CAS GENOME-EDITING TECHNOLOGY” In the last two years, genome-editing technology via the CRISPR/Cas system has emerged as a new artificial nuclease modifier based on the acquired immunity of bacteria. The principle is the same as previous ZFN and TALEN genomeediting technologies, which produce a DNA double-strand break at the DNA target site and then target genome editing through the regulation of the DNA repair pathway. Because this technology has many advantages (e.g., simple manipulation, high efficiency, low cost, 28

and the simultaneous silencing of any number of genes), it is considered to have great potential.

Currently, it has been successfully applied to the functional study of many species of plants and animals. Since 2013, studies applying CRISPR/ Cas technology have been extremely active. More than 50 relevant publications have appeared.

CRISPR/Cas technology was selected by the American journal Science as one of the top 10 scientific breakthroughs in 2013. Scientists are currently optimizing or modifying the Cas9 protein using CRISPR technology or looking for a better Cas protein to resolve the technical issues of off-targets and mismatches.

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

CHEMISTRY AND MATERIALS SCIENCE HOT RESEARCH FRONT DEVELOPMENT TREND OF THE TOP 10 RESEARCH FRONTS IN CHEMISTRY AND MATERIALS SCIENCE Table 21: Top 10 research fronts in chemistry and materials science

Rank

Research Fronts (changed)

Core Papers

Citations

Mean Year of Core Papers

1

Electrode materials for sodium-ion batteries

45

1607

2012.2

2

Functional metal organic frameworks

8

2976

2012

3

Synthesis of pillar [5/6] arenes and their host-guest chemistry

41

2058

2011.7

4

Rhodium-catalyzed C-H activation

36

1802

2011.7

5

Graphene-based photocatalysts

19

1537

2011.7

6

Synthesis and application of graphene quantum dots

31

2340

2011.5

7

Carbonic anhydrase inhibitors

27

2252

2011.1

8

Graphene and graphene oxide in biomedical application

44

5259

2011

9

Polymer-based high-performance field-effect transistors and photovoltaic devices

35

3255

2011

10

Highly enantioselective synthesis of spirooxindoles

22

1884

2011

Figure 6: Citing articles for the top 10 research fronts in chemistry and materials Sscience

29

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

HOT RESEARCH FRONT – “FUNCTIONAL METAL-ORGANIC FRAMEWORKS (MOFS)” Metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) are one type of solid porous materials formed by the selfassembly of metal ions or ion clusters and organic ligand complexes and have the merits of a rich composition and structure, a large specific surface area (with a maximum in excess of 10,000 m2/g), adjustable pore sizes, and a modifiable skeleton. MOFs have been widely applied to multiple aspects of absorption and separation, hydrogen storage, chemical sensors, fluorescence, catalysis, and biological medicine.

At the end of the last century, Omar M. Yaghi, now at the University of California at Berkeley in the United States, proposed the concept of MOFs. In the subsequent decade, MOFs developed at

an astonishing pace. Currently, more than 6,000 new structures are reported every year. MOFs have become a hot topic in research fronts in the field of chemistry. Due to their outstanding contributions to the field of MOFs, Susumu Kitagawa from Kyoto University of Japan and Yaghi of the United States were named Thomson Reuters Citation Laureates in 2010 and were forecasted to win the Nobel Prize in Chemistry.

In 2011, Thomson Reuters announced the list of the world's top 100 chemists in 2000-2010 to celebrate the International Year of Chemistry, and this list included seven chemists in the field of MOFs (see: archive.sciencewatch.com/dr/sci/ misc/Top100Chemists2000-10/).

Table 22: Top countries and institutions producing the eight core papers in the research front “Functional MOFs” Country Ranking

Country

Core Papers

Proportion

Institution Ranking

Institution

Core Papers

Proportion

1

USA

5

62.5%

1

University of Montpellier II (France)

1

12.5%

2

South Korea

2

25.0%

1

University of Paris Sud-Paris XI (France)

1

12.5%

3

France

1

12.5%

1

University of Versailles SaintQuentin-en-Yvelines (France)

1

12.5%

3

China

1

12.5%

1

Zhejiang University (China)

1

12.5%

3

UK

1

12.5%

1

Pohang University of Science & Technology (South Korea)

1

12.5%

1

Seoul National University (South Korea)

1

12.5%

1

University of Saint Andrews (UK)

1

12.5%

1

Northwestern University (USA)

1

12.5%

1

Rutgers State University at Newark (USA)

1

12.5%

1

Sandia National Laboratory (USA)

1

12.5%

1

Texas A&M University (USA)

1

12.5%

1

University of California at Berkeley (USA)

1

12.5%

1

University of Texas at San Antonio (USA)

1

12.5%

30

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

As an authoritative journal in the field of chemistry, the review journal of the American Chemical Society, Chemical Reviews, published a special issue on MOFs in 2012. The eight core papers are from this special edition. This occurrence is not the first time that MOFs have enjoyed the spotlight of a special edition in an authoritative journal. Another authoritative review journal, the Chemical Society Reviews of the Royal Society of Chemistry, set the precedent in 2009. Both of these special issues invited Jeffrey R. Long and Yaghi to be the editors, which reflects the leading position of these two scientists in the field of MOFs. One review paper

by Long has also been selected in the collection of core papers (Table 23). In the Chemical Reviews special edition, there are certain articles on the synthesis and structure of MOFs, but the eight review papers on the application of MOFs are the most prominent, which reflects that the

current hot topics in this field are more focused on specific applications. Among these eight core papers, there are five papers from research institutions in the United States, including four papers that have an American corresponding author (Tables 22 and 23), which is consistent with the overall dominance of the United States in the field of MOFs. Particularly, the study by Hong-Cai ‘Joe’ Zhou from Texas A&M University has been cited 541 times, which is the most cited paper among the eight core papers. The study

by Long has been cited 495 times. Only one paper from China (Guodong Qian from Zhejiang University) is also listed in the core papers, and the number of citations of this paper has reached 530, indicating that it has attracted relatively high interest. The Republic of Korea contributed two core papers. France also contributed to the core papers, with one paper on the list.

Table 23: Top corresponding authors of the eight core papers in the research front “Functional MOFs”

Ranking

Reprint Author

Reprint Institution

Country

Core Papers

1

Allendorf, M

Sandia National Laboratory

USA

1

1

Horcajada, P

University of Versailles Saint-Quentin-enYvelines

France

1

1

Kim, K

Pohang University of Science & Technology

South Korea

1

1

Li, J

Rutgers State University at Newark

USA

1

1

Long, JR

University of California at Berkeley

USA

1

1

Qian, GD

Zhejiang University

China

1

1

Suh, MP

Seoul National University

South Korea

1

1

Zhou, HC

Texas A&M University

USA

1

31

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

China leads in the top countries in terms of citing papers in this research front, accounting for 49 percent of these publications. Among the top institutions producing citing papers (Table 24), seven institutions are from China, including the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Nanjing University, Nankai University, and Zhejiang University. These institutions are the major research centers in the field of molecular sieves in China, and MOFs are one type of molecular sieve. Via their longterm research experience accumulation, these institutions have a relatively strong research strength in the field of MOFs.

EMERGING RESEARCH FRONT – “POLYMER SOLAR CELL WITH HIGH ENERGY CONVERSION EFFICIENCY” Energy production is a global issue, and it has become a national priority to locate and develop new renewable energy. As a clean renewable energy source, solar energy has received a significant amount of attention due to its inexhaustibility. A solar cell is a device that applies the photovoltaic effect to convert light energy into electric energy. The polymer solar cell has become a hot research topic for the third generation of solar cells due to its advantages

Table 24: Top countries and institutions producing citing papers in the research front “Functional MOFs” Country Ranking

Country

Citing Papers

Proportion

Institution Ranking

Institution

Citing Papers

Proportion

1

China

577

49.0%

1

Chinese Academy of Sciences (China)

126

10.7%

2

USA

270

22.9%

2

Nanjing University (China)

39

3.3%

3

France

66

5.6%

3

University of Versailles SaintQuentin-en-Yvelines (France)

34

2.9%

4

South Korea

66

5.6%

4

Nankai University (China)

33

2.8%

5

Germany

60

5.1%

4

University of South Florida (USA)

33

2.8%

6

Japan

55

4.7%

4

Jilin University (China)

33

2.8%

7

India

54

4.6%

7

Zhejiang University (China)

30

2.5%

8

UK

44

3.7%

8

Northeast Normal University – China (China)

26

2.2%

9

Spain

39

3.3%

9

Kyoto University (Japan)

25

2.1%

10

Australia

36

3.1%

10

University of Texas at San Antonio (USA)

24

2.0%

10

Beijing University of Chemical Technology (China)

24

2.0%

of low cost and the capability to be produced in large volumes with the “roll-to-roll” technique.

In 2013, polymer solar cells produced with the “roll-to-roll" technique entered the Top 100 Hot Research Fronts listed by Thomson Reuters.

In 2014, polymer solar cells again appeared as a leading edge, or emerging, research topic.

An energy conversion efficiency of 10 percent is the threshold for the polymer solar cells’ commercialization; the four core papers in a current research front focus on this objective.

Hongbin Wu from the South China University of Technology in China has designed a solar cell with a reverse structure and increased the energy conversion efficiency to 9.2 percent. Li Gang and 32

3

Yang Yang from the University of California at Los Angeles have advanced one step further based on the reverse structure and placed two subbatteries in series to form the laminate structure — for the first time, the energy conversion efficiency index broke 10 percent and reached 10.6 percent. Research by René A. J. Janssen from the Eindhoven University of Technology in the Netherlands is more avant-garde and he has designed a three-laminated solar cell to further improve the energy conversion efficiency.

Similarly, in July 2014, Yang Yang3 designed a type of three tandem solar cell, which increased the energy conversion efficiency to 11.55 percent, setting a new record.

Chun-chao Chen, Wei-Hsuan Chang, Ken Yoshimura, Kenichiro Ohya, Jingbi You, Ging Gao, Zirou Hong and Yang Yang. An Efficient Triple-Junction Polymer Solar Cell Having a Power Conversion Efficiency Exceeding 11% Advanced Materials. 2014, 26(32):5670-5677.

