Conference track on "Social Simulation of Science Processes" @ESSA 2013

There will be a special track of the following conference on the social simulation of science, chaired by Flaminio Squazzoni:

9th European Social Simulation Association Conference
Warsaw School of Economics, Warsaw, Poland
September 16-20, 2013
http://www.essa2013.org

The European Social Simulation Association and Warsaw School of
Economics, Division of Decision Analysis and Support, invite
researchers and scholars interested in applications and theoretical
foundations of simulation modeling in social sciences to participate
in the 9th European Social Simulation Association Conference.

The conference aims to provide an interdisciplinary forum for social
scientists, theorists, applied researchers and simulation modelers to
cooperate and exchange ideas concerning state of the art in methods
and applications of computational social sciences.

Submission

        - Full paper - in the length of 10 to 12 pages, which should be
comprehensive and consists of detailed presentation of theory,
methodology and simulation results
        - Extended abstract - in the length of 3 to 4 pages, which presents
the current topic in progress with enough detail to ensure proper
evaluation
        - Poster - should present the current work in progress

* Important dates *
- Registration opens:           1 January 2013
- Paper submission closes:      1 March 2013
- Notification of acceptance:   15 April 2013
- Final manuscript due:         15 May 2013

Paper publication

* Accepted full papers will be published by Springer in the conference
proceedings series "Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing",
http://www.springer.com/series/11156 (indexed by ISI Proceedings,
DBLP, Ulrich's, EI-Compendex, SCOPUS, Zentralblatt Math, MetaPress,
Springerlink).
* Authors of selected full papers or extended abstracts will be
invited to submit their extended version for special issue of Central
European Journal of Economic Modelling and Econometrics,
http://cejeme.org/ (indexed by IndexCopernicus, IC Value in 2011: 4.85
and RePEc).
* Full paper abstracts, extended abstracts and poster summaries will
be presented on conference website.

* Local organizing committee contact: contact@essa2013.org
* Conference website: http://www.essa2013.org

On behalf of the organizing committee:
Mateusz Zawisza
Warsaw School of Economics

A special session on "Social simulation of science processes" (chaired by Flaminio Squazzoni) has been scheduled at the 9th ESSA conference in Warsaw, Sept 16-20 2013. For info on submission, visit: http://www.essa2013.org

 

Paper: How the Scientific Community Reacts to Newly Submitted Preprints: Article Downloads, Twitter Mentions, and Citations

How the Scientific Community Reacts to Newly Submitted Preprints: Article Downloads, Twitter Mentions, and Citations

Xin Shuai¹, Alberto Pepe^2*, Johan Bollen¹

1 School of Informatics and Computing, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, United States of America, 2 Center for Astrophysics, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America

Abstract

We analyze the online response to the preprint publication of a cohort of 4,606 scientific articles submitted to the preprint database arXiv.org between October 2010 and May 2011. We study three forms of responses to these preprints: downloads on the arXiv.org site, mentions on the social media site Twitter, and early citations in the scholarly record. We perform two analyses. First, we analyze the delay and time span of article downloads and Twitter mentions following submission, to understand the temporal configuration of these reactions and whether one precedes or follows the other. Second, we run regression and correlation tests to investigate the relationship between Twitter mentions, arXiv downloads, and article citations. We find that Twitter mentions and arXiv downloads of scholarly articles follow two distinct temporal patterns of activity, with Twitter mentions having shorter delays and narrower time spans than arXiv downloads. We also find that the volume of Twitter mentions is statistically correlated with arXiv downloads and early citations just months after the publication of a preprint, with a possible bias that favors highly mentioned articles.

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0047523

 

Report: How Readers Discover Content in Scholarly Journals

A report that presents analyses of some survey data on the various means that researchers use to find the academic papers they wish to read:

A set of slides summarising the main findings:
http://www.sic.ox14.com/presentations/How%20Readers%20Discover%20Content%20in%20Scholarly%20Journals%20-%20ALPSP%202012.pdf

A free summary pdf of the report:
http://www.renewtraining.com/How-Readers-Discover-Content-in-Scholarly-Journals-summary-edition.pdf

Other, more detailed, versions (not free):
http://www.renewtraining.com/publications.htm

Call for applications to participate in a workshop on Simulating the Social Processes of Science, 7-11 April 2014, Netherlands

We are planning to submit an application for a Lorentz Centre workshop (http://www.lorentzcenter.nl/) on the topic of the Special Section of JASSS about a year ago on the Topic "Simulating the Social Processes of Science" (http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/14/4/14.html).  If successful this will happen 7-11 April 2014 in the Netherlands.  This is a very nice set-up with lunch, refreshments and facilities laid on in the centre, leaving lots of time for discussion and collaboration.

