From birger at hum.aau.dk Thu May 4 04:51:03 2017 From: birger at hum.aau.dk (Birger Larsen) Date: Thu, 4 May 2017 08:51:03 +0000 Subject: [Sigmetrics] Call for Nominations - 2017 Eugene Garfield Doctoral Dissertation Scholarship - Deadline extended to May 15 Message-ID: <1FE55AA8C30F694B820C89B197411E714BCA6B25@AD-EXCHMBX4-1.aau.dk> EUGENE GARFIELD DOCTORAL DISSERTATION SCHOLARSHIP 2017 CALL FOR NOMINATIONS *** DEADLINE EXTENDED TO MAY 15, 2017 *** 1. NATURE OF THE AWARD The scholarship will consist of an award of USD 3,000 (donated by the Eugene Garfield Foundation) to cover any research related expenses (including traveling) of the grant recipient, contingent upon the recipient's attending ISSI 2017, the next ISSI biennial conference. This conference will be held in Wuhan, P. R. China from October 16 till October 20, 2017. 2. PURPOSE OF THE AWARD The purpose of this scholarship is to foster research in informetrics, including bibliometrics, scientometrics, webmetrics and altmetrics by encouraging and assisting doctoral students in the field with their dissertation research. 3. ELIGIBILITY The scholarship recipient must meet the following qualifications: (a) Be an active doctoral candidate pursuing research using informetric, bibliometric, scientometric, webmetric or altmetric methodology in a degree-granting institution; (b) Have a doctoral dissertation proposal accepted by the institution or by their dissertation advisor. Clarification: an active doctoral student is someone who has not yet obtained the doctoral degree at the moment he/she receives the award. Moreover, the applicant need not be a member of ISSI to be considered for this scholarship. 4. ADMINISTRATION The award is sponsored by the Eugene Garfield Foundation with the cooperation of the Chemical Heritage Foundation, and is administered by the Board of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics (ISSI). 5. NOMINATIONS Submission should include the following: (a) The doctoral research proposal, including a description of the research, methodology, and significance, 10 pages or less in length, double-spaced, and in English; (b) A copy of the paper submitted for presentation at the ISSI Conference; (c) A cover letter from the dissertation advisor endorsing the proposal and confirming that the contents of this proposal are accepted by the institute, or at least by the advisor; (d) An up-to-date curriculum vitae. 6. SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS AND DEADLINE Due to the extension of the ISSI'2017 paper submission deadlines, the deadline for submission to the award is *** extended to MAY 15, 2017***. All proposals should be submitted in PDF by e-mail to ISSI Board member Birger Larsen at egdds.award at gmail.com. An acknowledgement of receipt will be sent to candidates. 7. CONFERENCE PRESENTATION The recipient of the award will be given the opportunity to present his/her work either during a normal session (if his/her paper has been accepted for presentation), either as a special lecture on the same level as research in progress. This presentation will be referred to as the special Eugene Garfield Doctoral Dissertation Scholarship Lecture. Some further clarifications a) The candidate must have the intention to attend the conference, as shown by a submitted paper. b) The awardee is free to use the award money as he/she pleases. The award does not have to (but of course may) be used for travelling to the conference. c) The awardee is not automatically entitled to an (extra) travel grant from the conference organizers or from ISSI. Of course he/she may apply for such a grant (if such grants are made available by the organizers) like any other conference participant. ___________________________________ Birger Larsen, PhD Professor Head of Communication and Information Studies Department of Communication Aalborg University Copenhagen A.C. Meyers V?nge 15 DK-2450 K?benhavn SV Denmark web: http://personprofil.aau.dk/130844?lang=en From loet at leydesdorff.net Wed May 10 00:17:57 2017 From: loet at leydesdorff.net (Loet Leydesdorff) Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 06:17:57 +0200 Subject: [Sigmetrics] Betweenness and Diversity in Journal Citation Networks as Measures of Interdisciplinarity -- preprint Message-ID: <000a01d2c944$67917230$36b45690$@leydesdorff.net> Betweenness and Diversity in Journal Citation Networks as Measures of Interdisciplinarity -- A Tribute to Eugene Garfield Journals were central to Eugene Garfield's research interests. Among