Paper detail

Unsupervised Anomaly Detection in Journal-Level Citation Networks

Journal Impact Factor is a popular metric for determining the quality of a journal in academia. The number of citations received by a journal is a crucial factor in determining the impact factor, which may be misused in multiple ways. Therefore, it is crucial to detect citation anomalies for further identifying manipulation and inflation of impact factor. Citation network models the citation relationship between journals in terms of a directed graph. Detecting anomalies in the citation network is a challenging task which has several applications in spotting citation cartels and citation stack and understanding the intentions behind the citations. In this paper, we present a novel approach to detect the anomalies in a journal-level scientific citation network, and compare the results with the existing graph anomaly detection algorithms. Due to the lack of proper ground-truth, we introduce a journal-level citation anomaly dataset which consists of synthetically injected citation anomalies and use it to evaluate our methodology. Our method is able to predict the anomalous citation pairs with a precision of 100\% and an F1-score of 86%. We further categorize the detected anomalies into various types and reason out possible causes. We also analyze our model on the Microsoft Academic Search dataset - a real-world citation dataset and interpret our results using a case study, wherein our results resemble the citations and SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) rating-change charts, thus indicating the usefulness of our method. We further design `Journal Citation Analysis Tool', an interactive web portal which, given the citation network as an input, shows the journal-level anomalous citation patterns and helps users analyze citation patterns of a given journal over the years.

preprint2020arXivOpen 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.