We are looking for people who could contribute to this.  In other words people who:

1.  Have done a simulation of a social aspect of science
2.  Are currently working on a simulation of a social aspect of science
3.  Has written about how to simulate a social aspect of science
3.  Is or could be involved in writing computer science tools to help with this
3.  Is a relevant philosopher, complexity science, science studies,
visualisation expert (or similar)
3.  Has studied/observed how scientists interact
4.  Is planning on doing one of the above

If you are interested in participating, please read the details at http://cfpm.org/spos and apply!  Deadline November 10th 2012.

Paper: Opening The Black-Box of Referee Behaviour. An Agent-Based Model of Peer Review

Opening The Black-Box of Referee Behaviour. An Agent-Based Model of Peer Review
by Flaminio Squazzoni and Claudio Gandelli

ABSTRACT. This paper investigates the impact of referee behaviour on the quality and efficiency of peer review. We focused especially on the importance of reciprocity motives to ensure cooperation between everyone involved. We modelled peer review as a process based on knowledge asymmetries and subject to evaluation bias. We built various simulation scenarios where we tested interaction conditions and manipulated author and referee behaviour. We found that reciprocity per se can have a negative effect on peer review as it tends to increase evaluation bias. It can have a positive impact only when purged by self-interest motivation and accompanied by disinterestedness and fairness standard.

KEYWORDS. Peer review; referees; referee behaviour; reciprocity; agent-based model.

AVAILABLE: http://www.scs-europe.net/conf/ecms2012/ecms2012%20accepted%20papers/sdcb_ECMS_0022.pdf

Paper: A simulation model of scientists as utility-driven agents

A simulation model of scientists as utility-driven agents
Melanie Baier

ABSTRACT. Agent-based simulations of science that account for the linkage between micro-level behavior of scientists and macro-level results of scientific competition are rather scarce. The approach of this simulation model is to link the motivation and behavior of scientists to knowledge growth and scientific innovations via the emergence of new knowledge fields. A new knowledge field is considered both to be a result of scientific competition and a representation of scientific advancement. This paper takes a closer look at the scientists’ motivation and how they coordinate and add to scientific progress as utilitydriven agents. Accounting for stylized facts of scientific competition, selected simulation results show how deep the processes of knowledge generation, reputation and scientific innovations are intertwined. As scientists are assumed to be of different utility types and have different aspiration levels, this approach is able to account for adaptive behavior of agents.

KEYWORDS. Agent-based modeling (ABM), coordination, knowledge generation, reputation, scientific advancement, scientific competition, status competition, utility function

AVAILABLE AT: http://www.scs-europe.net/conf/ecms2012/ecms2012%20accepted%20papers/sdcb_ECMS_0104.pdf

Paper: A simulation of disagreement for control of rational cheating in peer review

A simulation of disagreement for control of rational cheating in peer review
by Francisco Grimaldo and Mario Paolucci

ABSTRACT. We present an agent-based model of peer review built on three entities - the paper, the scientist and the conference. The systems is implemented on a BDI platform (Jason) that allows us to define a rich model of scoring, evaluating and selecting papers for conferences. Some of the reviewers apply a strategy (called “rational cheating”) aimed to prevent papers better than their own to be accepted. We show how a programme committee update based on disagreement control can remove them.

KEYWORDS. Artificial social systems, Peer Review, Agent-based simulation, Trust reliability and reputation

Available at: http://www.scs-europe.net/conf/ecms2012/ecms2012%20accepted%20papers/sdcb_ECMS_0088.pdf

Paper: Social Dynamics of Science

Social Dynamics of Science

Xiaoling Sun, Jasleen Kaur, Staša Milojević, Alessandro Flammini, Filippo Menczer

(Archived on 22 Sep 2012)

The birth and decline of disciplines are critical to science and society. However, no quantitative model to date allows us to validate competing theories of whether the emergence of scientific disciplines drives or follows the formation of social communities of scholars. Here we propose an agent-based model based on a \emph{social dynamics of science,} in which the evolution of disciplines is guided mainly by the social interactions among scientists. We find that such a social theory can account for a number of stylized facts about the relationships between disciplines, authors, and publications. These results provide strong quantitative support for the key role of social interactions in shaping the dynamics of science. A "science of science" must gauge the role of exogenous events, such as scientific discoveries and technological advances, against this purely social baseline.

At: http://arxiv.org/abs/1209.4950

Paper: Modeling peer review: an agent-based approach

Modeling peer review: an agent-based approach

Stefano Allesina, Chicago University

Abstract: The peer review system is under severe strain. Corrections have been
proposed, but experiments to determine effective measures are difficult to
perform. I propose a framework in which alternatives to the current peer
review system can be studied quantitatively using agent-based modeling. I
implement three possible systems. I show how, all other things being equal,
these alternatives produce different results in terms of speed of
publication, quality control, reviewers' effort, and authors' impact. This
modeling framework can be used to test other solutions for peer review,
leading the way to an improvement of how science is disseminated.