other things, journals are considered as units of analysis for bibliographic databases such as the Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus. In addition to disciplinary classifications of journals, journal citation patterns span networks across boundaries to variable extents. Using betweenness centrality (BC) and diversity, we elaborate on the question of how to distinguish and rank journals in terms of interdisciplinarity. Interdisciplinarity, however, is difficult to operationalize in the absence of an operational definition of disciplines, the diversity of a unit of analysis is sample-dependent. BC can be considered as a measure of multi-disciplinarity. Diversity of co-citation in a citing document has been considered as an indicator of knowledge integration, but an author can also generate trans-disciplinary--that is, non-disciplined--variation by citing sources from other disciplines. Diversity in the bibliographic coupling among citing documents can analogously be considered as diffusion of knowledge across disciplines. Because the citation networks in the cited direction reflect both structure and variation, diversity in this direction is perhaps the best available measure of interdisciplinarity at the journal level. Furthermore, diversity is based on a summation and can therefore be decomposed, differences among (sub)sets can be tested for statistical significance. In an appendix, a general-purpose routine for measuring diversity in networks is provided. Loet Leydesdorff, Caroline S. Wagner, and Lutz Bornmann Available at https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.03272 ** apologies for cross-postings _____ Loet Leydesdorff Professor, University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communication Research (ASCoR) loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ Associate Faculty, SPRU, University of Sussex; Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ., Hangzhou; Visiting Professor, ISTIC, Beijing; Visiting Fellow, Birkbeck, University of London; http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ych9gNYAAAAJ&hl=en -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From j.adams at digital-science.com Tue May 16 10:04:19 2017 From: j.adams at digital-science.com (Jonathan Adams) Date: Tue, 16 May 2017 15:04:19 +0100 Subject: [Sigmetrics] New report: Landscape of Climate Research Funding Message-ID: Dear Colleagues We have produced a funding data perspective of global activity in climate change research. "The Landscape of Climate Research Funding" looks at the growth and content of climate research investment and note its deep impact on monitoring, regulatory and policy organisations. The report was presented at the Week of the Arctic event in Fairbanks, Alaska, May 8th ? 14th. http://akarctichost.org/ The report uses data from the Dimensions database of competitive research grants, which indexes more than $1 trillion across more than 1.5 million individual grants and awards, linked to principal investigators and to their institutions. Key findings: - The funding data are a complement to standard publication analyses. Input and output are well aligned but funding provides a more proximate bellwether. - Research grant data can track trends highlighting where the impacts will fall, providing a useful reference point. - Funding towards climate research has grown since 2003 and forms around 1.7% of total research grants or $1.5 billion annually - Climate change research has shifted from the understanding of global systems research towards impacts and responses ? studies around adapting to and mitigating climate change. - Critical cuts may not be to research but to the agencies that implement the research. - Changes in the focus or magnitude of research funding in one research-intensive economy can have direct and significant consequences for the wider global research landscape; these impacts will not be recognized for quite a while since the nature of this research spans years. The report is available at: English language - https://www.digital-science.com/resources/digital-research-reports/landscape-climate-research-funding/ Russian language - https://www.digitalscience.ru/ -- Dr Jonathan Adams Chief Scientist, Digital Science Visiting Professor, King's College London http://www.kcl.ac.uk/sspp/policy-institute/policy-circle/adams.aspx M/ +44 7964 908449 E/ j.adams at digital-science.com Custom reporting and analysis to help you make better decisions faster -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From raf.guns at uantwerpen.be Thu May 18 08:55:49 2017 From: raf.guns at uantwerpen.be (Guns Raf) Date: Thu, 18 May 2017 12:55:49 +0000 Subject: [Sigmetrics] RESSH2017 registration open until 6 June Message-ID: --Apologies for cross-posting-- Dear colleagues, Registration for RESSH2017, the 2nd Conference on Research Evaluation in the Social Sciences and Humanities, is open until 6 June! RESSH2017 takes place on 6 and 7 July 2017 at the University of Antwerp, Belgium (preliminary programme). This follows the highly successful first conference that was held in Rennes, France, in June 2015. Please register for RESSH2017 by 6 June 2017 at the latest: https://www.uantwerpen.be/en/conferences/ressh2017/registration/. Kind regards, The RESSH2017 organizers -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From loet at leydesdorff.net Fri May 19 11:01:20 2017 From: loet at leydesdorff.net (Loet Leydesdorff) Date: Fri, 19 May 2017 17:01:20 +0200 Subject: [Sigmetrics] "Ten principles for the responsible use of university rankings" Message-ID: <000001d2d0b0$c6a613c0$53f23b40$@leydesdorff.net> Thirteen Dutch universities and ten principles in the Leiden Ranking 2017. This is a reaction to https://www.cwts.nl/blog?article=n-r2q274 &title=ten-principles-for-the-responsible-use-of-university-rankings Under principle 6, you formulate as follows: "To some extent it may be possible to quantify uncertainty in university rankings (e.g., using stability intervals in the Leiden Ranking), but to a large extent one needs to make an intuitive assessment of this uncertainty. In practice, this means that it is best not to pay attention to small performance differences between universities." It seems to me of some relevance whether minor differences are significant or not. The results can be counter-intuitive. At the occasion of the Leiden Ranking 2011, Lutz Bornmann and I therefore developed a tool in Excel that enables the user to test (i) the difference between two universities on its significance and (ii) for each university the difference between its participation in the top-10% cited publications versus the ceteris-paribus expectation of 10% participation (Leydesdorff & Bornmann, 2012). Does the university perform above or below expectation? The Excel sheet containing the test can be retrieved at http://www.leydesdorff.net/leiden11/leiden11.xls . In response to concerns similar to yours about using significance tests expressed by (Cohen, 1994; Schneider, 2013; Waltman, 2016), we added effect sizes to the tool (Cohen, 1988) . However, the weights of effect sizes are more difficult to interpret than p-values indicating a significance level. For example, one can raise the question of whether the relatively small differences among Dutch universities indicate that they can be considered as a homogenous set. This is the intuitive assessment which dominates in the Netherlands. Using the stability intervals on your website, however, one can show that there are two groups: one in the western part of the country (the "randstad") and another in more peripheral regions with significantly lower scores in terms of the top-10 publication (PP10). Figure 1 shows the division. http://leydesdorff.net/leiden17/index_files/image001.png Figure 1: Thirteen Dutch universities grouped into two statistically homogenous sets on the basis of the Leiden Rankings 2017. Stability intervals used as methodology. (If not visible, see the version at http://www.leydesdorff.net/leiden17/index.htm ) You add to principle 6 as follows: "Likewise, minor fluctuations in the performance of a university over time can best be ignored. The focus instead should be on structural patterns emerging from time trends." http://leydesdorff.net/leiden17/index_files/image002.jpg Figure 2: Thirteen Dutch universities grouped into two statistically homogenous sets on the basis of the Leiden Rankings 2016. Methodology: z-test. (If not visible, see the version at http://www.leydesdorff.net/leiden17/index.htm ) Using the z-test in the excel sheet, Dolfsma & Leydesdorff (2016) showed a similar pattern in 2016 (Figure 2). Only the position of the Radboud University in Nijmegen was changed: in 2017, this university is part of the core group. Using two subsequent years and two different methods, therefore, we have robust results and may conclude that there is a statistically significant division in two groups among universities in the Netherlands. This conclusion can have policy implications since it is counter-intuitive. In summary, the careful elaboration of statistical testing enriches the Leiden Rankings which can without such testing be considered as descriptive statistics. References Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Cohen, J. (1994). The Earth is Round (p <. 