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

PHYSICS HOT RESEARCH FRONT DEVELOPMENT TREND OF THE TOP 10 RESEARCH FRONTS IN PHYSICS Table 25: Top 10 research fronts in physics

Rank

Research Fronts (changed)

Core Papers

Citations

Mean Year of Core Papers

1

Observation of Higgs boson

2

1905

2012

2

Global neutrino data analysis

12

2350

2011.8

3

Nonlinear massive gravity

32

1814

2011.8

4

The growth and properties of silicene

25

1859

2011.7

5

MoS2 and transistors

20

3147

2011.5

6

Spin-orbit coupled Fermi gases

43

3246

2011.4

7

Alkali-doped iron selenide superconductors AxFe2-ySe2

35

2995

2011.2

8

Graphene plasmonics

15

1711

2011.1

9

Topological Mott insulators

33

2326

2011

10

Hydrodynamics of relativistic heavy ion collisions

29

2020

2011

Figure 7: Citing articles for the top 10 research fronts in physics

33

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

HOT RESEARCH FRONT – “OBSERVATION OF HIGGS BOSON” The Higgs boson is a zero-spin particle with mass but without charge and is the last particle to be discovered in the Standard Model. The Higgs boson is the cornerstone of the entire Standard Model, and without out, the Standard Model would be incomplete. In addition, the Higgs boson is thought to be the source of mass for elementary particles. Since the 1980s, governments around the world have invested a significant amount of capital and many scientists have been engaged in the search for the Higgs boson without making major discoveries. In July 2012, the European Centre for Nuclear Research (CERN) announced that the two experiments of A Toroidal LHC Apparatus (ATLAS) and Compact μ-solenoid (CMS) found a new boson with a mass of 125-126 GeV, and the confidence level was of five standard deviations (namely, the confidence level was 99.99994 percent, which is the criterion for the discovery of new particles). CERN refers to this particle as the “Higgs-like particle." In September 2012, these research results were published.

All the core papers on the front of the “Observation of Higgs boson” are two papers from the teams of ATLAS and CMS. The Nobel Prize in Physics for 2013 was awarded to the Belgian Theoretical Physicist Francois Englert and the British Theoretical Physicist Peter Higgs.

These scientists received this award because of “the theoretical discovery of a mechanism that contributes to our understanding of the origin of mass subatomic particles, which was confirmed through the discovery of the predicted fundamental particle by the ATLAS and CMS experiments at CERN's Large Hadron Collider,” which directly refers to their key papers published in 1964 and the more recently published papers of the ATLAS and CMS teams. By the end of 2013, these two papers had been cited 1905 times,

34

and they are the most cited papers in physics published from 2012-2013. The research front on the Higgs boson was mentioned in Research Fronts 2013 published by Thomas Reuters last year, which was an emerging research front in the field of physics in 2013.

Currently, the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is being shut down for a 2015 upgrade, after which, its power will be doubled, generating more collisions and more data, aiding further understanding of the Higgs boson.

By analyzing the citing papers (Table 26), we found that they are primarily from researchers in the United States (302), which accounts for 37.5 percent of the total citing papers. Germany is ranked second with 193 citing papers, which accounts for 23.9 percent of the total, followed

by Switzerland, United Kingdom, and Italy.

China ranked seventh with 111 citing articles.

Among the top institutions with citing papers, the Italian National Institute for Nuclear Physics and the European Centre of Nuclear Research have the most citing papers, which are 104 and 103, respectively, each accounting for approximately 13 percent of the total. The Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory of the United States ranked third with 64 citing papers, which is followed by the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the University of Wisconsin-Madison of the United States, which each have 60 citing papers. This analysis indicates that the United States is the most active participant in the study of the “Observation of Higgs boson,” and the primary participating institutions include several national laboratories and several universities.

Switzerland and Italy are also active participants, and their primary participating institutions are the European Centre of Nuclear Research and the Italian National Institute for Nuclear Physics.

The relative large amount of citing papers by the Chinese Academy of Sciences—one of the main participating institutions—reflects, to a certain extent, China's interest in this research front.

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

Table 26: Top countries and institutions producing citing articles in the research front “Observation of Higgs boson” Country Ranking

Country

Citing Papers

Proportion

Institution Ranking

Institution

Citing Papers

Proportion

1

USA

302

37.5%

1

Istituto Nazional di Fisica Nucleare (Italy)

104

12.9%

2

Germany

193

23.9%

2

European Organization for Nuclear Research (Switzerland)

103

12.8%

3

Switzerland

134

16.6%

3

Fermilab National Accelerator Lab (USA)

64

7.9%

4

UK

133

16.5%

4

Chinese Academy of Sciences (China)

60

7.4%

5

Italy

120

14.9%

4

University of Wisconsin Madison (USA)

60

7.4%

6

Spain

113

14.0%

6

Argonne National Laboratory (USA)

58

7.2%

7

France

111

13.8%

6

Joint Institute for Nuclear Research (Russia)

58

7.2%

7

China

111

13.8%

8

Deutsch Elecktronen Synchrotron DESY (Germany)

56

6.9%

9

Japan

110

13.6%

9

Institute for Theoretical & Experimental Physics (Russia)

52

6.5%

10

South Korea

85

10.5%

10

Lomonosov Moscow State University (Russia)

50

6.2%

10

Atomic Energy & Alternative Energies Commission (France)

50

6.2%

10

Massachusetts Institute of Technology (USA)

50

6.2%

10

University of Tokyo (Japan)

50

6.2%

EMERGING RESEARCH FRONT – “SEARCH FOR THE TOP QUARK SUPER-SYMMETRIC COUNTERPART (STOP)” To complete the theory of particle physics, scientists have proposed a series of new physical models beyond the Standard Model. In particular, the super-symmetric model is widely regarded as one of the most powerful competitors among the many models beyond the Standard Model.

Over the last several decades, many theoretical studies on super-symmetry have been performed, however, the correctness of those theories remains to be verified by experiment results.

Therefore, one of the primary tasks of the LHC is to search for super-symmetric particles. In the super-symmetric model, all the elementary particles have their super-symmetric counterpart.

In a particle, the top quark super-symmetric counterpart (STOP) is lighter than the supersymmetric counterpart of the other particles. The STOP can be generated under a relatively low

energy scale and can stabilize the mass of the Higgs particle. In addition, the determination of the mass for the Higgs boson provides additional information for the investigation of the presence of the STOP. From 2012-2013, “search for the top quark super-symmetric counterpart" was active and became one of an emerging research front in the field of physics. The six core papers constitute theoretical research work performed under the minimum super-symmetric model to directly search for the signal of the STOP at the LHC. The citation frequencies of the papers from the Institute of High Energy Physics of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, John Hopkins University of the United States, and the SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory of the United States have been relatively high.

35

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS HOT RESEARCH FRONT DEVELOPMENT TREND OF THE TOP 10 RESEARCH FRONTS IN ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS Table 27: Top 10 research fronts in astronomy and astrophysics

Rank

Research Fronts

Core Papers

Citations

Mean Year of Core Papers

1

Sloan digital sky survey-III baryon oscillation spectroscopic survey

13

2103

2011.5

2

Detection and characterization of extra-solar planet by Kepler mission and high accuracy radial velocity planet searcher

49

4450

2011.3

3

Herschel Space Observatory performance and observational strategy

7

2122

2010.4

4

In search of high redshift galaxies with space-based and groundbased observatories

24

2704

2010.3

5

The large area telescope on Fermi gamma-ray space telescope (Fermi/LAT) performance and observational results

11

2356

2010.2

6

Neutrino and antineutrino research with different approaches

17

1949

2010.2

7

Galileon cosmology & Galileon field

18

1894

2010.1

8

Solar atmosphere and magnetic field researches based on the observation from Hinode (Solar-B) and solar dynamics observatory

26

4134

2010

9

Binary black hole and neutron star merger theory and observation

38

3786

2009.8

10

Theoretical and observational studies of star and galaxy formation (CO-H2 conversion factor dependence of the star formation rate)

29

4983

2009.3

Figure 8: Citing articles for the top 10 research fronts in astronomy and astrophysics

36

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

HOT RESEARCH FRONT – “HERSCHEL SPACE OBSERVATORY PERFORMANCE AND OBSERVATIONAL STRATEGY” Most regions in the universe are very cold and cannot be detected at the band of visible light or at shorter wavelengths. These cold celestial bodies can only be observed in the spectral range of infrared or at longer wavelengths. The Herschel Space Observatory, launched on May 14, 2009, is a large space telescope with a spectral observation range from the far-infrared to the sub-millimeter wave band (wavelength range from 55-672 µm), and it can detect the long-wave radiation from the coldest celestial bodies at the farthest distance.

The Herschel Space Observatory was built with the investment of the European Space Agency, and it was originally named the Far Infrared and Sub-millimeter Telescope. Then, it was renamed in memory of the astronomer William Herschel, who discovered solar infrared radiation in 1800.

The four major scientific goals of the Herschel Space Observatory are to discover the following: the formation and evolution of galaxies in the early universe; the formation of stars and the interaction between stars and the interstellar medium; the chemical composition of the atmosphere and the ground surface of planets, comets, and satellites, and the molecular chemistry of the universe.

The Herschel Space Observatory adopted the Cassegrain design, and the diameter of the primary mirror reaches 3.5 meters, which is the largest astronomical telescope that has been launched; the entire mission cost up to 1.1 billion Euros4. The three major scientific instruments carried by Herschel are the Heterodyne Instrument for the Far-Infrared (HIFI), the Photo-detector Array Camera and Spectrometer Instrument (PACS), and the Spectral and Photometric Imaging Receiver (SPIRE). The designed lifetime of the Herschel Space Observatory is three years, and the elongated lifetime is approximately one year. The Herschel Space Observatory has 7,000 scientific hours every year, and all the astronomers in the world can use it. On April 29, 2013, the Herschel Space Observatory ended its scientific observation phase due to the exhaustion of the liquid helium coolant5,6.

This hot research front only includes seven core papers. Because this research was a large-scale program with worldwide attention, it generated a broad and significant impact within only four years. As commented by the director of the Science and Robotic Exploration Department of the European Space Agency (ESA) and the director of the European Space Research and Technology Centre of the ESA (ESTEC ESA), Alvaro Giménez, the observation of the Herschel Space Observatory must race against time because the time of operation is limited. Based on the observational data obtained, the observatory will continuously generate new scientific discoveries for the next ten years or even longer7.