Keywords: peer review; agent-based modeling; publishing; editorial rejection;
simulations

http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/IEE/article/view/4447

Paper: "Positive assortment for peer review" by Aktipis & Thompson-Schill

Positive assortment for peer review

1. C Athena Aktipis
   1. Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Arizona, aktipis@alumni.reed.edu

1. Sharon L Thompson-Schill
   1. Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania

Abstract

We suggest that the introduction of positive assortment (the pairing of individuals with similar characteristics) to the peer review process would increase the speed of reviewing, improve the quality of reviews, and decrease the burden on reviewers. In assortative reviewing, each reviewer is given a score based on speed of reviewing, the usefulness of the review, the rate of reviewing, or any other priority of the journal editor. Authors submitting manuscripts are then paired with reviewers who have similar scores to themselves. This is a no-cost solution that aligns reviewers’ incentives by accounting for the benefits provided to the scientific community and returning them in kind. This assortative reviewing system can promote rapid, high quality, and high volume reviewing at a benefit to the scientific community at no financial cost. 

At: http://adb.sagepub.com/content/18/5/448.abstract

CfP: EOPS V - Epistemological Perspectives on Simulation 2012

 ==============================================================
CALL FOR PAPERS OR EXTENDED ABSTRACT
Epistemological Perspectives on Simulation 2012 (EPOS V)

San Antonio, Texas, USA
October 10-12, 2012

trinity.edu/epos

Extended Deadline for Manuscript Submission:  August 20, 2012.
==============================================================

Epistemological Perspectives on Simulation 2012

EPOS V Call for Papers

The Fifth Edition of Epistemological Perspectives on Simulation promises to be a productive meeting of minds. Held of the first time outside of Europe, this meeting aims to bring together researchers working on common issues of Computer Simulation, Methodology, and Philosophy of Science from many different angles, making for a truly interdisciplinary opportunity for discussion on the state of the art in this blooming field.

The meeting will take place on the grounds of Trinity University, in San Antonio, Texas, on October 10 – 13, 2012.

Like its predecessors the workshop wants to provide a forum for researchers from various disciplines, such as the social sciences, economics, computer science, engineering or the natural sciences, who are interested in discussing epistemological aspects of simulation across disciplinary boundaries. Philosophers are highly welcome, too.

Topics to be addressed in the workshop include, but are not restricted to issues such as the epistemology of simulation, credentials for model building, and standards for presenting and analyzing simulation results. EPOS V will bring together simulation experts, modelers, scientists and philosophers of science to share the latest advancements in simulation technology, its applications, as well as potential benefits and drawbacks. Like its predecessors, the workshop wants to provide a forum for researchers from various disciplines, such as the social sciences, computer science, engineering or the natural sciences, who are interested in discussing epistemological aspects of simulation across disciplinary boundaries.

Following the tradition of previous EPOS workshops, we will publish a selection of the accepted papers in a special issue of a journal after a further reviewing process. This time, the venue will be a special issue of the International Journal of Agent Technologies and Systems (IJATS).

Important deadlines are as follows:

August 20, 2012: Submission of papers or extended abstracts (Extended Deadline)

September 10, 2012: Notification of acceptance

September 28, 2012: Receipt of full papers

October 10-12, 2012: Workshop, San Antonio, Texas, USA

October 13, 2012: Complementary field trip for participants in the beautiful Texas Hill Country

Hosts: Prof. Dr. Dante Suarez and Prof. Dr. Yu Zhang (Trinity University), Prof. Dr. Klaus G. Troitzsch (University of Koblenz-Landau) and Prof. Dr. Manuel Castañon-Puga (University of Baja California).

An article on predatory scholarly publishing

"Predatory scholarly publishing" by Moshe Y. Vardi

Original article is at: http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=2209249.2209250

The source material is on the website: http://scholarlyoa.com

Paper: Saint Matthew strikes again: An agent-based model of peer review and the scientific community structure

Saint Matthew strikes again: An agent-based model of peer review and the scientific community structure 

Flaminio Squazzoni, Claudio Gandelli
University of Brescia, Italy

email: squazzon@eco.unibs.it

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157711001179

This paper investigates the impact of referee reliability on the quality and efficiency of peer review. We modeled peer review as a process based on knowledge asymmetries and subject to evaluation bias. We tested various levels of referee reliability and different mechanisms of reviewing effort distribution among agents. We also tested different scientific community structures (cohesive vs. parochial) and competitive science environments (high vs. low competition). We found that referee behavior drastically affects peer review and an equal distribution of the reviewing effort is beneficial only if the scientific community is homogeneous and referee reliability is the rule. We also found that the Matthew effect in the allocation of resources and credit is inherent to a ‘winner takes all’ well functioning science system, more than a consequence of evaluation bias.

Keywords: Peer review, Referees, Referee reliability, Matthew effect, Agent-based model

Published: Informetrics, 6, 2, 2012, pp. 265-275

Paper: PNAS (2004) The simultaneous evolution of author and paper networks

by: Katy Börner, Jeegar T. Maru, and Robert L. Goldstone, PNAS April 6, 2004 vol. 101 no. Suppl 1 5266-5273 

Available at:    http://www.pnas.org/content/101/suppl.1/5266.full