05). American psychologist, 49(12), 997-1003. Dolfsma, W., & Leydesdorff, L. (2016). Universitaire en Economische Pieken (Mountains and Valleys in University and Economics Research in the Netherlands). ESB, 101((4742) 13 oktober 2016), 678-681; available at https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2849151 Leydesdorff, L., & Bornmann, L. (2012). Testing Differences Statistically with the Leiden Ranking. Scientometrics, 92(3), 781-783. Schneider, J. W. (2013). Caveats for using statistical significance test in research assessments. Journal of Informetrics, 7(1), 50-62. Waltman, L. (2016). Conceptual difficulties in the use of statistical inference in citation analysis. arXiv preprint arXiv:1612.03285. Amsterdam, May 19, 2017. _____ Loet Leydesdorff Professor, University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communication Research (ASCoR) loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ Associate Faculty, SPRU, University of Sussex; Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ., Hangzhou; Visiting Professor, ISTIC, Beijing; Visiting Fellow, Birkbeck, University of London; http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ych9gNYAAAAJ&hl=en -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 154451 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 41710 bytes Desc: not available URL: From ismaelrafols at gmail.com Tue May 23 19:44:02 2017 From: ismaelrafols at gmail.com (Ismael Rafols) Date: Wed, 24 May 2017 00:44:02 +0100 Subject: [Sigmetrics] =?utf-8?q?Call_for_papers=3A_=E2=80=9CScientific_com?= =?utf-8?q?munication_in_local_and/or_professional_communities?= =?utf-8?b?4oCd?= Message-ID: *Call for papers: ?Scientific communication in local and/or professional communities ? values and evaluations?* *A special issue of the journal BiD aims to gather reflections on the challenges in scientific communication in thematic, geographical, social or linguistic spaces that are perceived as peripheral or marginal. We invite contributions that explore how ongoing transformations towards open science and the re(appraisal) of societal contributions may affect scientific communication in these local and professional spheres.* Journal: BiD: textos universitaris de biblioteconomia i documentaci? Paper length: 4,000 words (max.) Submission deadline: 15th October 2017 A workshop with some of the papers submitted will be held in Barcelona in January 2018 *Theme of the special issue* We are witnessing the birth of a new paradigm in scientific communication, brought about by factors such as the impact of ICTs, the information explosion and open science, on the one hand, and by growing demands for research to be socially responsible and to communicate with professional spheres in order to contribute to well-being, on the other hand. In other words, the birth of a new system of scientific communication runs parallel to the emergence of a new system for the appraisal and assessment of research. For the last two decades, concepts such as ?excellence? and ?international visibility? have dominated the selection criteria in research publishing and management (Vessuri et al., 2014). The prevailing idea has been that both science and scientific journals are organized (like sports competitions) in ascending strata from less to more quality, in which the most international journals publish the most important studies. However, in recent years, this universalist perspective, which associates international visibility with quality, has come under growing criticism. First of all, because it is an elitist vision that may favour narrow disciplinary research and may discriminate against studies that are important from the viewpoint of socially responsible research (Stilgoe, 2014; Bianco & Sutz, 2014). Second, because it favours topics of interest in dominant countries and marginalises other types of research, in languages other than English (Pi?eiro & Hicks, 2015; Vessuri et al., 2014). This special issue aims to collect articles that reflect on how, in an open science context, local scientific communities develop journals or other communication tools to address topics with a low coverage in the main international journals. Contributors are invited to explore