Paper detail

Finding Influential Institutions in Bibliographic Information Networks

Ranking in bibliographic information networks is a widely studied problem due to its many applications such as advertisement industry, funding, search engines, etc. Most of the existing works on ranking in bibliographic information network are based on ranking of research papers and their authors. But the bibliographic information network can be used for solving other important problems as well. The KDD Cup $2016$ competition considers one such problem, which is to measure the impact of research institutions, i.e. to perform ranking of research institutions. The competition took place in three phases. In this paper, we discuss our solutions for ranking institutions in each phase. We participated under team name "anu@TASL" and our solutions achieved the average NDCG@$20$ score of $0.7483$, ranking in eleventh place in the contest.

preprint2016arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.