Grading of evaluation formula III is as follows.
Code Pub HighCite Domestic Foreign
Weight 30% 30% 15% 25%
Table 13 grading of evaluation formula III Scoring result of evaluation formula III is as follows.
University Pub HighCite Domestic Foreign Total
NCKU 0.818984547 0.002207506 0.42384106 0.472406181 0.428035 NCU 0.763837638 0.007380074 0.361623616 0.42804428 0.39262 NCTU 0.699468085 0.003989362 0.417553191 0.439414115 0.383524 NTUST 0.744094488 0 0.362204724 0.421259843 0.382874 NTU 0.512355848 0.013179572 0.403624382 0.45785124 0.332667 NTUT 0.617977528 0 0.258426966 0.247191011 0.285955 NTHU 0.447058824 0.001470588 0.308823529 0.375 0.274632
Table 14 ranking results of evaluation formula III
We normalize “evaluation formula III” based on journal paper of the computer science of the university.
The purpose of evaluation formula III is to construct literature evaluation indictor from excellent and popularity. The paper cited by foreigners is higher weight than cited by Taiwanese.
Evaluation formula III emphasize academic excellence. Excellence of them is 60%.
From academic excellence view, the journal paper of NCKU is most published in SCI etc.Besides,NTU is most high-cited.
From academic popularity view, journal papers of NCKU are most cited by natives (Taiwanese) and foreigners (non-Taiwanese).
In evaluation formula III, number one is NCKU, number two is NCU and number three is NCTU.
5.4 COMPREHENSIVE RESULTS
There are different ranking results by choosing various indicators and various weights.
Comprehensive results of the three evaluations formula, there are different ranking results in the experiment.
Evaluation formula I emphasized academic popularity. The evaluation indicator emphasized worldwide. The top three is NCKU、NTU and NCTU.
Evaluation formula II emphasized localized. The top three is NCTU、NCKU and NTU.
Evaluation formula III emphasized academic excellence. The top three is NCKU、
NCU and NCTU.
6 CONCLUSION
The primary aim of our model is to find what and how to construct evaluation indicators on scholarly literatures under citation network.
We use the journal paper of the National University of computer science to be analyzed. Today, Internet developed; we can easily get any information through Internet platform. In this research, we obtain journal paper information of our experiment from the National Science council web site. Besides, we use Google scholar to get cited related information of our experiment because Google scholar is a powerful search engine and free. We reference ARWU and HEEACT rank system to construct academic evaluation indicator model. We successfully produced the evaluation indicators on scholarly literatures under citation network.
In this research, every indicator has its expression in a target-oriented. We try to present a variety of academic indicators from multiple aspects. We also explain careful the significance of each indicator.
It can be developed as point of view to construction of academic indicators by scholar‟s papers under citation network. But it may not apply to papers published less.
This study currently only completed under Computer Science of National University of Republic of China. It can continue to study other areas in the future.
REFERENCE
[1] D. J. Watts and S. H. Strogatz, Collective dynamics of „small-world‟ networks.
Nature 393, 440–442 (1998).
[2] Watts, D. J. Small Worlds, The Dynamics of Networks Between Order and Randomness .Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ (1999).
[3]Mei-Ling Wang. University Research Assessment and Citation Analysis. Journal of Library and Information Science 31（1）：5 – 13(Apr., 2005)
[4]李聰明，大學評鑑的研究(臺北：中國文化大學出版部，民 86 年)，頁 13。
[5] Donald Kennedy 著，楊振高譯，學術這一行(臺北：天下，民 89 年)，頁 2。
[6]Huang, M. H., Chang, H. W., & Chen, D.Z. Research evaluation of research-oriented universities in Taiwan from 1993 to 2003. Scientometrics, 67(3), 419-435(2006).
[7] Mu-Hsuan Huang. Application of H-index for Research Evaluation at University Level. 高教評鑑 1:2(Feb 2008)
[8]Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual‟s scientific research output.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(46), 16569-16572.
[9]Ball, P. (2005).Index aims for fair ranking of scientists. Nature, 436,900.
[10] Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual‟s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(46), 16569-16572.
[11]Egghe, L. & Rousseau, R. (1990). Introduction to Informetrics: Quantitative Methods in Library, Documentation and Information Science. Amsterdam, NL:
Elsevier.
in the anaesthetics field: „Perturbation of ion transport‟. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 43: 814
[13] R.N.Kostoff, “The use and misuse of citation analysis in research evaluation”, Scientometrics, 43:1(1998):27-29
[14] A.T.Balaban,”How should citations to articles in high- and low-impact journals be evaluated, or what is a citation worth?” Scientometrics, 37:3(1996):495
[15] S. Redner. How popular is your paper? an empirical study of the citation distribution. The European Physical Journal B, 4(2):131–134, 1998.
[16] How can we investigate citation behavior? A study of reasons for citing literature in communication: Journal of the American society for information 51(7):635-645, 2000
[17] 19.Vaughan, L.; Shaw, D. (2008) A new look at evidence of scholarly citations in citation indexes and from web sources, Scientometrics, vol. 74, no. 2. pp. 317-330.
