International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research

Home About Us Scope Editorial Board Blog/Latest News Contact Us
10th percentile
Powered by  Scopus
Scopus coverage:
Nov 2018 to May 2020


IJSTR >> Volume 10 - Issue 5, May 2021 Edition

International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research  
International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research

Website: http://www.ijstr.org

ISSN 2277-8616

Modeling And Analysis Of (MUEJ) Mehran University Research Journal Using Complex Network Approach

[Full Text]



Saria Abbasi, Altaf Hussain Abro, Abdul Waheed Mahesar, Khalil-ur-Rehman Khoumbati



Betweenness, Complex networks, Closeness , Collaborative networks, Centrality measures, Degree, Two-mode network.



Many complex systems in this world have been modeled and analyzed as complex networks. In this research paper, we have modeled specific dataset of MUEJ journal as two-mode network to find its structural properties. Our finding suggests that, this network is evolving with few prominent nodes which are playing the role of connector in this network. This trend can be the reason of highly clustered and more robust behavior in terms of specific nodes in the network.



[1] M. E. J. Newman, “Scientific collaboration networks.  I. Network construction and fundamental results,” Phys. Rev. E, vol. 64, no. 1, p. 16131, 2001.
[2] M. C. González, Contact Networks of Mobile Agents and Spreading Dynamics. 2006.
[3] R. Cazabet, P. Borgnat, and P. Jensen, “Enhancing Space-Aware Community Detection Using Degree Constrained Spatial Null Model,” Springer, pp. 47--55, 2017.
[4] D. Goss-Souza, L. W. Mendes, C. D. Borges, D. Baretta, S. M. Tsai, and J. L. M. Rodrigues, “Soil microbial community dynamics and assembly under long-term land use change,” FEMS Microbiol. Ecol., vol. 93, no. 10, 2017.
[5] J. Guan, Y. Yan, and J. J. Zhang, “The impact of collaboration and knowledge networks on citations,” J. Informetr., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 407–422, 2017.
[6] A. Ebadi and A. Schiffauerova, “How to become an important player in scientific collaboration networks?,” J. Informetr., vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 809–825, 2015.
[7] M. Bordons, J. Aparicio, B. González-Albo, and A. A. Díaz-Faes, “The relationship between the research performance of scientists and their position in co-authorship networks in three fields,” J. Informetr., vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 135–144, 2015.
[8] M. E. J. Newman, “Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., vol. 101, no. Supplement 1, pp. 5200–5205, 2004.
[9] M. S. Couceiro, F. M. Clemente, and F. M. L. Martins, “Towards the Evaluation of Research Groups based on Scientific Co-authorship Networks: The RoboCorp Case Study,” Arab Gulf J. Sci. Res., vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 36–52, 2013.
[10] I. Tahamtan, A. Safipour Afshar, and K. Ahamdzadeh, “Factors affecting number of citations: a comprehensive review of the literature,” Scientometrics, vol. 107, no. 3, pp. 1195–1225, 2016.
[11] M. E. J. Newman, “Who is the best connected scientist? A study of scientific coauthorship networks,” vol. 64, pp. 1–7, 2000.
[12] L. C. Freeman, S. P. Borgatti, and D. R. White, “Centrality in valued graphs: A measure of betweenness based on network flow,” Soc. Networks, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 141–154, 1991.
[13] L. C. Freeman, “Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification,” Soc. Networks, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 215–239, 1978.