In this hot research front, five of the seven core papers are from the special issue of “Herschel: The first science highlights” in Volume 518 in 2010, which was released by the well-known journal Astronomy & Astrophysics8. This special issue includes one editorial review and 152 research letters, which received significant attention from the research community. Five of the core papers primarily concern the tasks of the three major scientific apparatus and their initial performance on the Herschel Space Observatory.

The other two papers are on the detection targets and strategies for the search for water and relevant molecules in the star-forming regions and the orbital performance of HIFI, respectively.

The Herschel Space Observatory is a large international cooperative program led by the ESA and is operated through the collaboration of more than 40 organizations from ten countries9.

The international collaboration is also reflected by the seven core papers on this front. Except for one paper introducing the general condition of the program of the Herschel Space Observatory that was collaboratively written by 11 authors from three sub-centers of the ESA, the number of authors for the other six core papers is more

4

http://esamultimedia.esa.int/docs/herschel/Herschel-Factsheet.pdf http://sci.esa.int/herschel/47356-fact-sheet/ 6 http://sci.esa.int/herschel/34682-summary/ 7 http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-22914076 5

37

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

than 50. Particularly, the number of authors for two of the papers exceeds 150. For the countries and institutions producing the core papers, the distribution is broad, and the difference is insignificant, indicating that the intensity of the international collaboration is relatively high.

Particularly, the performance of the participating countries and organizations in which the subcenters of the ESA are located is relatively prominent, and these top producing countries and organizations are also influential generally in the research field of astronomy (Table 28).

Two out of seven corresponding authors of core papers are from the Netherlands Space Research Organization located at the University of Groningen of the Netherlands, which is also the organization of the chief scientist of the HIFI, one of the three primary scientific instruments of the Herschel Space Observatory (Table 29). Göran L. Pilbratt from the European Space Research

and Technology Centre of the ESA is the principal scientist of the Herschel Space Observatory. One paper with Pilbratt as the corresponding author has been cited 720 times. Albrecht Poglitsch of the Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics of the Max Planck Institute is the chief scientist of another scientific instrument of Herschel, the Photo-detector Array Camera and Spectrometer Instrument (PACS), and his paper regarding the PACS has been cited 519 times, which is ranked second only to the paper of Pilbratt.

The Rutherford Appleton Laboratory is the location of the control centre of the Spectral and Photometric Imaging Receiver. Matt J. Griffin of Cardiff University, the principle investigator of SPIRE project, publicated a core paper as the first author to introduce SPIRE and to show its flight performance with citations of 455 ranking the third among seven core papers. Ewine F. van Dishoeck of Leiden University is the general coordinator of “water in the star-forming region with Herschel (WISH).”

Table 28: Top countries and institutions producing the seven core papers in the research front “Herschel Space Observatory performance and observational strategy”

Country Ranking

Country

Core Papers

Proportion

Institution Ranking

Institution

Core Papers

Proportion

1

Spain

7

100.0%

1

ESAC ESA (Spain)

6

85.7%

2

France

6

85.7%

2

INAF (Italy)

5

71.4%

2

Germany

6

85.7%

2

California Institute of Technology (USA)

5

71.4%

2

USA

6

85.7%

3

Stockholm University (Sweden)

4

57.1%

5

Canada

5

71.4%

3

Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich (Switzerland)

4

57.1%

5

Italy

5

71.4%

3

Max Planck Society (Germany)

4

57.1%

5

Netherlands

5

71.4%

3

CNRS (France)

4

57.1%

38

8

http://aanda.org/index.php?option=com_toc&url=/articles/aa/abs/2010/10/contents/contents.html http://herschel.caltech.edu/page/partners

9

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

Because the Herschel Space Observatory is a large international cooperative project, the production of the citing papers is generally by the significant participating countries and organizations of the program. The Max-Planck Institute in Germany is the top-ranked institution for the production of the citing papers on this front topic, and 76 percent of the citing papers in

Germany come from this organization (Table 30).

Similarly, the California Institute of Technology in the United States contributes 54 percent of the citing articles. Additionally, 90 percent of the citing articles from Italy come from the National Institute for Astrophysics (INAF).

Table 29: Top corresponding authors of the seven core papers in the research front “Herschel Space Observatory performance and observational strategy”

Ranking

Reprint Author

Reprint Institution

Country

Core Papers

1

De Graauw, T

University of Groningen

Netherlands

1

1

Pilbratt, GL

ESTEC ESA

Netherlands

1

1

Poglitsch, A

Max Planck Society

Germany

1

1

Roelfsema, PR

University of Groningen

Netherlands

1

1

Griffin MJ10

Cardi University

UK

1

1

Swinyard, BM

Rutherford Appleton Lab

UK

1

1

van Dishoeck, EF

Leiden University

Netherlands

1

Table 30: Top countries and institutions producing citing papers in the research front “Herschel Space Observatory performance and observational strategy”

10

Country Ranking

Country

Citing Papers

Proportion

Institution Ranking

Institution

Citing Papers

Proportion

1

USA

655

76.3%

1

Max Planck Society, Germany

391

45.6%

2

France

552

64.3%

2

Catech, USA

351

40.9%

3

Germany

516

60.1%

3

INAF, Italy

323

37.6%

4

UK

486

56.6%

4

CNRS, France

247

28.8%

5

Spain

422

49.2%

5

Cardiff University, UK

209

24.4%

6

Italy

359

41.8%

5

Leiden University, Netherlands

209

24.4%

7

Netherlands

340

39.6%

7

University of Paris Diderot – Paris VII, France

208

24.2%

8

Canada

319

37.2%

8

ESAC ESA, Spain

197

23.0%

9

Belgium

185

21.6%

9

University of Edinburgh, UK

183

21.3%

10

Chile

138

16.1%

10

NASA, USA

182

21.2%

Griffin, MJ is the first author. Corresponding author was not found in this article.

39

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

VEMERGING RESEARCH FRONT – “POSITRON FRACTION IN THE COSMIC RAY BASED ON THE ACCURATE MEASUREMENT OF THE ALPHA MAGNETIC SPECTROMETER (AMS)” According to the existing theory, dark matter is one type of particle called weakly interacting massive particles, (WIMPs). A WIMP has mass and participates in the gravitational action.

However, a WIMP does not participate in the electromagnetic action, meaning it does not emit or absorb light. Currently, a WIMP has never been observed in any experiment. The theory predicts that a WIMP is the anti-matter of itself, therefore, when two dark matter particles collide, they will be annihilated to become energy. According to Einstein's mass-energy formula, this energy will also create positive matter and anti-matter, such as an electron and a positron. That means a certain amount of excess positrons will be present in the universe which is generated by the annihilation of dark matter particles. These excess positrons will appear within in a certain range of energy and then suddenly disappear when they exceed that range of energy.

In 2008, the PAMELA satellite of Italy discovered excessive positrons for the first time; in 2011, the “Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope” of the United States confirmed this discovery.

The experiment of the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer (AMS) is a large international cooperative project led by Professor Chaochung Ting, which has attracted the participation of 56 institutions from 16 countries. The AMS experiment is divided into the following two stages: in June of 1998, AMS-01 performed a 10-day flight on the Discovery space shuttle and verified the feasibility of the concept of the space probe; on May 16, 2011, the 8.5-ton AMS-02 that cost approximately 1.5 billion USD was carried by the Endeavour space shuttle to reach the International Space Station (ISS).

11

AMS-02 will be finished on the ISS in 2028, and the data acquired to date only account for 8 percent of the total amount of data to be obtained in the future. As the amount of data collected by the AMS gradually increases, the measurement accuracy will increase. These data will eventually conclude whether these excess positrons are from dark matter particles or not.

http://press.web.cern.ch/press-releases/2013/04/ams-experiment-measures-antimatter-excess-space Aguilar, M., Alberti, G., Alpat, B., et al. First Result from the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer on the International Space Station: Precision Measurement of the Positron Fraction in Primary Cosmic Rays of 0.5–350 GeV. Physical Review Letters, 2013, 110(14): 141102.

12

40

On April 2, 2013, Professor Chaochung Ting announced the first research results of the AMS02 experiment at CERN11, and these results were later published in the Physical Review Letters12.

The research result was obtained based on 25 billion records of cosmic ray events by AMS within 18 months. The experimental result indicates that in the interval of 10 to 250 billion eV, the proportion of positrons relative to the sum of the electrons and positrons gradually increases.

However, in the interval of 20 billion to 250 billion eV, the increasing rate of the proportion of positrons decreases by one order of magnitude.

These results also indicate that there is no significant change in the experimental data over time, and there is no significant relationship with the direction of the cosmic ray source. This experimental result agrees with the theory that the dark matter particles in the universe collide and annihilate to produce positrons. However, the result cannot exclude another explanation, namely, that positrons originate from the pulsars distributed near the galactic plane. Meanwhile, the super-symmetric theory also predicts that when the energy of the positron exceeds the range of mass for the dark matter particle, the observed cases will decrease significantly, but this phenomenon has not been observed experimentally.

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

MATHEMATICS, COMPUTER SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING HOT RESEARCH FRONT DEVELOPMENT TREND OF THE TOP 10 RESEARCH FRONTS IN MATHEMATICS, COMPUTER SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING Table 31: Top 10 research fronts in mathematics, computer science and engineering

Rank

Research Fronts

Core Papers

Citations

Mean Year of Core Papers

1

Particle swarm and other optimization algorithms

41

961

2011.5

2

Biodiesel fuel performance and emissions

23

919

2011.5

3

Modified couple stress theory

37

1174

2011.4

4

Fuzzy Lyapunov method

36

1116

2011.2

5

Coupled fixed point theorems in G-Metric Spaces

30

985

2011.1

6

Applications of various difference equations

34

869

2011.1

7

Predictive control in power electronics and drives

35

1167

2011

8

Vanadium redox flow battery

22

1218

2010.9

9

High-capacity electrodes for lithium-ion batteries

16

1004

2010.7

10

Entransy dissipation in heat exchangers

26

942

2010.7

Figure 9: Citing articles for the top 10 research fronts in mathematics, computer science, and engineering

41

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

HOT RESEARCH FRONT – “BIODIESEL FUEL PERFORMANCE AND EMISSIONS”

ANALYSIS OF THE ACTIVITY STATUS OF COUNTRIES AND INSTITUTIONS

Biodiesel refers to liquid fuel that can replace fossil diesel. Biodiesel can be made from animal fats, microbial oils, and food waste oils as raw oil via a transesterification process. Biodiesel has excellent compatibility with diesel, can be used as a mixture with standard diesel, or by itself.

