科技论文学术水平评估

为了更科学合理地评估科技论文的学术水平，从多个角度分析总结出一套科技论文学术水平综合评价指标体系，该体系分为2个层次，共19项指标组成，并采用主成分分析法提取影响科技论文学术水平的主要因素并计算各因素的权重，以求得出科技论文学术水平的综合得分，给科研管理部门提供了一种新的能够较科学、客观、公平地评价科技论文学术水平的具体操作方法。     

利用文献数据库加强审稿过程中的学术质量判断

【目的】 研究学术期刊编辑精选稿件流程,基于各类文献数据库查证来稿的学术创新性、作者及其团队的学术实力、学术研究环境,以及稿件文献列表的合理性,试图实证来稿学术的创新性,发现来稿中的学术不端行为等问题。【方法】 除常规选稿流程之外,增加检索文献数据库以及比对流程,按照作者姓名、单位名称、来稿     

A computer-oriented approach to obtaining an analytical expression of an impulse response of a one- or two-dimensional filter

A method is presented, that can be readily written in a computer program, to obtain the closed-form solution of the impulse response of a digital filter. The extension of this approach to two-dimensional digital filters and to analog filter transfer functions is also presented. Examples are shown.     

Identifying breakthrough scientific papers

Citation analysis does not tell the whole story about the innovativeness of scientific papers. Works by prominent authors tend to receive disproportionately many citations, while publications by less well-known researchers covering the same topics may not attract as much attention. In this paper we address the shortcomings of traditional scientometric approaches by proposing a novel method that utilizes a classifier for predicting publication years based on latent topic distributions. We then calculate real-number innovation scores used to identify potential breakthrough papers and turnaround years. The proposed approach can complement existing citation-based measures of article importance and author contribution analysis; it opens as well novel research direction for time-based, innovation-centered research scientific output evaluation. In our experiments, we focus on two corpora of research papers published over several decades at two well-established conferences: The World Wide Web Conference (WWW) and the International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR), containing around 3500 documents in total. We indicate significant years and demonstrate examples of highly-ranked papers, thus providing a novel insight on the evolution of the two conferences. Finally, we compare our results to citation analysis and discuss how our approach may complement traditional scientometrics.