how these journals are rated in the assessment systems ? and their possible effects in downplaying research with a local and social focus (see principles 2 and 3 of the *Leiden Manifesto*; Hicks et al., 2015). We are particularly interested in exploring the aspects of scientific communication that target professionals, that is, technologists, communicators and librarians. These professionals are also knowledge users and generators, but from the viewpoint of the specific and contextual use of knowledge (Chavarro et al., 2016). This means that the research that practitioners find most useful is rarely the most visible internationally. Finally, we also aim to discuss how systemic transformations in research data (such as *Figshare*), bibliographical search engines (such as *Google Scholar*), the proliferation of alternative scientific and technological indicators (such as *ImpactStory*), and the concentration of renowned journals in the hands of large publishers (Larivi?re et al., 2015) may influence the role of scientific communication in local communities. Guest editors: *Ismael R?fols*, *Ingenio* (CSIC-UPV), Univ. Polit?cnica de Val?ncia, and CWTS, Univ. de Leiden (visiting) *Lloren? Arguimbau*, Univ. Oberta de Catalunya (UOC), Observatori de la Recerca de l'Institut d'Estudis Catalans (OR-IEC), Barcelona Institute of Science and Tech. (BIST) BiD: textos universitaris de biblioteconomia i documentaci? is an open access journal (free of charge) on Library and Information Science. Articles can be submitted in English, Catalan and Spanish and are translated and published in these three languages. BiD is widely indexed (e.g. in Latindex, Web of Science and Scopus, among others, see http://bid.ub.edu/en/indexed). See author guidelines: http://bid.ub.edu/en/authors-guidelines *References* Bianco, M., & Sutz, J. (2014). Veinte a?os de pol?ticas de investigaci?n en la Universidad de la Rep?blica: aciertos, dudas y aprendizajes . Ediciones Trilce, Montevideo. Chavarro, D. A., Tang, P., & Rafols, I. (2016). Why researchers publish in non-mainstream journals: Training, knowledge bridging, and gap filling . SPRU Working Paper Series 2016-22. Hicks, D., Wouters, P., Waltman, L., De Rijcke, S., & Rafols, I. (2015). The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics . *Nature*, *520*(7548), 429. Larivi?re, V.; Haustein, S.; Mongeon, P. (2015). The Oligopoly of Academic Publishers in the Digital Era . *PLoS ONE*, June 10, 2015. Pi?eiro, C. L., & Hicks, D. (2015). Reception of Spanish sociology by domestic and foreign audiences differs and has consequences for evaluation . *Research Evaluation*, *24*(1), 78-89. Stilgoe, J. (2014) *Against excellence* . *The Guardian* blog on science. 19 December 2014. Vessuri, H., Gu?don, J. C., & Cetto, A. M. (2014). Excellence or quality? Impact of the current competition regime on science and scientific publishing in Latin America and its implications for development . *Current Sociology*, *62*(5), 647-665. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Philipp.Mayr-Schlegel at gesis.org Tue May 23 15:46:57 2017 From: Philipp.Mayr-Schlegel at gesis.org (Mayr-Schlegel, Philipp) Date: Tue, 23 May 2017 19:46:57 +0000 Subject: [Sigmetrics] =?utf-8?q?Deadline_Extension=3A_BIRNDL=E2=80=9917=3A?= =?utf-8?q?_Bibliometric-enhanced_IR_and_NLP_for_Digital_Libraries_worksho?= =?utf-8?q?p_=40SIGIR_2017?= Message-ID: <1a3f91ba-19ab-47e5-b331-95571d9c0fab@SVKOEXC01.gesis.intra> Submission deadline has been extended due to several requests to June 04, 2017! == Call for Papers == You are invited to participate in the 2nd Joint Workshop on Bibliometric-enhanced IR and NLP for Digital Libraries (BIRNDL), to be held as part of 40th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR 2017) in Tokyo, Japan on 11th August 2017. We are happy to announce that the past BIR and NLPIR4DL organizers are proposing this workshop at SIGIR together. In conjunction with the BIRNDL workshop, we will hold the 3rd CL-SciSumm Shared Task in Scientific Document Summarization. See for a separate cfp. Reports from the shared task systems will be featured as part of a session at the workshop. === Important Dates === - Submissions deadline: June 04, 2017 - Notification: June 29, 2017 - Camera Ready Contributions: TBD - Workshop: August 11, 2017 in Tokyo, Japan === Aim of the Workshop === The BIRNDL workshop is the first step to foster a reflection on interdisciplinarity, and the benefits that the disciplines bibliometrics, IR and NLP can derive from it in a