Biodiesel is a typical clean, renewable “green energy” and an ideal substitute for non-renewable resources, such as petroleum. To avoid competing with food and to reduce biodiesel production cost, the raw materials of biodiesel have changed from using edible oils (such as canola oil, soybean oil, etc.) to developing non-edible oils (such as palm oil, kiriko oil, jatropha oil, waste oil, etc.), and further developing the use non-fat biomass.

Subsequently, biodiesel synthetic methods and processes are constantly being updated. In recent years, biodiesel has achieved fuel trials in automotive engines, aircraft engines, and other engines. This research front primarily studies fuel performance, engine performance (such as idling performance, etc.), and emission characteristics of biodiesel and biodiesel blends (with standard diesel hybrid). These studies form the foundation for further research to improve the combustion ratio of biodiesel fuel, reduce engine emissions, and improve the environmental characteristics of biodiesel. These improvements would thereby increase the applicability of biodiesel as an alternative fuel and provide experimental and theoretical references to promote the use of biodiesel fuel.

Based on the analysis of nations and institutions that produce core articles (as shown in Table 32), it can be seen that Malaysia exhibits excellent performance in the field of biodiesel research.

Among the 23 core articles in this field, 11 are from Malaysia, with six from the University of Malaya and two from the University of Nottingham Malaysia Campus, which are the primary research institutions in this field. The outstanding performance of Malaysia in the field of biodiesel research field benefits from the strategic decisions of its government. Malaysia is the largest palm oil producer, and with this advantage, the Malaysian government strives to ensure that Malaysia is the largest producer and consumer of biodiesel all over the world. With the support of funding and policies, Malaysia is at the forefront of the world in the production and promotion of biodiesel use.

Following Malaysia, China, India, Indonesia, and Turkey have also achieved remarkable results.

The State University of Medan of Indonesia has had a long-term cooperation with the University of Malaya and has two core publications in the field of biodiesel. Among the top producing institutions, 12 institutions are in Mainland China and the Taiwan region, which indicates that biodiesel production and promotion involve a wide range of studies in China.

Moreover, three of the four core articles published in 2013 studied the performance and emissions of biodiesel fuel and were performed by the Mechanical Engineering Team of the Malaysia University School. These studies laid the foundation for promoting the use of biodiesel fuel; accordingly, Malaysia also plans to comprehensively promote the use of biodiesel fuel in 2014.

From the overall data, the countries and institutions performing research in the biodiesel field are concentrated in Asia because biodiesel as an alternative fuel is highly dependent on raw materials and, simultaneously, is most suited for traditionally energy-scarce regions. Therefore, these Asian countries have strong motivation and a strong basis of raw materials for biofuel research to further create strong research capabilities in the field.

42

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

Table 32: Top countries and institutions producing the 23 core papers in the research front “Biodiesel fuel performance and emissions” Country Ranking

Country

Core Papers

Proportion

Institution Ranking

Institution

Core Papers

Proportion

1

Malaysia

11

47.8%

1

University of Malaya (Malaysia)

6

26.1%

2

China

7

30.4%

2

Medan State Polytechnic (Indonesia)

2

8.7%

3

India

2

8.7%

2

University of Nottingham Malaysia (Malaysia)

2

8.7%

2

8.7%

3

Indonesia

2

8.7%

2

Sila Science: Energy Reserch Development Marketing Publishing Project Information Unlimited Co. Üniversite Mah. (Turkey)

3

Turkey

2

8.7%

4

University of Tenaga Nasional (Malaysia)

1

4.3%

4

East China University of Science & Technology (China)

1

4.3%

4

Guizhou University (China)

1

4.3%

4

Jiangsu University (China)

1

4.3%

4

Tianjin University (China)

1

4.3%

4

Tongji University (China)

1

4.3%

4

Tsinghua University (China)

1

4.3%

4

University of Hongkong (China)

1

4.3%

4

University of Macau (China)

1

4.3%

4

Guiyang University (China)

1

4.3%

4

Huaiyin Institute of Technology (China)

1

4.3%

4

Kongju National University (South Korea)

1

4.3%

4

University of Khartoum (Sudan)

1

4.3%

4

Malardalen University (Sweden)

1

4.3%

4

Royal Institute of Technology (Sweden)

1

4.3%

4

CPC CORP (Taiwan)

1

4.3%

4

National Sun Yat-sen University (Taiwan)

1

4.3%

4

University of Nebraska Lincoln (USA)

1

4.3%

4

University Putra Malaysia (Malaysia)

1

4.3%

4

The University of Nottingham Malaysia (Malaysia)

1

4.3%

4

Universiti Malaysia Sabah (Malaysia)

1

4.3%

4

University of British Columbia (Canada)

1

4.3%

4

Anna University (India)

1

4.3%

4

Delhi Technological University (India)

1

4.3% 43

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

ANALYSIS OF THE ACTIVITY STATUS OF AUTHORS As shown in Table 33, among the corresponding authors of the 23 core articles in the field of biodiesel, Hoon Kiat Ng of the University of Nottingham Malaysia Campus published three core articles in 2012, and is thus ranked number one. Abdelaziz Emad Atabani of the School of Mechanical Engineering, University of Malaysia and Mustafa and Balat of Sila Science: Energy Reserch Development Marketing Publishing Project Information Unlimited Co., Turkey each published two articles and are ranked second.

These authors are the leaders in the field of

biodiesel research. Among them, the review article by Balat of Turkey summarized the four main techniques to produce biodiesel: dilution, microemulsion, pyrolysis, and transesterification.

This review has attracted much attention and has been cited 111 times. Among these four techniques, transesterification is the most common method for biodiesel production.

Although Dennis Y.C. Leung of Hong Kong University has only published one core article, this review of biodiesel production through transesterification has 229 citations.

Table 33: Top corresponding authors of the 23 core articles in the research front “Biodiesel fuel performance and emissions”

Ranking

Reprint Author

Reprint Institution

Country

Core Papers

1

Ng, HK

University of Nottingham Malaysia

Malaysia

3

2

Atabani, AE

University of Malaya

Malaysia

2

2

Balat, M

Sila Science: Energy Reserch Development Marketing Publishing Project Information Unlimited Co. Üniversite Mah

Turkey

2

4

Arbab, MI

University of Malaya

Malaysia

1

4

Aroua, MK

University of Malaya

Malaysia

1

4

Chauhan, BS

Delhi Technological University

India

1

4

Ellis, N

University of British Columbia

Canada

1

4

Fattah, IMR

University of Malaya

Malaysia

1

4

Ghazi, TIM

University Putra Malaysia

Malaysia

1

4

Leung, DYC

University of Hong Kong

China

1

4

Lin, YC

National Sun Yat-sen University

Taiwan

1

4

Ma, HL

Jiangsu University

China

1

4

Mofijur, M

University of Malaya

Malaysia

1

4

Renganathan, S

Anna University

India

1

4

Tan, PQ

Tongji University

China

1

4

Wang, JF

Tsinghua University

China

1

4

Wong, PK

University of Macau

China

1

4

Yang, S

Guizhou University

China

1

4

Yu, XH

East China University of Science & Technology

China

1

44

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

1.2.3 ANALYSIS OF THE DEVELOPMENT STATUS OF COUNTRIES AND INSTITUTIONS As shown in Table 34, there is a difference between the top countries that produce the citing articles and the core articles in the field of biodiesel research. Malaysia and China are ranked in the top two for their production of citing articles. India, China, the Taiwan region and Indonesia are still in the top, ranked four, seven and eight respectively, in terms of number of citing articles. However, countries like Brazil, USA, Spain, Iran, and France, which are not in the top core articles category, are in the top in the citing articles category. Amongst these countries, Brazil is ranked number three, which indicates that research on the use and emission performance of biodiesel is spreading to more countries.

However, the statistics of the top institutions that produce citing articles show that while the top ranked institutions are still Malaysia, Mainland China, and the Taiwan region of China and that the University of Malaya is still ranked number one, the institutions that produce the greatest

number of citing articles are generally different from the countries that produce the largest number of core articles. For example, the Chinese Academy of Sciences did not appear in the list of the top institutions that produce core articles but does appear in the list of top institutions producing citing articles. This indicates that the Chinese Academy of Sciences is tracking this area, performing related studies in the field of biodiesel, and is making various research achievements.

In summary, the comparative results of the top countries and institutions that produce citing articles and core articles indicate that research in the field of biodiesel engine performance and emissions monitoring is in a development and expansion stage. In the face of the current global energy shortage, an attempt to promote the development of biodiesel has become a potential choice of alternative fuel for various countries.

Table 34: Top countries and institutions producing citing articles in the research front â&#x20AC;&#x153;Biodiesel fuel performance and emissionsâ&#x20AC;?

Country Ranking

Country

Citing Papers

Proportion

Institution Ranking

Institution

Citing Papers

Proportion

1

Malaysia

90

18.3%

1

University of Malaya (Malaysia)

48

9.8%

2

China

87

17.7%

2

Universiti Sains Malaysia (Malaysia)

17

3.5%

3

Brazil

44

9.0%

3

South China University of Technology (China)

9

1.8%

4

India

44

9.0%

3

Chinese Academy of Sciences (China)

9

1.8%

5

USA

36

7.3%

5

University of Tenaga Nasional (Malaysia)

8

1.6%

6

Spain

29

5.9%

5

National Cheng Kung University (Taiwan)

8

1.6%

7

Taiwan

21

4.3%

5

Medan State Polytechnic (Indonesia)

8

1.6%

8

Indonesia

20

4.1%

8

National Taiwan University of Science & Technology (Taiwan)

7

1.4%

9

Iran

17

3.5%

8

University of Nottingham Malaysia (Malaysia)

7

1.4%

10

France

16

3.3%

8

Jiangsu University (China)

7

1.4%

45

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

EMERGING RESEARCH FRONT – “RESEARCH ON THE STRUCTURAL MECHANICS OF BEAMS, PLATES AND SHELLS OF FUNCTIONALLY GRADED MATERIALS UNDER HIGH-ORDER SHEAR DEFORMATION THEORY” Functionally graded material is a new type of non-uniform composite material. In this type of material, the abrupt interfaces of traditional composite materials are replaced by a continuous gradient of a changing material component.

Therefore, the discontinuity of physical properties is eliminated, and the thermal stress concentration in the material is minimized.

