Topcites is up, string cites is down

[marcus]

Peter Woit calls our attention to the SLAC/Stanford library service

http://www.slac.stanford.edu/library/topcites/2005/annual.shtml

 

[marcus]

Peter Woit calls our attention to the SLAC/Stanford library service

http://www.slac.stanford.edu/library/topcites/2005/annual.shtml

they took their time about posting the list of topcited papers for 2005.

we had some bets about this

basically it was you look at RECENT papers, those appearing in the last 5 years 2001-2005, and guess how many recent string papers would receive 100+ citations in 2005

It used to be that a dozen or more would break the 100 mark. But lately that has been declining so we had a poll to see what people's forecast would be.

Now that the list is out, I count 4 recent string papers with 100+ citations. That was, IIRC, the most pessimistic we considered in the poll.

the ones I found were numbers 18, 34, 49, and 79 on the list

I looked at #106 but it turned out to be about Standard Model, not string/M.
Maybe someone else can find others?

============================
Thanks to Alejandro for going ahead earlier this month, when SLAC was not forthcoming with the list, and generating his own unofficial topcite info.
Here is a thread about that.
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=113685

Alejandro's independent effort got a link at Woit's blog. I think it is conceivable that someone at SLAC/Stanford noticed the independent effort to compile cites list and that reminded them that they should get busy and put out their official list. I know of no indication that happened but it is not impossible.

============================
Peter's announcement is here
http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=365

 

[marcus]

Here are the result of the forecast poll we had here at Physicsforums

https://www.physicsforums.com/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=580 I see that I predicted 8 recent string papers would break 100 citations.
Way too optimistic.

Five people chose the option "5 or less"
they are our good guessers this time:

Chronos, Gokul, notevenwrong, ohwilleke, Spin_Network

Gokul and Spin_Network are no longer around much. But congratulations to Chronos, ohwilleke, and notevenwrong (aka Peter Woit)

here is the thread discussing the poll
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=81739

 

[Gokul43201]

Hey, I'm around...just mostly "invisible" !

 

[marcus]

Here are the result of the forecast poll we had here at Physicsforums

https://www.physicsforums.com/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=580


I see that I predicted 8 recent string papers would break 100 citations.
Way too optimistic.

Five people chose the option "5 or less"
they are our good guessers this time:

Chronos, Gokul, notevenwrong, ohwilleke, Spin_Network

Gokul is on hand as well!
Congratulations to you too, Gokul. I had no idea there would be so few highly cited recent papers---no way would have guessed as low as you did.

Maybe you should suggest a forecast poll. Winners choice. Shall we do the same thing but for next year, or something else? If you have any ideas for a poll, let me know. If I like it, and you don't want to take the trouble, I will implement it

 

[duke_nemmerle]

Gokul is on hand as well!
Congratulations to you too, Gokul. I had no idea there would be so few highly cited recent papers---no way would have guessed as low as you did.

Maybe you should suggest a forecast poll. Winners choice. Shall we do the same thing but for next year, or something else? If you have any ideas for a poll, let me know. If I like it, and you don't want to take the trouble, I will implement it

Yes, as the year develops we should probably do it again. This is shockingly low

 

[arivero]

http://xstructure.inr.ac.ru/x-bin/theme2.py?arxiv=hep-th&level=3&index1=0

does some plotting now on its own.

 

[marcus]

http://xstructure.inr.ac.ru/x-bin/theme2.py?arxiv=hep-th&level=3&index1=0

does some plotting now on its own.

interesting graphs by research topic.
I am glad you found this.
thanks arivero!