[18]Smith, Linda C., "Citation Analysis," Library Trends 30:1(Summer 1981):
94-98.
[19] Google Scholar，http://scholar.google.com
[20]Google Scholar: The New Generation of Citation Indexes Libri, 2005, vol. 55, pp.
170–180
[21]Kousha, K.; Thelwall, M. (2007) Google Scholar Citations and Google Web/URL Citations: A Multi-Discipline Exploratory Analysis, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, vol. 58, no. 7, pp. 1055-1065.
[22] Jacsó, P. (2005) Google Scholar: the pros and the cons, Online Information Review, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 208-214.
[23] http://www.usnews.com/rankings
[24]http://www.usnews.com/education/worlds-best-universities/articles/2010/09/21/w orlds-best-universities-top-400-?PageNr=8
[25] http://www.arwu.org/Chinese/ARWUMethodology2009.jsp [26] http://ranking.heeact.edu.tw
[27]http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/me thodology/simple-overview
APPENDIX
附錄 A SMALL-WORLD NETWORK
The whole world is composed of many different individuals. If there is a relationship between them, there is a link between each other. These links are interwoven into the relationship between different forms of network, called the Social Network. The branching degree (vertex degree) is the link between the individual and the number of individuals. For example, 4 to the branch level, means the individual X and individual Y1, Y2, Y3, Y4 are linked. The most common way to link social networks based on different links: regular Network, small-world network and random Network.
Small-world network in 1998, Cornell University Duncan J. Watts and Steven thesis advisor Strogatz co-sponsored paper, "Collective dynamics of small-world network", opened a small world network of trend. Small-world network is neither completely ordered network, nor entirely random network, but somewhere between the two networks. Small-world network is a network in order adds a shortcut on the random (Shortcut). It is the current closest to the real social network.
Two major characteristics of social networks are clustering and degree of separation. Degree of clustering is connected to the individual and the extent of the individual neighboring. Degree of separation is the shortest number of links will have to go through the intersection. The small world network has ordered a high degree of clustering network (Highly clustered) and random network of low degree of separation (small characteristic path length) features. The most famous small-world phenomenon is between two people of any irrelevant, can be linked together by six degrees of a relationship called Six Separated.
In the real world, there is a wide range of small world network, such as the western United States electricity supply system, the film Actors map, road map, links
to networks of human neurons, modes of spread of infectious diseases, are showing a small world network phenomenon.
附錄 B 資料
完整資料敘述
本文以國內國立大學資訊學院學者教授從 2006 年到 2010 年發表的論文為基 礎，參考財團法人高等教育評鑑中心基金會及上海交通大學排名系統所用的評鑑 指標，試圖建立學術論文評估指標，探討在小世界網路理論為基礎的徵引學術研 究下建構學術論文評估指標可行性及方式，並產生排名供選擇就讀或就業學校的 參考。
本研究所使用的資料為國立台灣大學電機資訊學院資訊相關系所、國立清華 大學電機資訊學院資訊相關系所、國立成功大學電機資訊學院資訊相關系所、國 立交通大學資訊學院、國立台灣科技大學電資學院資訊相關系所、國立中央大學 資訊電機學院資訊相關系所、國立台北科技大學電資學院資訊相關系所，共七所 學校。為了盡量使用完整而可供研究的資料，本研究主要的分析對象是從 2006 年到 2010 年上述國內國立大學資訊相關系所學者教授所發表的論文，共 5 個年 度，資料包含下列欄位：1. 該篇論文所屬學院；2.論文發表年度；3. 該篇論文 學者教授名字；4. 該篇論文名稱；5. 該篇論文是否收錄在 SCI/EI/SSCI；6. 該 篇論文被引用次數；7. 該篇論文是否曾被引用；8. 該篇論文引用次數是否超過 100 次(含)；9. 該篇論文是否被同領域引用；10. 該篇論文是否被本國人引用；
11. 該篇論文是否被外國人引用。我們將這些資料彙整成以該篇論文所屬學院為 主要索引依據，共有 359 位學者，3106 筆資料，作為建構學術論文評估指標的 輸入資料。
附錄 C FAMOUS RANKED SYSTEM
There are different ranking results by choosing various indicators and various weights. In famous ranked system, HEEACT emphasized long-term and recent research performance; ARWU emphasized top academic performance; THE and QS emphasized peer review.
The following chart is ranking result from the world's famous ranked system.
University HEEACT ARWU THE QS
NTU 114（1） 127（1） 115（2） 94（1）
NCKU 302（2） 256（2） - 283（3）
NTHU 346（3） 314 107（1） 196（2）
NCTU 479 313（3） 181 327
NCU - 443 - 398
NTUT - - - -
NTUST - - - 370
Table15 ranking results of Taiwan university
Ps. - : That did not enter the ranks; （）: Figures in the domestic ranked among top three