Functionally graded material has application potentials in the engineering and technology fields of the aerospace industry, nuclear reactors, internal combustion engines, microelectromechanical systems, and laser heating, among others. Functionally graded material structure and front composite material have been a focus of research in the field of structural mechanics over the past decade. In the 13 core articles of this research front, most of the work used analytical and numerical methods to seek analytical or numerical solutions of the static and

46

dynamic responses and to determine the thermal load of beams, plates, and shells of functionally graded material under high-order shear deformation theory, sinusoidal shear theory, and hyperbolic shear theory. The numerical methods that were used consisted primarily of the finite element method, differential quadrature method, and Galerkin variational method. The differential equations governing the free vibration of beams and plates made from functionally graded material are extremely complicated when comprehensively considering the impact of shear deformation, axial and lateral rotation, and pullbending-coupled inertia force on the natural frequency. The equations are difficult to solve analytically, and thus, several studies have used the numerical shooting method to determine the solution of the free-vibration problem of functionally graded material beams.

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

ECONOMICS, PSYCHOLOGY AND OTHER SOCIAL SCIENCES HOT RESEARCH FRONT DEVELOPMENT TREND OF THE TOP 10 RESEARCH FRONTS IN ECONOMICS, PSYCHOLOGY AND OTHER SOCIAL SCIENCES Table 35: Top 10 research fronts in economics, psychology and other social sciences

Rank

Research Fronts

Core Papers

Citations

Mean Year of Core Papers

1

Key issues of entrepreneurship and innovation in SMEs

49

1250

2011.4

2

Statistical evidence and replication in experimental psychology

20

1007

2011.3

3

Human habitation and behavior in Middle Stone Age southern Africa

25

1032

2011

4

Management and performance studies of family firms

26

1001

2010.8

5

Mobile health technology

20

1396

2010.7

6

Diagnostic and statistical research (DSM-5) analysis of mental disorders based on personality traits

12

881

2010.7

7

Payment supply of environmental services and research on the sustainability of ecological landscape

29

1705

2010.6

8

Early Homo origins and evolution

29

1149

2010.6

9

The formation mechanism of idea and influential members in the internet social networks and its commercial applications

20

968

2010.5

10

Structural decomposition analysis methods such as multi-regional input-output analysis tools in the study of greenhouse gas emissions

44

2258

2010.3

Figure 10: Citing articles for the top 10 research fronts in economics, psychology, and other social sciences

47

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

HOT RESEARCH FRONT – “MOBILE HEALTH (MHEALTH) TECHNOLOGY”

ANALYSIS OF THE ACTIVITY STATUS OF COUNTRIES AND INSTITUTIONS

Along with the development of wireless and internet technology, Mobile Health (MHealth) has become a hot topic in global academia and industry in recent years. MHealth is the sum of a class of technology applications that enables the exchange of clinical information between patients or doctors regardless of their location. For example, medical information can be exchanged through email, text message, smart phone applications, picture storage and transmission, and internet videos. The MHealth market is being re-stimulated by the growth of the smart phone industry. In fact, based on the indications of our database, MHealth research is currently the hottest research front in the field of economics, psychology, and other social sciences. Before and after July of 2010, there were 20 core articles in MHealth research, which have been cited 1396 times, constituting the front of this research.

Our literature review data show (Table 36) that research in MHealth technology is primarily concentrated in the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, Kenya, and New Zealand.

There are two or more core articles from each of these countries, among which the United States has the most core articles with 14, accounting for 70 percent of the total number of core articles.

Six of the top institutions are in the United States, namely the University of California at San Diego, Boston University, Georgetown University, Columbia University, Harvard University, and the University of Pittsburgh. Among the other four universities, three of them are from the United Kingdom, namely the University of London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, the Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, and the University of Warwick; the remaining institution is the University of Auckland in New Zealand.

Table 36: Top countries and institutions producing the 20 core papers in the research front “MHealth technology” Country Ranking

Country

Core Papers

Proportion

Institution Ranking

Institution

Core Papers

Proportion

1

USA

14

70.0%

1

University of California at San Diego (USA)

4

20.0%

2

UK

5

25.0%

2

Boston University (USA)

2

10.0%

3

Australia

3

15.0%

2

Georgetown University (USA)

2

10.0%

3

Kenya

3

15.0%

2

University of Auckland (New Zealand)

2

10.0%

5

New Zealand

2

10.0%

2

London School Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (UK)

2

10.0%

2

The Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine (UK)

2

10.0%

2

University of Warwick (UK)

2

10.0%

2

Columbia University (USA)

2

10.0%

2

Harvard University (USA)

2

10.0%

2

University of Pittsburgh (USA)

2

10.0%

48

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

ANALYSIS OF THE ACTIVITY STATUS OF AUTHORS It can be seen from the analysis of corresponding authors (Table 37) that the author with the most core articles is Caroline Free of the University of London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, with three core articles, followed by Kevin Patrick of the University of California at San Diego with two core articles. The remaining 15 corresponding authors contributed one article each.

From the perspective of countries and the institutions of the authors, 11 of the top authors are from the United States, all from different institutions. Among the other six authors, two are from Australia, and the remaining four are from the United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand, and Kenya. These authors are also from different institutions.

It can be seen from the above analysis that there is no one particular institution or author dominating achievements in this field. However, from the country perspective, the United States is undoubtedly the leader, followed by the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, and Kenya.

Table 37: Top corresponding authors of the 20 core articles in the research front â&#x20AC;&#x153;MHealth technologyâ&#x20AC;?

Ranking

Reprint Author

Reprint Institution

Country

Core Papers

1

Free, C

London School Hygiene & Tropical Medicine

UK

3

2

Patrick, K

University of California at San Diego

USA

2

3

Abroms, LC

George Washington University

USA

1

3

Burke, LE

University of Pittsburgh

USA

1

3

Cole-Lewis, H

Yale University

USA

1

3

Fjeldsoe, BS

University of Queensland

Australia

1

3

Granholm, E

Veterans Administration San Diego Healthcare System

USA

1

3

Hardy, H

Bristol Myers Squibb Co.

USA

1

3

Hellard, ME

Austin Research Institute

Australia

1

3

Krishna, S

Saint Louis University

USA

1

3

Lester, RT

British Columbia Centre for Disease Control

Canada

1

3

Petrie, KJ

University of Auckland

New Zealand

1

3

Shiffman, S

University of Pittsburgh

USA

1

3

Smyth, JM

Syracuse University

USA

1

3

Stockwell, MS

Columbia University

USA

1

3

Thirumurthy, H

World Bank

USA

1

3

Zurovac, D

Kenya Medical Research Institute Welcome Trust

Kenya

1

49

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

ANALYSIS OF THE DEVELOPMENT STATUS OF COUNTRIES AND INSTITUTIONS It can be seen from the data in Table 38 that the United States accounts for 63.8 percent of the total number of citing articles with 473 citing articles, followed by UK with 115 citing articles.

Nine of the top institutions are from the United States, namely Harvard University, University of Pittsburgh, Columbia University, University

of California at San Francisco, University of Michigan, University of California at San Diego, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, University of California at Los Angeles, and University of Pennsylvania. King's College London of the United Kingdom ranks the eighth in the list in terms of the citing papers.

Table 38: Top countries and institutions producing citing articles in the research front â&#x20AC;&#x153;MHealth technologyâ&#x20AC;?

Country Ranking

Country

Citing Papers

Proportion

Institution Ranking

Institutions (all USA)

Citing Papers

Proportion

1

USA

473

63.8%

1

Harvard University

37

5.0%

2

UK

115

15.5%

2

University of Pittsburgh

31

4.2%

3

Australia

51

6.9%

3

Columbia University

27

3.6%

4

Netherlands

45

6.1%

4

University of California at San Francisco

24

3.2%

5

Germany

38

5.1%

4

University of Michigan

24

3.2%

6

Canada

34

4.6%

6

University of California at San Diego

23

3.1%

7

Switzerland

28

3.8%

7

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

20

2.7%

8

Kenya

21

2.8%

8

Kings College London

19

2.6%

9

Sweden

20

2.7%

9

University of California at Los Angeles

18

2.4%

10

France

17

2.3%

9

University of Pennsylvania

18

2.4%

50

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

EMERGING RESEARCH FRONT – “AFRICAN SCHISTOSOMIASIS CONTROL AND DRUG RESEARCH” Schistosomiasis is a chronic parasitic disease caused by bilharzia fluke of genus Schistosoma, which is prevalent in tropical and subtropical areas with poor sanitation, especially in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Schistosomiasis is particularly serious in poor areas with a lack of access to safe drinking water and proper sanitation. Infection of schistosomiasis can be caused by contact with skin and mucous membranes with contaminated water. Due to the fact that most of the regions in Africa are tropical areas and coupled with poor medical and sanitary conditions, people are more likely to be infected with this type of latent tropical disease, and these areas become a high-incidence area of schistosomiasis. Statistics estimate that at least 90 percent of schistosomiasis patients who require medical treatment live in Africa. Schistosomiasis is categorized into two types: one is intestinal schistosomiasis, which is primarily caused by Schistosoma mansoni and S. japonicum, and the other is urinary schistosomiasis, which is caused by S. haematobium.

It can be seen from our data that the number of core articles related to schistosomiasis control and treatment in Africa has increased dramatically since 2011, and the number of citations has also rapidly increased. The 13 core articles are primarily from the developed countries in Europe and North America, such as the United Kingdom and the United States.

Schistosomiasis in Africa is primarily observed as intestinal schistosomiasis caused by Schistosoma mansoni and urinary schistosomiasis caused by S. haematobium. Infants and preschool children are one of the high schistosomiasis risk groups and are one of the hardest-hit populations of African schistosomiasis. Therefore, infants and preschool and school-age children are the most important object of study in the core articles related to “African schistosomiasis control and drug research.” The study subjects of eight out of 13 core articles (approximately 61.5 percent) are infants or preschool or school-age children.

Presently, praziquantel is the drug of choice to treat schistosomiasis, which has the advantage of high efficiency, low toxicity, minor effects, which can be taken orally, has a short clinical course, and is effective in killing the larvae, child and adult worms. The drug involved in most of the core articles in drug research is praziquantel. The article published by J. Russell Stothard of the British National History Museum in 2010, which has been cited 29 times, primarily describes the appropriate dose of praziquantel and the effectiveness and side effects of praziquantel for preschool children in Uganda. In 2013, A. Garba of Niger studied the efficacy and safety of double doses of praziquantel in treating S. haematobium and S. mansoni infection in school-age children. The pattern of re-infection of schistosomiasis was analyzed by tracking research. The article published in the same year

by Louis-Albert Tchuem Tchuente of Cameroon Schistosomiasis and Parasitology Centre and of The Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, University of London used data from various countries to analyze the effectiveness of praziquantel and the infection pattern of schistosomiasis.