digital libraries context. The workshop is intended to stimulate IR researchers and digital library professionals to elaborate on new approaches in natural language processing, information retrieval, scientometrics, text mining and recommendation techniques that can advance the state-of-the-art in scholarly document understanding, analysis, and retrieval at scale. Researchers are in need of assistive technologies to track developments in an area, identify the approaches used to solve a research problem over time and summarize research trends. Digital libraries require semantic search, question-answering and automated recommendation and reviewing systems to manage and retrieve answers from scholarly databases. Full document text analysis can help to design semantic search, translation and summarization systems; citation and social network analyses can help digital libraries to visualize scientific trends, bibliometrics and relationships and influences of works and authors. All these approaches can be supplemented with the metadata supplied by digital libraries, inclusive of usage data, such as download counts. We invite papers and presentations that incorporate insights from IR, bibliometrics and NLP to develop new techniques to address the open problems in Big Science, such as evidence-based searching, measurement of research quality, relevance and impact, the emergence and decline of research problems, identification of scholarly relationships and influences and applied problems such as language translation, question-answering and summarization. Finding relevant scholarly literature is key point of the workshop and sets the agenda for tools and approaches to be discussed and evaluated at BIRNDL. At the workshop, we would also like to address the need for established, standardized baselines, evaluation metrics and test collections. See the proceedings of the first BIRNDL workshop at JCDL 2016 and a recent report in SIGIR Forum . This workshop will be relevant to scholars in computer and information science, specialized in IR, bibliometrics and NLP. The Shared Task is expected to be of interest to a broad community including those working in CL and NLP, especially in the sub-disciplines of text summarization, discourse structure in scholarly discourse, paraphrase, textual entailment and text simplification. The workshop will also be of importance for all stakeholders in the publication pipeline: implementers, publishers and policymakers. Formal citation metrics are increasingly a factor in decision-making by universities and funding bodies worldwide, making the need for research in applying these metrics more pressing. Today's publishers continue to provide new ways to support their consumers in disseminating and retrieving the right published works to their audience. Even when only considering the scholarly sites within Computer Science, we find that the field is well-represented - ACM Portal, IEEE Xplore, Google Scholar, PSU's CiteSeerX, MSR's Academic Search, Elsevier?s Mendeley, Tsinghua's ArnetMiner, Trier's DBLP, Hiroshima's PRESRI; with this workshop we hope to bring a number of these contributors together. === Workshop Topics === We invite stimulating as well as unpublished submissions on topics including - but not limited to - full-text analysis, multimedia and multilingual analysis and alignment as well as the application of citation-based NLP or information retrieval and information seeking techniques in digital libraries. Specific examples of fields of interests include (but are not limited to): - Infrastructure for scientific mining and IR - Semantic and Network-based indexing, navigation, searching and browsing in structured data - Discourse structure identification and argument mining from scientific papers - Summarisation and question-answering for scholarly DLs - Bibliometrics, citation analysis and network analysis for IR - Task based user modelling, interaction, and personalisation - Recommendation for scholarly papers, reviewers, citations and publication venues - Measurement and evaluation of quality and impact - Metadata and controlled vocabularies for resource description and discovery; - Automatic metadata discovery, such as language identification - Disambiguation issues in scholarly DLs using NLP or IR techniques; Data cleaning and data quality For the paper sessions, we especially invite descriptions of running projects and ongoing work as well as contributions from industry. Papers that investigate multiple themes directly are