1,721,038 research outputs found
Specifying graph languages with type graphs
Full text linkWe investigate three formalisms to specify graph languages, i.e. sets of graphs, based on type graphs. First, we are interested in (pure) type graphs, where the corresponding language consists of all graphs that can be mapped homomorphically to a given type graph. In this context, we also study languages specified by restriction graphs and their relation to type graphs. Second, we extend this basic approach to a type graph logic and, third, to type graphs with annotations. We present decidability results and closure properties for each of the formalisms
Confluence of graph transformation revisited
No full textIt is shown that it is undecidable in general whether a terminating graph rewriting system is confluent or not—in contrast to the situation for term and string rewriting systems. Critical pairs are introduced to hypergraph rewriting, a generalisation of graph rewriting, where it turns out that the mere existence of common reducts for all critical pairs of a graph rewriting system does not imply local confluence. A Critical Pair Lemma for hypergraph rewriting is then established which guarantees local confluence if each critical pair of a system has joining derivations that are compatible in that they map certain nodes to the same nodes in the common reduct
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
- …
