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

Peter Sjögårde

Peter Sjögårde contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Digital LibrariesHuman-Computer InteractionSocial and Information Networks

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
3works
0followers
3topics
3close 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

3 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Exploring user needs in relation to algorithmically constructed classifications of publications

Algorithmic classification of research publications has been created to study different aspects of research. Such classifications can be used to support information needs in universities for decision making. However, the classifications have foremost been evaluated quantitatively regarding their content, but not qualitatively regarding their feasibility in a specific context. The aim of this study was to explore and evaluate the usefulness of such classifications to users in the context of exploring an emerging research area. I conducted four interviews with managers of a project aimed to support research and application of artificial intelligence at the Swedish medical university Karolinska Institutet. The interviews focused on the information need of the managers. To support the project, a classification was created by clustering of publications in a citation network. A cluster map based on this classification was provided to the project leader and one interview focused on the use of the classification in the project in relation to the stated information needs. The interviews showed that the aim of the project was to improve competence, enhance communication between researchers and develop support structures. Getting an overview of artificial intelligence at the university and information about who is doing what was important to fulfill this aim. The cluster map was used to support activities conducted by the project leader, such as interviews and information gathering. It was also used to get overview and display of AI research at KI. Interpretation was found to be challenging in some cases. The interactivity of the map facilitated interpretation. This study was small in scope, but it provides one piece of knowledge about the information needs related to algorithmic classifications.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

The association between topic growth and citation impact of research publications

Citations are used for research evaluation, and it is therefore important to know which factors influence or associate with citation impact of articles. Several citation factors have been studied in the literature. In this study we propose a new factor, topic growth, that no previous study has studied empirically. The growth rate of topics may influence future citation counts because a high growth in a topic means there are more publications citing previous publications in that topic. We construct topics using community detection in a citation network and use a two-part regression model to study the association between topic growth and citation counts in eight broad disciplines. The first part of the model uses quantile regression to estimate the effect of growth ratio on citation counts for publications with more than three citations. The second part of the model uses logistic regression to model the influence of the explanatory variables on the probability of being lowly cited versus being modestly or highly cited. Both models control for three variables that may distort the association between the topic growth and citations: journal impact, number of references, and number of authors. The regression model clearly shows that publications in fast-growing topics have a citation advantage compared to publications in slow-growing or declining topics in all of the eight disciplines. Using citation indicators for research evaluation may give incentives for researchers to publish in fast-growing topics, but they may cause research to be less diversified. The results have also some implications for citation normalization.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Algorithmic labeling in hierarchical classifications of publications: Evaluation of bibliographic fields and term weighting approaches

Algorithmic classifications of research publications can be used to study many different aspects of the science system, such as the organization of science into fields, the growth of fields, interdisciplinarity, and emerging topics. How to label the classes in these classifications is a problem that has not been thoroughly addressed in the literature. In this study we evaluate different approaches to label the classes in algorithmically constructed classifications of research publications. We focus on two important choices: the choice of (1) different bibliographic fields and (2) different approaches to weight the relevance of terms. To evaluate the different choices, we created two baselines: one based on the Medical Subject Headings in MEDLINE and another based on the Science-Metrix journal classification. We tested to what extent different approaches yield the desired labels for the classes in the two baselines. Based on our results we recommend extracting terms from titles and keywords to label classes at high levels of granularity (e.g. topics). At low levels of granularity (e.g. disciplines) we recommend extracting terms from journal names and author addresses. We recommend the use of a new approach, term frequency to specificity ratio, to calculate the relevance of terms.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access