 

[marcus]

More about the hep-th citation graph analysis that arivero found

http://xstructure.inr.ac.ru/about.htm

it is called Xstructure
the only input to the algorithm is the citation network, it finds clusters of papers that cite each other or which cite some seminal ancestor paper

given that researchers are human, and humans are silly, and also that computers are sometimes silly as well, this Xstructure analysis could admittedly yield meaningless results

however to me it seems very interesting, especially because it identifies NEW RESEARCH THEMES

every time they re-initiate the algorithm it goes thru the hep-th arxiv and finds if there are any new THEMES (according to the machine's own idea of what a theme is) which I guess means new clusters or trees of research that it perceives in the citation-web.

this automatic process seems to me at least as interesting as the NUMBERS it generates---which are counts of papers per year in each theme group.

What I shall decide to watch for the time being are Level A theme #7

and within A7, go down one level and chose subthemes #3 and #5. So we could call it A7.3 and A7.5

 

[marcus]

here is A7
http://xstructure.inr.ac.ru/x-bin/theme2.py?arxiv=hep-th&level=2&index1=7

the machine's chosen NAME of this large collection of research papers is
"renormalization group; exact renormalization; quantum gravity; flow equation"

some verbal TAGS which the machine has found to be frequently associated with this category are:

"renormalization group; exact renormalization; quantum gravity; flow equation; wilson renormalization; lorentzian quantum; manifestly gauge; scheme independence; average action; renormalisation group; group flow; group equation; nonperturbative renormalization; effective average; quantum einstein; critical exponents; derivative expansion; invariant exact; asymptotic safety; gauge invariant; simplicial gravity; expansion renormalization; renormalized phi**4; wilsonian flow; dynamical triangulation; temperature renormalization; einstein gravity; fixed point; proper time; 2-d quantum"

but we should understand that THE verbal associated TAGS DO NOT DEFINE THE CLUSTER. the definition of the cluster is graphtheorical from the citation-web. it is not a human-language concept, so it is machine-stupid instead of human-stupid. Everybody makes mistakes but machines make DIFFERENT KINDS FROM US, so it can be interesting what they see.

 

[marcus]

Here are the Subthemes that have been found to be in A7

http://xstructure.inr.ac.ru/x-bin/subthemes2.py?arxiv=hep-th&level=2&index1=7&skip=0

the ones that interest me are #3 and #5, so I will call them A7.3 and A7.5

here are their pages

A7.3
http://xstructure.inr.ac.ru/x-bin/theme2.py?arxiv=hep-th&level=1&index1=4699696

machine-given NAME
"quantum einstein; asymptotic safety; quantum gravity; simplicial gravity"
frequently associated TAGS
"quantum einstein; asymptotic safety; quantum gravity; simplicial gravity; einstein gravity; two-dimensional regge; near two-dimensions; regge gravity; Newtonian potential; asymptotically safe; Newtonian coupling; point quantum; scaling dimension; spacetime structure; potential conformal; propagator quantum; faddeev-popov determinant; determinant two-dimensional; gravity dirac; ultraviolet fixed; (2+epsilon)-dimensional quantum; galois field; gravity near; fixed point; Newton's constant; energy quantum; gravity gauss-bonnet; theory over; potential energy; conformal factor"

A7.5
http://xstructure.inr.ac.ru/x-bin/theme2.py?arxiv=hep-th&level=1&index1=4637488

machine-given NAME
"lorentzian quantum; causal dynamical; dynamical triangulation; quantum gravity"
frequently associated TAGS
"lorentzian quantum; causal dynamical; dynamical triangulation; quantum gravity; over topology; sum over; string bit; 2-d quantum; causal quantum; bit model; quantum gravity,; 4-d quantum; nonperturbative effect; proper time; background independent; topology change; coupled matter; quantum cosmology; gravity coupled; two-dimensional quantum; path integral; matrix model; cosmological constant; quantum field; field theory"

I want to emphasize the important fact that the human implementor of this serious arxiv analysis is a Russian, Grigorii Pivovarov,
and that Russians sometimes have a different sense of humor from other people because of their unique experience. Like of Ivan the Terrible. but in this case I agree with this Russian wholeheartedly and remember what hamlet said in the graveyard "how absolute the knave is! we must speak by the card, or equivocation will undo us." This was just waiting to happen to arXiv Hep-th.