130,381 research outputs found
Signs of reality - reality of signs. Explorations of a pending revolution in political economy.
No full textThis paper explores the interaction between the world of information processes in human society and the non-information dynamics, which the latter set out to understand. This broad topic is approached with a focus on evolutionary political economy: It turns out that progress in this scientific discipline seems to depend crucially on a methodological revolution reframing this above mentioned interplay. The paper consists of three parts. After a brief introduction, which sketches the position of the argument in the current epistemological discourse, part 1 sets out to describe the basic methodological ingredients used by evolutionary political economy to describe the ‘reality’ of socioeconomic dynamics. Part 2 jumps to the world of languages used and proposes a rather radical break with the received apparatus of analytical mathematics used so successfully in sciences studying non-living phenomena. The development of procedural simulation languages should substitute inadequate mathematical formalizations, some examples are provided. Part 3 then returns to ‘reality’ dynamics, but now incorporates the interaction with the information sphere in a small algorithmic model. This model – like the introduction - again makes visible the relationships to earlier research in the field. Instead of a conclusion – several, hopefully innovative ideas are provided in passing, throughout the paper - an epilogue is provided, which tries to indicate the implications of this methodological paper for political practice in face of the current global crisis.Scientific methods, evolutionary political economy, formal languages, ideology
Die Bearbeitung von Diversität in Organisationen – Plädoyer zur Erweiterung bisheriger Typologien
No full textDen Ausgangspunkt des Beitrags bilden die typologischen Überlegungen von Thomas und Ely. Diese Typologie ist vielfach diskutiert und weiter entwickelt worden. Allerdings sind auch diese konzeptionellen Weiterentwicklungen mit Blick auf den Organisationstypus Unternehmen konzipiert worden. Nun implementieren aber auch aktuell immer mehr Organisationen der Zivilgesellschaft und Verwaltungen sowie Einrichtungen der öffentlichen Hand – und hier insbesondere Hochschulen – unterschiedlich ausgestaltete Diversitätskonzepte. Mit Blick darauf wird im Folgenden ein weiter Organisationsbegriff zugrunde gelegt, um eine erweiterte Typologie des Umgangs mit Diversität in Organisation zu entwickeln. Dabei werden Unternehmen und Hochschulen als zwei Pole eines Kontinuums im Umgang mit organisationsinternen wie -externen Diversifizierungsprozessen und ihre Folgen betrachtet: Während Unternehmen zusehends damit beginnen, mehr Eigenkomplexität innerhalb der Unternehmensorganisation zu erzeugen, geht es Hochschulen andersherum verstärkt darum, ihre Eigenkomplexität zu reduzieren, um ihre strategische Positionierung zu optimieren. Der übergeordnete Zielgedanke eines geglückten Diversitätsmanagements besteht in dieser Perspektivierung dann darin, eine optimale Balance zwischen diversitätsbedingter Umwelt und Organisationskomplexität herzustellen. Demgegenüber geht es einem neu aufgetauchten Typus, der hier als „inclusive & transformative“ bezeichnet wird, darum, seine Umwelt zu transformieren. Dieser Typus wird am Beispiel der University of Califonia, Berkeley konturiert
MeSH term explosion and author rank improve expert recommendations
No full textInformation overload is an often-cited phenomenon that reduces the productivity, efficiency and efficacy of scientists. One challenge for scientists is to find appropriate collaborators in their research. The literature describes various solutions to the problem of expertise location, but most current approaches do not appear to be very suitable for expert recommendations in biomedical research. In this study, we present the development and initial evaluation of a vector space model-based algorithm to calculate researcher similarity using four inputs: 1) MeSH terms of publications; 2) MeSH terms and author rank; 3) exploded MeSH terms; and 4) exploded MeSH terms and author rank. We developed and evaluated the algorithm using a data set of 17,525 authors and their 22,542 papers. On average, our algorithms correctly predicted 2.5 of the top 5/10 coauthors of individual scientists. Exploded MeSH and author rank outperformed all other algorithms in accuracy, followed closely by MeSH and author rank. Our results show that the accuracy of MeSH term-based matching can be enhanced with other metadata such as author rank
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
No full textThe 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
"Closing the R&D Gap, Evaluating the Sources of R&D Spending"
No full textBoth spending and tax policies have been implemented in the United States with the goal of stimulating private sector research and development (R&D). Karier questions whether current R&D policy, especially the research and experimentation tax credit, can contribute to closing the gap between nondefense expenditures on R&D in the United States and such expenditures in other countries, such as Japan and Germany. He also explores possible changes to our current R&D policy to make it more effective.
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
No full textWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
R&D portfolio selection considering risk and project interrelations
No full textDie vorliegende Arbeit beinhaltet ein Modell sowie die prototypische Referenzimplementierung eines zugehörigen Frameworks für die Evaluation von Forschungs- und Entwicklungsprojekten (F&E). Dabei wird das Risiko sowie der Nutzen solcher Projekte berücksichtigt. Der Framework ermöglicht die Auswahl eines Portfolios von F&E Projekten unter Berücksichtigung beschränkter Ressourcen, Begrenzung des Risikos und verschiedener Abhängigkeiten zwischen den Projekten. Aufgrund des innovativen Charakters von F&E Projekten, besteht auch hohe Unsicherheit bezüglich der Ergebnisse der Projekte. Daher kann die Durchführung von F&E Projekten ein risikoreiches Unterfangen sein. Unter Verwendung des Konzeptes des Value-at-Risk wird sowohl das Risiko eines einzelnen Projektes, als auch das Risiko eines Portfolios abhängiger Projekte in den Evaluationsprozess miteinbezogen.Der Erfolg oder Misserfolg eines F&E Projektes ist schwer zu bewerten, da viele Aspekte berücksichtigt werden müssen. Daher wird eine multi-dimensionale Bewertung herangezogen, welche, zusätzlich zu den finanziellen Aspekten, auch Wissensgewinn, Umwelt- oder soziale Folgen etc. der Projekte in Betracht zieht. Ein informationstheoretischer Ansatz zur Bewertung des Wissensgewinns während eines Projektes wird vorgeschlagen. Diese multi-dimensionale Bewertung wird in einem Real Options Modell für die Bewertung von F&E Projekten verwendet. Der Bewertungsprozess berücksichtigt das Risiko der Projekte.Mit Hilfe von Multi-Attribute Utility Analysis wird diese multi-dimensionale Bewertung zu einem skalaren Nutzenwert aggregiert.Dieser Nutzenwert dient zur Auswahl eines Projektportfolios, das den totalen erwarteten Nutzen maximiert und den Ressourcenbeschränkungen genügt. Die Auswahl des Projektportfolios wird sowohl mittels einer klassischen Lösung zum 0/1 Knapsack Problem sowie mittels dynamischer Programmierung implementiert.Um Abhängigkeiten, Synergien und Redundanzen zwischen den Projekten in der Auswahl des Projektportfolios zu berücksichtigen, wird der Algorithmus für das Knapsack Problem erweitert, um diese verschiedene Arten von Abhängigkeiten in die Portfolio Auswahl mit einbeziehen zu können.In this work a model and a prototypical reference implementation of an according framework for the evaluation of research and development (R&D) projects is presented, that accounts for the risk and utility of these projects. The framework allows for the selection of a portfolio of R&D projects considering limited resources, risk limits and various interrelations between the projects. Because of the highly innovative character of R&D projects, there is also high uncertainty about the outcomes of the projects. Consequently conducting R&D projects can be a risky venture. By using the notion of the Value-at-Risk the risk for an individual R&D project as well as for a portfolio of interrelated projects is included into the evaluation process. The success or failure of an R&D project is difficult to measure, as there are many aspects that have to be taken into consideration. Thus a multi-dimensional measure is used that, in addition to the financial aspects, considers knowledge, environmental or social impacts etc. of the projects. A technique for measuring the knowledge gained within an R&D project is proposed that is based on information theory.This multi-dimensional measure is used in a real options model for the evaluation of R&D projects. The evaluation process takes the risk of these projects into account.With the help of multi-attribute utility analysis this multi-dimensional measure is aggregated to a scalar utility value. This utility value is used to select a portfolio of projects that maximises the total expected utility, and satisfies certain constraints concerning the resources available. The portfolio selection process is implemented using a classic and dynamic programming solution for the 0/1 Knapsack problem.In order to consider interdependencies, synergies and redundancies between the projects within the portfolio selection, the algorithm for the Knapsack problem is extended to allow for various kinds of interrelations
Scholarly Communication and Publishing Lunch and Learn Talk #11: The ULS Open Access Author Fee Fund
No full textAt the May 2014 talk, you will learn about the ULS Open Access Author Fee Fund--what it is, why we do it, how it works, and how the program is going so far
The R&D Tax Incentives
No full textThis article sets out some background information and reflections of the author on the R&D tax incentive schemes included in the Common Corporate Tax Base (CCTB) Proposal. In particular the author analyzes the stimulus to private R&D through ad hoc tax incentives included in the CCTB Proposal and dives into the actual provisions included in the Proposal highlighting the most relevant issues connected with their design and interpretation. Moreover, the author explores the interaction between the CCTB Proposal and the granting by Member States of domestic R&D tax incentives
- …