In addition, Anna-Sofie Stensgaard of the University of Copenhagen in Demark studied the influence of climate change, such as global warming, on intestinal schistosomiasis in Africa and hypothesized that global warming will lead to the rapid spread of infectious diseases in the region.

51

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

APPENDIX: 44 EMERGING RESEARCH FRONTS No.

Category

Research Fronts (changed)

Core Papers

Citations

Mean Year Core Papers

1

Ecology and Environmental Sciences

Ecological status assessment of Europe surface waters by aquatic organisms

8

121

2012.5

2

Geosciences

Major non-CO2 Greenhouse gas such as ozone, methane, and black carbon, as well as OH and anthropogenic sulfur dioxide in the Atmospheric Chemistry and Climate Model Intercomparison Project (ACCMIP) simulaitons

9

110

2012.9

3

Clinical Medicine

Clinical, microbiological and epidemiologic features of patients infected with influenza A H7N9 virus in East China in 2013

20

404

2013

4

Clinical Medicine

MYD88 L265P mutation in Waldenstrรถm's macroglobulinemia

6

104

2012.8

5

Clinical Medicine

Temozolomide adjuvant treatment of glioblastoma in elderly patients

7

192

2012.7

6

Clinical Medicine

Association of childhood narcolepsy and influenza A (H1N1) vaccination

6

126

2012.7

7

Clinical Medicine

New drugs for preventing the recurrence of venous thromboembolism

4

190

2012.5

8

Clinical Medicine

Clinical and virological features of Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus infection

27

626

2012.8

9

Clinical Medicine

Circulating tumor cells monitoring in metastatic breast cancer

13

212

2012.9

10

Clinical Medicine

Mortality statistics on smoking and benefits of cessation (page 515)

6

143

2012.5

11

Clinical Medicine

Chronic rhinosinusitis with allergy or asthma

5

133

2012.6

12

Clinical Medicine

Time-of-day effect on athletes anaerobic performances

12

197

2012.5

13

Biological Sciences

RIF1 protein regulation of DNA repair

6

111

2013

14

Biological Sciences

CRISPR/CAS system for genomic editing

7

687

2012.9

15

Biological Sciences

Elongation factor P and protein synthesis

4

100

2012.8

16

Biological Sciences

Functions and characteristics of circular RNAs

4

119

2012.8

17

Biological Sciences

Purification of mitotically active oocyte progenitor cells from mouse and human ovaries

4

115

2012.5

18

Biological Sciences

Bioinformatics application in the prediction of protein structure and nucleosome positioning

15

336

2012.6

19

Biological Sciences

Application of magnetic resonance imaging in functional connectomics

11

538

2012.5

20

Biological Sciences

Culture, isolation, identification and characterization of Pathogens (giant viruses and bacteria) in humans

11

199

2012.5

21

Chemistry and Materials Science

Polymer solar cells with enhanced power-conversion efficiency

4

516

2012.8

22

Chemistry and Materials Science

Asymmetric catalysis using chiral anions

3

108

2012.7

23

Chemistry and Materials Science

Bulk heterojunction polymer solar cells

6

116

2012.7

52

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

No.

Category

Research Fronts (changed)

Core Papers

Citations

Mean Year Core Papers

24

Chemistry and Materials Science

Supercapacitors based on nanoporous carbon electrodes

5

129

2012.6

25

Chemistry and Materials Science

Synthesis of functional gold nanorods

6

131

2012.7

26

Chemistry and Materials Science

Enhanced Visible Light photocatalysts

5

151

2012.6

27

Chemistry and Materials Science

Metal organic materials with optimal adsorption thermodynamics and kinetics for CO2 separation

4

118

2012.8

28

Chemistry and Materials Science

Synthesis of copolymers by direct arylation polycondensation

7

158

2012.6

29

Chemistry and Materials Science

Enamine-catalyzed Asymmetric synthesis

8

292

2012.5

30

Chemistry and Materials Science

Magnetically retrievable nanocatalysts

8

135

2012.8

31

Chemistry and Materials Science

Dual gold catalysis

9

274

2012.6

32

Chemistry and Materials Science

High performance perovskite-sensitized solar cells

14

381

2012.6

33

Chemistry and Materials Science

Palladium-catalyzed decarboxylative acylation

10

199

2012.6

34

Chemistry and Materials Science

Photoinitiated polymerization and Photoinitiators

6

183

2012.5

35

Physics

BiS2-based superconductors

9

144

2012.7

36

Physics

Symmetry protected topological phases

8

160

2012.8

37

Physics

Inverse spin hall and spin Seebeck effects; Pt films

17

258

2012.8

38

Physics

Supersymmetric stop direct production search

6

106

2012.5

39

Physics

p-Pb collisions at TEV energies; angular correlations

7

113

2012.9

40

Physics

Charged charmonium-like structures

8

159

2012.8

41

Astronomy and Astrophysics

Star formation and accretion histories in dark matter halos

4

113

2012.8

42

Astronomy and Astrophysics

Precision measurement of cosmic ray positron fraction by Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer (AMS)

4

130

2012.8

43

Mathematics, Computer Science and Engineering

Higher order shear deformation theories, functionally graded plates

13

144

2012.6

44

Economics, Psychology and Other Social Sciences

Control and treatment of schistosomiasis in Africa using the drug praziquantel

13

137

2012.5

53

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

RESEARCH FRONTS: IN SEARCH OF THE STRUCTURE OF SCIENCE When Eugene Garfield introduced the concept of a citation index for the sciences in 1955, he emphasized its several advantages over traditional subject indexing.1 Since a citation index records the references in each article indexed, a search can proceed from a known work of interest to more recently published items that cited that work. Moreover, a search in a citation index, either forward in time or backward through cited references, is both highly efficient and productive because it relies upon the informed judgments of researchers themselves, reflected in the references appended to their papers, rather than the choices of indexing terms by cataloguers who are less familiar with the content of each publication than are the authors. Garfield called these authors “an army of indexers” and his invention “an association-of-ideas index.” He recognized citations as emblematic of specific topics, concepts, and methods: “the citation is a precise, unambiguous representation of a subject that requires no interpretation and is immune to changes in terminology2.” In addition, a citation index is inherently cross-disciplinary and breaks through limitations imposed by source coverage.

The connections represented by citations are not confined to one field or several—they naturally roam throughout the entire landscape of research. That is a particular strength of a citation index for science since interdisciplinary territory is well recognized as fertile ground for discovery. An early supporter of Garfield’s idea, Nobel Laureate Joshua Lederberg, saw this specific benefit of a citation index in his own field of genetics, which interacted with biochemistry, statistics, agriculture, and medicine. Although it took many years before the Science Citation Index (now the Web of Science™) was fully accepted by librarians and the researcher community, the power of the idea and the utility of its implementation could not be denied. This year marks the 50th anniversary of the Science Citation Index, which first became commercially available in 19643.

While the intended and primary use of the Science Citation Index was for information retrieval, Garfield knew almost from the start that his data could be exploited for the analysis of scientific research itself. First, he recognized that citation frequency was a method for identifying significant papers—ones with “impact”—and that such papers could be associated with specific

54

specialties. Beyond this, he understood that there was a meaningful, if complex, structure represented in this vast database of papers and their associations through citations. In “Citation indexes for sociological and historical research,” published in 1963, he stated that citation indexing provided an objective method for defining a field of inquiry4. That assertion rested on the same logical foundation that made information retrieval in a citation index effective: citations revealed the expert decisions and self-organizing behavior of researchers, their intellectual as well as their social associations. In 1964, with colleagues Irving H. Sher and Richard J. Torpie, Garfield produced his first historiograph, a linear mapping through time of influences and dependencies, illustrated by citation links, concerning the discovery of DNA and its structure5. Citation data, Garfield saw, provided some of the best material available for building out a picture of the structure of scientific research as it really was, even for sketching its terrain. Aside from making historiographs of specific sets of papers, however, a comprehensive map of science could not yet be charted.

Garfield was not alone in his vision. During the same era, the physicist and historian of science, Derek J. de Solla Price, was exploring the characteristic features and structures of the scientific research enterprise. The Yale University professor used the measuring tools of science on scientific activity, and he demonstrated in two influential books, of 1961 and 1963, how science had grown exponentially since the late 17th century, both in terms of number of researchers and publications6,7. There was hardly a statistic about the activity of scientific research that his restless mind was not eager to obtain, interrogate, and play with. Price and Garfield became acquainted at this time, and Price, the son of a tailor, was soon receiving data, as he said, “from the cutting-room floor of ISI’s computer room8.”

In 1965, Price published “Networks of scientific papers,” which used citation data to describe the nature of what he termed “the scientific research front9.” Previously, he had used the term “research front” in a generic way, meaning the leading edge of research and including the most knowledgeable scientists working at the coalface.

But in this paper, and using the short-lived field of research on N-rays as his example, he described the research front more specifically in terms of

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

its density of publications and time dynamics as revealed by a network of papers arrayed chronologically and their inter-citation patterns.

Price observed that a research front builds upon recently published work and that it displays a tight network of relationships.

“The total research front of science has never been a single row of knitting. It is, instead, divided by dropped stitches into quite small segments and strips. Such strips represent objectively defined subjects whose description may vary materially from year to year but which remain otherwise an intellectual whole. If one would work out the nature of such strips, it might lead to a method for delineating the topography of current scientific literature. With such a topography established, one could perhaps indicate the overlap and relative importance of journals and, indeed, of countries, authors, or individual papers by the place they occupied within the map, and by their degree of strategic centralness within a given strip10.”

The year is 1972. Enter Henry Small, a young historian of science previously working at the American Institute of Physics in New York City who joined the Institute for Scientific Information in Philadelphia hoping to make use of the Science Citation Index data and its wealth of title and key words. After his arrival, Small quickly changed allegiance from words to citations for the same reasons that had captivated and motivated Garfield and Price: their power and potential.