especially welcome. === Submission Details === All submissions must be written in English following Springer LNCS author guidelines (max. 6 pages for short and 12 pages for full papers, Springer LNCS: ; exclusive of unlimited pages for references) and should be submitted as PDF files to EasyChair. All submissions will be reviewed by at least two independent reviewers. Please be aware of the fact that at least one author per paper needs to register for the workshop and attend the workshop to present the work. In case of no-show the paper (even if accepted) will be deleted from the proceedings and from the program. EasyChair: Workshop proceedings will be deposited online in the CEUR workshop proceedings publication service (ISSN 1613-0073) - This way the proceedings will be permanently available and citable (digital persistent identifiers and long term preservation). Please retweet BIRNDL cfp Please retweet 3rd CL-SciSumm Summarization Shared Task cfp === PC Chairs === - Philipp Mayr, GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences, Germany - Kokil Jaidka, University of Pennsylvania, USA - Muthu Kumar Chandrasekaran, School of Computing, National University of Singapore, Singapore The main organizers will be supported by our previous co-organizers: - Guillaume Cabanac, University of Toulouse, France - Ingo Frommholz, University of Bedfordshire in Luton, UK - Min-Yen Kan, School of Computing, National University of Singapore, Singapore - Dietmar Wolfram, School of Information Studies, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, USA === Program Committee === The following committee members have stated their support to review submissions to the workshop. Akiko Aizawa, National Institute of Informatics, Japan Iana Atanassova, Universit? de Franche-Comt?, France Joeran Beel, Trinity College Dublin, ADAPT Centre Patrice Bellot, Aix-Marseille University, France Marc Bertin, Universit? du Qu?bec ? Montr?al, Canada Colin Batchelor, Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, UK Cornelia Caragea, University of North Texas, USA Zeljko Carevic, GESIS, Germany Jason S Chang, National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan John Conroy, IDA Center for Computing Sciences Ed A. Fox, Virginia Tech, USA Norbert Fuhr, University of Duisburg-Essen, Germany C. Lee Giles, Penn State University, USA Bela Gipp, University of Konstanz, Germany Nazli Goharian, Georgetown University, USA Pawan Goyal, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur Wolfgang Gl?nzel, KU Leuven, Belgium Gilles Hubert, University of Toulouse, France Rahul Jha, Microsoft, USA Noriko Kando, National Institute of Informatics, Japan Dain Kaplan, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan Roman Kern, Graz University of Technology, Austria Anna Korhonen, University of Cambridge, UK John Lawrence, University of Dundee, UK Chin-Yew Lin, Microsoft Research Asia Kathy McKeown, Columbia University, USA Prasenjit Mitra, Penn State University, USA / Qatar Computing Research Institute, Qatar Marie-Francine Moens, KU Leuven, Belgium Peter Mutschke, GESIS, Germany Preslav Nakov, Qatar Computing Research Institute, Qatar Doug Oard, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA Manabu Okumura, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan Arzucan Ozgur, Bogazici University, Turkey Cecile Paris, The Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Australia Soujanya Poria, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore Ameni Sahraoui, GESIS, Germany Philipp Schaer, TH Cologne, Germany Rajiv Ratn Shah, Singapore Management University, Singapore Vivek Singh, Banaras Hindu University (BHU), India Kazunari Sugiyama, National University of Singapore, Singapore Pradeep Teregowda, IBM, Watson Discovery Services, USA Mike Thelwall, University of Wolverhampton, UK Bart Thijs, KU Leuven, Belgium Lucy Vanderwende, Microsoft Research Andre Vellino, University of Toronto Anita de Waard, Elsevier Labs Alex Wade, Microsoft Research Stephen Wan, CSIRO ICT Centre, Australia Yifang Yin, National University of Singapore, Singapore ? Best regards, Philipp Mayr, Kokil Jaidka, Muthu Kumar Chandrasekaran, Guillaume Cabanac, Ingo Frommholz, Min-Yen Kan, and Dietmar Wolfram?? -- Dr. Philipp Mayr Team Leader GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences Unter Sachsenhausen 6-8, D-50667 K?ln, Germany Tel: + 49 (0) 221 / 476 94 -533 Email: philipp.mayr at gesis.org Web: http://www.gesis.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: