BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Orion Penner

Orion Penner contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
physics.soc-phDigital Librariesphysics.data-anSocial and Information Networksphysics.pop-ph

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
8works
0followers
5topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

8 published item(s)

preprint2020arXiv

Renormalizing individual performance metrics for cultural heritage management of sports records

Individual performance metrics are commonly used to compare players from different eras. However, such cross-era comparison is often biased due to significant changes in success factors underlying player achievement rates (e.g. performance enhancing drugs and modern training regimens). Such historical comparison is more than fodder for casual discussion among sports fans, as it is also an issue of critical importance to the multi-billion dollar professional sport industry and the institutions (e.g. Hall of Fame) charged with preserving sports history and the legacy of outstanding players and achievements. To address this cultural heritage management issue, we report an objective statistical method for renormalizing career achievement metrics, one that is particularly tailored for common seasonal performance metrics, which are often aggregated into summary career metrics -- despite the fact that many player careers span different eras. Remarkably, we find that the method applied to comprehensive Major League Baseball and National Basketball Association player data preserves the overall functional form of the distribution of career achievement, both at the season and career level. As such, subsequent re-ranking of the top-50 all-time records in MLB and the NBA using renormalized metrics indicates reordering at the local rank level, as opposed to bulk reordering by era. This local order refinement signals time-independent mechanisms underlying annual and career achievement in professional sports, meaning that appropriately renormalized achievement metrics can be used to compare players from eras with different season lengths, team strategies, rules -- and possibly even different sports.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2015arXiv

Identifying Geographic Clusters: A Network Analytic Approach

In recent years there has been a growing interest in the role of networks and clusters in the global economy. Despite being a popular research topic in economics, sociology and urban studies, geographical clustering of human activity has often studied been by means of predetermined geographical units such as administrative divisions and metropolitan areas. This approach is intrinsically time invariant and it does not allow one to differentiate between different activities. Our goal in this paper is to present a new methodology for identifying clusters, that can be applied to different empirical settings. We use a graph approach based on k-shell decomposition to analyze world biomedical research clusters based on PubMed scientific publications. We identify research institutions and locate their activities in geographical clusters. Leading areas of scientific production and their top performing research institutions are consistently identified at different geographic scales.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

Exploiting citation networks for large-scale author name disambiguation

We present a novel algorithm and validation method for disambiguating author names in very large bibliographic data sets and apply it to the full Web of Science (WoS) citation index. Our algorithm relies only upon the author and citation graphs available for the whole period covered by the WoS. A pair-wise publication similarity metric, which is based on common co-authors, self-citations, shared references and citations, is established to perform a two-step agglomerative clustering that first connects individual papers and then merges similar clusters. This parameterized model is optimized using an h-index based recall measure, favoring the correct assignment of well-cited publications, and a name-initials-based precision using WoS metadata and cross-referenced Google Scholar profiles. Despite the use of limited metadata, we reach a recall of 87% and a precision of 88% with a preference for researchers with high h-index values. 47 million articles of WoS can be disambiguated on a single machine in less than a day. We develop an h-index distribution model, confirming that the prediction is in excellent agreement with the empirical data, and yielding insight into the utility of the h-index in real academic ranking scenarios.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

Inequality and cumulative advantage in science careers: a case study of high-impact journals

Analyzing a large data set of publications drawn from the most competitive journals in the natural and social sciences we show that research careers exhibit the broad distributions of individual achievement characteristic of systems in which cumulative advantage plays a key role. While most researchers are personally aware of the competition implicit in the publication process, little is known about the levels of inequality at the level of individual researchers. We analyzed both productivity and impact measures for a large set of researchers publishing in high-impact journals. For each researcher cohort we calculated Gini inequality coefficients, with average Gini values around 0.48 for total publications and 0.73 for total citations. For perspective, these observed values are well in excess of the inequality levels observed for personal income in developing countries. Investigating possible sources of this inequality, we identify two potential mechanisms that act at the level of the individual that may play defining roles in the emergence of the broad productivity and impact distributions found in science. First, we show that the average time interval between a researcher's successive publications in top journals decreases with each subsequent publication. Second, after controlling for the time dependent features of citation distributions, we compare the citation impact of subsequent publications within a researcher's publication record. We find that as researchers continue to publish in top journals, there is more likely to be a decreasing trend in the relative citation impact with each subsequent publication. This pattern highlights the difficulty of repeatedly publishing high-impact research and the intriguing possibility that confirmation bias plays a role in the evaluation of scientific careers.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

Reputation and Impact in Academic Careers

Reputation is an important social construct in science, which enables informed quality assessments of both publications and careers of scientists in the absence of complete systemic information. However, the relation between reputation and career growth of an individual remains poorly understood, despite recent proliferation of quantitative research evaluation methods. Here we develop an original framework for measuring how a publication&#39;s citation rate $Δc$ depends on the reputation of its central author $i$, in addition to its net citation count $c$. To estimate the strength of the reputation effect, we perform a longitudinal analysis on the careers of 450 highly-cited scientists, using the total citations $C_{i}$ of each scientist as his/her reputation measure. We find a citation crossover $c_{\times}$ which distinguishes the strength of the reputation effect. For publications with $c < c_{\times}$, the author&#39;s reputation is found to dominate the annual citation rate. Hence, a new publication may gain a significant early advantage corresponding to roughly a 66% increase in the citation rate for each tenfold increase in $C_{i}$. However, the reputation effect becomes negligible for highly cited publications meaning that for $c\geq c_{\times}$ the citation rate measures scientific impact more transparently. In addition we have developed a stochastic reputation model, which is found to reproduce numerous statistical observations for real careers, thus providing insight into the microscopic mechanisms underlying cumulative advantage in science.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Is Europe Evolving Toward an Integrated Research Area?

An integrated European Research Area (ERA) is a critical component for a more competitive and open European R&D system. However, the impact of EU-specific integration policies aimed at overcoming innovation barriers associated with national borders is not well understood. Here we analyze 2.4 x 10^6 patent applications filed with the European Patent Office (EPO) over the 25-year period 1986-2010 along with a sample of 2.6 x 10^5 records from the ISI Web of Science to quantitatively measure the role of borders in international R&D collaboration and mobility. From these data we construct five different networks for each year analyzed: (i) the patent co-inventor network, (ii) the publication co-author network, (iii) the co-applicant patent network, (iv) the patent citation network, and (v) the patent mobility network. We use methods from network science and econometrics to perform a comparative analysis across time and between EU and non-EU countries to determine the &#34;treatment effect&#34; resulting from EU integration policies. Using non-EU countries as a control set, we provide quantitative evidence that, despite decades of efforts to build a European Research Area, there has been little integration above global trends in patenting and publication. This analysis provides concrete evidence that Europe remains a collection of national innovation systems.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

On the Predictability of Future Impact in Science

Correctly assessing a scientist&#39;s past research impact and potential for future impact is key in recruitment decisions and other evaluation processes. While a candidate&#39;s future impact is the main concern for these decisions, most measures only quantify the impact of previous work. Recently, it has been argued that linear regression models are capable of predicting a scientist&#39;s future impact. By applying that future impact model to 762 careers drawn from three disciplines: physics, biology, and mathematics, we identify a number of subtle, but critical, flaws in current models. Specifically, cumulative non-decreasing measures like the h-index contain intrinsic autocorrelation, resulting in significant overestimation of their &#34;predictive power&#34;. Moreover, the predictive power of these models depend heavily upon scientists&#39; career age, producing least accurate estimates for young researchers. Our results place in doubt the suitability of such models, and indicate further investigation is required before they can be used in recruiting decisions.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2011arXiv

Detrending career statistics in professional baseball: Accounting for the steroids era and beyond

There is a long standing debate over how to objectively compare the career achievements of professional athletes from different historical eras. Developing an objective approach will be of particular importance over the next decade as Major League Baseball (MLB) players from the &#34;steroids era&#34; become eligible for Hall of Fame induction. Here we address this issue, as well as the general problem of comparing statistics from distinct eras, by detrending the seasonal statistics of professional baseball players. We detrend player statistics by normalizing achievements to seasonal averages, which accounts for changes in relative player ability resulting from both exogenous and endogenous factors, such as talent dilution from expansion, equipment and training improvements, as well as performance enhancing drugs (PED). In this paper we compare the probability density function (pdf) of detrended career statistics to the pdf of raw career statistics for five statistical categories -- hits (H), home runs (HR), runs batted in (RBI), wins (W) and strikeouts (K) -- over the 90-year period 1920-2009. We find that the functional form of these pdfs are stationary under detrending. This stationarity implies that the statistical regularity observed in the right-skewed distributions for longevity and success in professional baseball arises from both the wide range of intrinsic talent among athletes and the underlying nature of competition. Using this simple detrending technique, we examine the top 50 all-time careers for H, HR, RBI, W and K. We fit the pdfs for career success by the Gamma distribution in order to calculate objective benchmarks based on extreme statistics which can be used for the identification of extraordinary careers.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access