In 1973, Small published a paper that was as groundbreaking in its own way as Garfield’s 1955 paper introducing citation indexing for science. This paper, “Co-citation in the scientific literature: a new measure of relationship between two documents,” introduced A new era in describing the specialty structure of science11.

Small measured the similarity of two documents in terms of the number of times they were cited together, in other words their co-citation frequency. He illustrated his method of analysis with an example from recent papers in the literature of particle physics. Having found that such co-citation patterns indicated “the notion of subject similarity” and “the association or cooccurrence of ideas,” he suggested that frequently cited papers, reflecting key concepts, methods, or experiments, could beused as a starting point for a co-citation analysis as an objective way to reveal the social and intellectual, or the sociocognitive, structure of a specialty area. Like

Price’s research fronts, consisting of a relatively small group of recent papers tightly knit together, so too Small found co-citation analysis pointed to the specialty as the natural organizational unit of research, rather than traditionally defined and larger fields. Small also saw the potential for cocitation analysis to make, by analogy, movies and not merely snapshots. “The pattern of linkages among key papers establishes a structure or map for the specialty which may then be observed to change through time,” he stated. “Through the study of these changing structures, co-citation provides a tool for monitoring the development of scientific fields, and for assessing the degree of interrelationship among specialties.”

It should be noted that the Russian information scientist Irena V. Marshakova-Shaikevich also introduced the idea of co-citation analysis in 197312.Since neither Small nor MarshakovaShaikevich knew of each other’s work, this was an instance of simultaneous and independent discovery. The sociologist of science Robert K. Merton designated the phenomenon “multiple discovery” and demonstrated that it is more common in the history of science than most recognize13, 14. Both Small and MarshakovaShaikevich contrasted co-citation with bibliographic coupling, which had been described

by Myer Kessler in 196315. Bibliographic coupling measures subject similarity between documents based on the frequency of shared cited references: if two works often cite the same literature, there is a probability they are related in their subject content. Co-citation analysis inverts this idea: instead of the similarity relation being established by what the publications cited, co-citation brings publications together by what cites them. With bibliographic coupling, the similarity relationships are static because their cited references are fixed, whereas similarity between documents determined by co-citation can change as new citing papers are published. Small has noted that he preferred co-citation to bibliographic coupling because he “sought a measure that reflected scientists’ active and changing perceptions16.”

The next year, 1974, Small and Belver C. Griffith of Drexel University in Philadelphia published a pair of landmark articles that laid the foundations for defining specialties using co-citation analysis and mapping them according to their similarity17,18.

Although there have since been significant adjustments to the methodology used by Small and Griffith, the general approach and underlying

55

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

principles remain the same. A selection is made of highly cited papers as the seeds for a co-citation analysis. The restriction to a small number of publications is justified because it is assumed that the citation histories of these publications mark them as influential and likely representative of key concepts in specific specialties, or research fronts. (The characteristic hyperbolic distribution of papers by citation frequency also suggests that this selection will be robust and representative.)

Once these highly cited papers are harvested, they are analyzed for co-citation occurrence, and, of course, there are many zero matches. The cocited pairs that are found are then connected to others through single-link clustering, meaning only one co-citation link is needed to bring a cocited pair in association with another co-cited pair (the co-cited pair A and B is linked to the cocited pair C and D because B and C are also cocited). By raising or lowering a measure of cocitation strength for pairs of co-cited papers, it is possible to obtain clusters, or groupings, of various sizes. The lower the threshold, the more papers group together in large sets and setting the threshold too low can result in considerable chaining. Setting a higher threshold produces discrete specialty areas, but if the similarity threshold is set too high, there is too much disaggregation and many “isolates” form. The method of measuring co-citation similarity and the threshold of co-citation strength employed in creating research fronts has changed over the years. Today, we use cosine similarity, calculated as the co-citation frequency count divided by the square root of the product of the citation counts for the two papers. The minimum threshold for co-citation strength is a cosine similarity measure of .1, but this can be raised incrementally to break apart large clusters if the front exceeds a maximum number of core papers, which is set at 50. Trial and error has shown this procedure yields consistently meaningful research fronts.

56

To summarize, a research front consists of a group of highly cited papers that have been co-cited above a set threshold of similarity strength and their associated citing papers. In fact, the research front should be understood as both the co-cited core papers, representing a foundation for the specialty, and the citing papers that represent the more recent work and the leading edge of the research front. The name of the research front can be derived from a summarization of the titles of the core papers or the citing papers. The naming of research fronts in Thomson Reuters Essential Science IndicatorsSM relies on the titles of core papers. In other cases, the citing papers have been used: just as it is the citing authors who determine in their co-citations the pairing of important papers, it is also the citing authors who confer meaning on the content of the resulting research front. Naming research fronts is not a wholly algorithmic process, however. A careful, manual review of the cited or citing papers sharpens accuracy in naming a research front.

In the second of their two papers in 197419, Small and Griffith showed that individual research fronts could be measured for their similarity with one another. Since co-citation defined core papers forming the nucleus of a specialty based on their similarity, co-citation could also define research fronts with close relationships to others. In their mapping of research fronts, Small and Griffith used multidimensional scaling and plotted similarity as proximity in two dimensions.

Price hailed the work of Small and Griffith, remarking that while co-citation analysis of the scientific literature into clusters that map on a two dimensional plane “may seem a rather abstruse finding,” it was “revolutionary in its implications.”He asserted: “The finding suggests that there is some type of natural order in science crying out to be recognized and diagnosed. Our method of indexing papers by descriptors or other terms is almost certainly at variance with this natural order. If we can successfully define the natural order, we will have created a sort of giant atlas of the corpus of scientific papers that can be maintained in real time for classifying and monitoring developments as they occur20.”

Garfield remarked that “the work by Small and Griffith was the last theoretical rivet needed to get our flying machine off the ground21.” Garfield, ever the man of action, transformed the basic

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

research findings into an information product offering benefits of both retrieval and analysis.

The flying machine took off in 1981 as the ISI Atlas of Science: Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, 1978/8022. This book presented 102 research fronts, each including a map of the core papers and their relationships laid out by multidimensional scaling. A list of the core papers was provided with their citation counts as well as a list of key citing documents, including a relevance weight for each that was the number of core documents cited. A short review, written by an expert in the specialty, accompanied these data. Finally, a large, foldout map showed all 102 research fronts plotted according to their similarities. It was a bold, cutting edge effort and a real gamble in the marketplace, but of a type wholly characteristic of Garfield.

The ISI Atlas of Science in its successive forms— another in book format and then a series of review journals23,24—did not survive beyond the 1980s, owing to business decisions at the time in which other products and pursuits held greater priority. But Garfield and Small both continued their research and experiments in science mapping over the decade and thereafter. In two papers published in 1985, Small introduced an important modification to his method for defining research fronts: fractional co-citation clustering25. By counting citation frequency fractionally, based on the length of the reference list in the citing papers, he was able to adjust for differences in the average rate of citation among fields and therefore remove the bias that whole counting gave to biomedical and other “high citing” fields. As a consequence, mathematics, for example, emerged more strongly, having been underrepresented by integer counting. He also showed that research fronts could be clustered for similarity at levels higher than groupings of individual fronts26. The same year, he and Garfield summarized these advances in “The geography of science: disciplinary and national mappings,” which included a global map of science based on a combination of data in the Science Citation Index and the Social Sciences Citation Index, as well as lower level maps that were nested below the areas depicted on the global map27. “The reasons for the links between the macro-clusters are as important as their specific contents,” the authors noted. “These links are the threads which hold the fabric of science together.”

In the following years, Garfield focused on the development of historiographs and, with the assistance of Alexander I. Pudovkin and Vladimir S. Istomin, introduced the software tool HistCite.

Not only does the HistCite program automatically generate chronological drawings of the citation relationships of a set of papers, thereby offering in thumbnail a progression of antecedent and descendant papers on a particular research topic, it also identifies related papers that may not have been considered in the original search and extraction. It is, therefore, also a tool for information retrieval and not only for historical analysis and science mapping28,29. Small continued to refine his co-citation clustering methods and to analyze in detail and in context the cognitive connections found between fronts in the specialty maps30,31. A persistent interest was the unity of the sciences. To demonstrate this unity, Small showed how one could identify strong co-citation relationships leading from one topic to another and travel along these pathways across disciplinary boundaries, even from economics to astrophysics32,33.

In this, he shared the perspective of E. O. Wilson, expressed in the 1998 book Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge34. Early in the 1990s, Small developed SCI-MAP, a PC-based system for interactively mapping the literature35. Later in the decade, he introduced research front data into the new database Essential Science Indicators (ESI), intended mainly for research performance analysis. The research fronts presented in ESI had the advantage of being updated every two months, along with the rest of the data and rankings in this product. It was at this time, too, that Small became interested in virtual reality software for its ability to create immersive, threedimensional visualizations and to handle large datasets in real time36,37. For example, in the late 1990s, Small played a leading role in a project to visualize and explore the scientific literature through co-citation analysis that was undertaken with Sandia National Laboratories using its virtual reality software tool called VxInsight38,39.

This effort, with farsighted support of Sandia’s senior research manager Charles E. Meyers, was an important step forward in exploiting rapidly developing technology that provided detailed and dynamic views of the literature as a geog raphic space with, for example, dense and prominent features depicted as mountains.

Zooming into and out of the landscape allowed the user to travel from the specific to the general and back. Answers to queries made against the underlying data could be highlighted for visual understanding.

57

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

In fact, this moment — the late 1990s— was a turning point for science mapping, after which interest in and research about defining specialties and visualizing their relationships exploded. There are now a dozen academic centers across the globe focusing on science mapping, using a wide variety of techniques and tools. Developments over the last decade are summarized and illustrated in Indiana University professor Katy Borner’s 2010 book, which carries a familiar-sounding title: Atlas of Science— Visualizing What We Know40.

The long interval between the advent of cocitation clustering for science mapping and the blossoming of the field, a period of about 25 years, is curiously about the same time it took from the introduction of citation indexing for science to the commercial success of the Science Citation Index. In retrospect, both were clearly ideas ahead of their time. While the adoption of the Science Citation Index faced ingrained perceptions and practice in the library world (and by extension among researchers whose patterns of information seeking were traditional), delayed enthusiasm for science mapping—a wholly new domain and activity—can probably be attributed to a lack of access to the amount of data required for the work as well as technological limitations that were not overcome until computing storage, speed, and software advanced substantially in the 1990s. Data is now more available and in larger quantity than in the past and personal computers and software are more adequate to the task. Today, the use of the Web of Science for information retrieval and research analysis and the use of research front data for mapping and analyzing scientific activity have found not only their audiences but also their advocates.

58

What Garfield and Small planted many seasons ago has firmly taken root and is growing with vigor in many directions. A great life, according to one definition, is “a thought conceived in youth and realized in later life.” This adage applies to both men. Thomson Reuters is committed to continuing and advancing the pioneering contributions of these two living legends of information science.

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

REFERENCES [1] Eugene Garfield. Citation indexes for science: a new dimension in documentation through association of ideas. Science, 122 (3159): 108-111, 1955.

[13] Robert K. Merton. Singletons and multiples in scientific discovery: a chapter in the sociology of science. Proceedings of the American philosophical society, 105 (5): 470-486, 1961.

[2] Eugene Garfield. Citation indexing: its theory and application in science, technology, and humanities. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1979, 3.

[14] Robert K. Merton. Resistance to the systematic study of multiple discoveries in science. Archives EuropĂŠennes de Sociologie, 4 (2): 237-282, 1963.

[3] Genetics citation index. Philadelphia: institute for scientific information, 1963.

[4] Eugene Garfield. Citation indexes in sociological and historicresearch. American documentation, 14 (4): 289-291, 1963.

[5] Eugene Garfield, Irving H. Sher, Richard J. Torpie. The use of citation data in writing the history of science. Philadelphia: institute for scientific information, 1964.

[6] Derek J. de Solla Price. Science since Babylon.

New haven: Yale University Press, 1961. [See also the enlarged edition of 1975.]

[7] Derek J. de Solla Price. Little science, big science. New York: Columbia University Press, 1963. [See also the edition Little science, big Science and beyond, 1986, including nine influential papers by Price in addition to the original book.]

[8] Derek J. de Solla Price. Foreword. in Eugene Garfield, Essays of an information scientist, Volume 3, 1977-1978,Philadelphia: institute for scientific information, 1979, v-ix.

[9] Derek J. de Solla Price. Networks of scientific papers: the pattern of bibliographic references indicates the nature of the scientific research front. Science, 149 (3683): 510-515, 1965.

[10] ibid.

[11] Henry Small. Co-citation in scientific literature: a new measure of the relationship between two documents. Journal of the American society for information science, 24 (4): 265-269, 1973.

[12] Irena V. Marshakova-Shaikevich. System of document connections based on references.

Nauchno Tekhnicheskaya,Informatsiza Seriya 2, SSR, [Scientific and technical information serial of VINITI.], 6: 3-8, 1973.

[15] Myer M. Kessler. Bibliographic coupling between scientific papers. American documentation, 14 (1): 10-25, 1963.

[16] Henry Small. Cogitations on co-citations.

Current contents, 10: 20, march 9, 1992.

[17] Henry Small, Belver C. Griffith. The structure of scientific literatures in: identifying and graphing specialties. Science studies, 4 (1):17-40, 1974.

[18] Belver C. Griffith, Henry g. Small, Judith A. stonehill, sandra Dey. The structure of scientific literatures II: toward amacro- and microstructure for science. Science Studies, 4 (4):339-365, 1974.

[19] ibid.

[20] See note 8 above.

[21] Eugene Garfield. Introducing the ISI Atlas of Science: biochemistry and Molecular Biology, 1978/80. Current contents, 42, 5-13, October 19, 1981 [Reprinted in Eugene Garfield, Essays of an Information Scientist, Vol. 5, 1981-1982, Philadelphia: institute for scientific information, 1983,279-287.]

[22] ISI atlas of science: biochemistry and molecular biology, 1978/80, Philadelphia: institute for scientific information,1981.

[23] ISI atlas of science: biotechnology and molecular genetics, 1981/82, Philadelphia: institute for scientific information, 1984.

[24] Eugene Garfield. Launching the ISI Atlas of Science: for the new year, a new generation of reviews. Current contents, 1: 3-8, January 5, 1987. [Reprinted in Eugene Garfield, essays of an information scientist, vol. 10,1987, Philadelphia: institute for scientific information,1988, 1-6.]

59

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

[25] Henry Small, ED Sweeney. Clustering the science citation index using co-citations. I. A comparison of methods. Scientometrics, 7 (3-6): 391-409, 1985.

[26] Henry Small, ED Sweeney, Edward Greenlee.

Clustering the science citation index using cocitations. II. Mapping science. Scientometrics, 8 (5-6): 321-340, 1985.

[27] Henry Small, Eugene Garfield. The geography of science: disciplinary and national mappings. Journal of information science, 11 (4): 147-159, 1985.

[28] Eugene Garfield, Alexander I. Pudovkin, Vladimir S. Istomin. Why do we need algorithmic historiography? Journal of the American society for information science and technology, 54(5): 400-412, 2003.

[29] Eugene Garfield. Historiographic mapping of knowledge domains literature. Journal of information science, 30(2):119-145,2004.

[30] Henry Small. The synthesis of specialty narratives fromco-citation clusters. Journal of the American society for information science, 37 (3): 97-110, 1986.

[31] Henry Small. Macro-level changes in the structure of co-citation clusters: 1983-1989.

Scientometrics, 26 (1): 5-20, 1993.

[32] Henry Small. A passage through science: crossing disciplinary boundaries. Library Trends, 48 (1): 72-108, 1999.

[33] Henry Small. Charting pathways through science: exploring Garfield's vision of a unified index to science. In Blaise Cronin and Helen Barsky Atkins, editors, The web of knowledge: a Festschrift in Honor of Eugene Garfield, Medford, NJ: American society for information science, 2000,449-473.

60

[34] Edward O. Wilson. Consilience: The unity of knowledge, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1998.

[35] Henry small. A Sci-MAP case study: building a map of AIDs Research. Scientometrics, 30 (1): 229-241, 1994.

[36] Henry Small. Update on science mapping: creating large document spaces. Scientometrics, 38 (2): 275-293, 1997.

[37] Henry Small. Visualizing science by citation mapping. Journal of the American society for information science, 50 (9):799-813, 1999.

[38] George S. Davidson, Bruce Hendrickson, David K. Johnson, Charles E. Meyers, Brian N. Wylie. Knowledge mining with VxinsightÂŽ: discovery through interaction. Journal of intelligent information systems, 11 (3): 259285,1998.

[39] Kevin W. Boyack, Brian N. Wylie, George S. Davidson. Domain visualization using Vx insight for science and technology management. Journal of the American society for information science and technology, 53 (9): 764-774, 2002.

[40] Katy BĂśrner. Atlas of science: Visualizing what we know, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2010.

RESEARCH FRONTS 2014

COMPILATION COMMITTEE Counselors The National Science Library, Chinese Academy of Sciences

Xiaolin ZHANG

Thomson Reuters IP & Science

Li GUO

General Plan Team (methodology, data analysis and drafting) Thomson Reuters IP & Science

David PENDLEBURY Weiping YUE

The National Science Library, Chinese Academy of Sciences

Fuhai LENG Qiuju ZHOU

Research Front Interpretation Team (analysis and interpretation of research front and hot research front) Agriculture, plant and animal sciences

Jianxia YUAN Ying XING

Ecology and environmental sciences

Qiuju ZHOU

Geosciences

Fan YANG Shijie GUO

Clinical medicine

Zanmei LI Junlian LI

Biological sciences

Yanping YANG Yu DONG

Chemistry and materials science

Wenyue BIAN

Physics

Longguang HUANG

Astronomy and astrophysics

Lin HAN Haiming WANG Xiaorong LV

Mathematics, computer science and engineering

Xiapping LIU (Mathematics) Zexia LI (Computer science) Di ZHANG (Engineering)

Economics, psychology and other social sciences

Ruimin PEI

Data Support Team Thomson Reuters IP & Science The National Science Library, Chinese Academy of Sciences

Xiaomei WANG Guopeng LI

61

ABOUTTHE NATIONAL SCIENCE LIBRARY, CHINESE ACADEMY OF SCIENCES

ABOUT THE JOINT RESEARCH CENTER OF EMERGING TECHNOLOGY ANALYSIS

Based on Chinese Academy of Sciences, the National Science Library, Chinese Academy of Sciences (NSLC) delivers services across China.

NSLC provides literature information services, strategic intelligence research services, public information service platform, and science exchange and communication services for independent scientific innovation in natural sciences, inter-disciplinary fields and high tech fields. Meanwhile it provides information services for scientific research institutions in other fields of the national innovation system through the national science and technology literature platform and on the co-construction and sharing. NSLC is credited to grant doctor and master degrees in library science and information science. It is an important member of the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions.

The Joint Research Center of Emerging Technology Analysis was co-established by The National Science Library, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Thomson Reuters IP&Science on September 6, 2011. Based on rich data resources, powerful analytical tools and professional information analyst groups, both parties joined forces to advance future-oriented analysis on emerging technologies, monitor the landscapes of global science and technology development, forecast the trends that will bring revolutionary impact, and conduct research and practice on improving knowledge transfer between research institutions and industry. The goal of this Joint Research Center is to meet the significant needs for science and technology information of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and China’s scientific community. The collaboration mechanism is projectbased. The research outputs of the Joint Research Center are jointly published reports or papers.

ABOUT THOMSON REUTERS Thomson Reuters is the world’s leading source of intelligent information for businesses and professionals. We combine industry expertise with innovative technology to deliver critical information to leading decision makers in the financial and risk, legal, tax and accounting, intellectual property and science and media markets, powered by the world’s most trusted news organization. With headquarters in New York and major operations in London and Eagan, Minnesota, Thomson Reuters employs approximately 60,000 people and operates in over 100 countries. For more information, go to thomsonreuters.com.

The National Science Library, Chinese Academy of Sciences

To find out more about IP Solutions from Thomson Reuters, go to

ADD: 33 Beisihuan Xilu, Zhongguancun, Beijing P.R.China Postal Code: 100190 TEL: +86-10-82626611 FAX: +86-10-82626600 office@mail.las.ac.cn http://www.las.ac.cn

ip-science.thomsonreuters.com.

Thomson Reuters Unit 610, North Tower Raycom Info Tech Park Building C No.2, Kexueyuan South Road, Haidian Dist. Beijng, P.R.China Postal Code: 100190 Tel: +86-10 57601200 Fax: +86-10 82862088 info.china@thomsonreuters.com ip-science.thomsonreuters.com.cn