Devising an individually oriented method for selection of scientific activity subjects for implementing scientific projects based on scientometric analysis

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2021.248040

Keywords:

subject of scientific activity, scientometric analysis, scientific project, multicriterial problem of choice

Abstract

The main factors influencing the choice of individual subjects of the scientific activity or potential partners and executors for scientific and educational projects were analyzed. The specific features of choosing project executors of different categories were indicated. The functional responsibilities of project participants in accordance with the project structure were described.

The individually oriented method for choosing subjects of scientific activity as executors of scientific and educational projects was developed, taking into account the productivity of their scientific activities in the past and considering the structure of projects. To determine the merits of the subjects of scientific activity, which are included in the relevant scientific subject spaces, it is necessary to apply the procedure of their productivity assessment. In addition, it is necessary to predict a change in productivity in the future based on retrospective data for this subject. Next, it is required to solve the multi-criteria problem of the choice among the subjects of scientific activity who are quite productive in the opinion of the project manager. The use of the developed method reduces the subjective impact on making a decision regarding the choice of project executors. This is due to the fact that they are chosen by automated calculation of scientometric indicators of subjects, guided only by open sources of information.

The individually oriented method for the selection of subjects of scientific activity was verified on the example of the formation of three applications of research projects. As a result, the average percentage of scientists who meet the requirements of project managers for each scientific subject space was about 46.55 %. The percentage of those involved in the project from those who were selected is about 24.07 %. The probability of cooperation is higher among those who have an average H-index.

Author Biographies

Huilin Xu, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv; Yancheng Polytechnic College

Postgraduate Student

Department of Information Systems and Technologies

Alexander Kuchansky, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv; Kyiv National University of Construction and Architecture

Doctor of Technical Sciences, Associate Professor

Department of Information Systems and Technology

Department of Cyber Security and Computer Engineering

Myroslava Gladka, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv

PhD, Assistant

Department of Information Systems and Technology

References

  1. Bogers, M., Chesbrough, H., Moedas, C. (2018). Open Innovation: Research, Practices, and Policies. California Management Review, 60 (2), 5–16. doi: http://doi.org/10.1177/0008125617745086
  2. Beck, S., Bergenholtz, C., Bogers, M., Brasseur, T.-M., Conradsen, M. L., Di Marco, D. et. al. (2020). The Open Innovation in Science research field: a collaborative conceptualisation approach. Industry and Innovation, 1–50. doi: http://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2020.1792274
  3. Kazakovtsev, V., Oreshin, S., Serdyukov, A., Krasheninnikov, E., Muravyov, S., Bezvinnyi, A. et. al. (2020). Recommender system for an academic supervisor with a matrix normalization approach. 2020 International Conference on Control, Robotics and Intelligent System. doi: http://doi.org/10.1145/3437802.3437817
  4. Bushuyev, D., Bushuieva, V., Kozyr, B., Ugay, A. (2020). Erosion of competencies of innovative digitalization projects. Scientific Journal of Astana IT University, 1, 70–83. doi: http://doi.org/10.37943/aitu.2020.1.63658
  5. Sihombing, D. I., Sitompul, O. S., Sutarman, Nababan, E. (2018). Combining the use of analytical hierarchy process and lexicographic goal programming in selecting project executor. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 420. doi: http://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899x/420/1/012113
  6. Chu, X. N., Tso, S. K., Zhang, W. J., Li, Q. (2000). Partners Selection for Virtual Enterprises. Proceedings of the 3th World Congress on Intelligent Control and Automation, 164–168. doi: http://doi.org/10.1109/wcica.2000.859940
  7. Al‐Khalifa, A. K., Eggert Peterson, S. (1999). The partner selection process in international joint ventures. European Journal of Marketing, 33 (11/12), 1064–1081. doi: http://doi.org/10.1108/03090569910292276
  8. Feng, W. D., Chen, J., Zhao, C. J. (2000). Partners Selection Process and Optimization Model for Virtual corporations Based on Genetic Algorithms. Journal of Tsinghua University (Science and Technology), 40, 120–124.
  9. Zhong, Y., Jian, L., Zijun, W. (2009). An integrated optimization algorithm of GA and ACA-based approaches for modeling virtual enterprise partner selection. ACM SIGMIS Database: The DATABASE for Advances in Information Systems, 40 (2), 37–56. doi: http://doi.org/10.1145/1531817.1531824
  10. Schall, D. (2014). A multi-criteria ranking framework for partner selection in scientific collaboration environments. Decision Support Systems, 59, 1–14. doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2013.10.001
  11. Wagner, C. S., Leydesdorff, L. (2005). Network structure, self-organization, and the growth of international collaboration in science. Research Policy, 34 (10), 1608–1618. doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.08.002
  12. Fu, F., Hauert, C., Nowak, M. A., Wang, L. (2008). Reputation-based partner choice promotes cooperation in social networks. Physical Review E, 78 (2). doi: http://doi.org/10.1103/physreve.78.026117
  13. Kleinberg, J. M. (1999). Authoritative sources in a hyperlinked environment. Journal of the ACM, 46 (5), 604–632. doi: http://doi.org/10.1145/324133.324140
  14. Page, L., Brin, S., Motwani, R., Winograd, T. (1999). The PageRank Citation Ranking: Bringing Order to the Web. Available at: http://ilpubs.stanford.edu:8090/422/
  15. Haveliwala, T. H. (2002). Topic-sensitive PageRank. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on World Wide Web – WWW '02. New York, 517–526. doi: http://doi.org/10.1145/511446.511513
  16. Xu, H., Kuchansky, A., Biloshchytska, S., Tsiutsiura, M. (2021). A Conceptual Research Model for the Partner Selection Problem. 2021 IEEE International Conference on Smart Information Systems and Technologies (SIST). doi: http://doi.org/10.1109/sist50301.2021.9465931
  17. Yershov, S. V., Ponomarenko, R. M. (2018). Parallel Fuzzy Inference Method for Higher Order Takagi–Sugeno Systems. Cybernetics and Systems Analysis, 54 (6), 1003–1012. doi: http://doi.org/10.1007/s10559-018-0103-3
  18. Wang, D., Yang, X.C., Wang, G.R. (2002). Implementation of Partner Selection in Virtual Enterprise Based on Fuzzy-AHP. Journal of Northeastern University, 21 (6), 606–609.
  19. Lizunov, P., Biloshchytskyi, A., Kuchansky, A., Andrashko, Y., Biloshchytska, S. (2019). Improvement of the method for scientific publications clustering based on n-gram analysis and fuzzy method for selecting research partners. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 4 (4 (100)), 6–14. doi: http://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2019.175139
  20. Li, B., Zhang, J. (2021). A Cooperative Partner Selection Study of Military-Civilian Scientific and Technological Collaborative Innovation Based on Interval-Valued Intuitionistic Fuzzy Set. Symmetry, 13 (4), 553. doi: http://doi.org/10.3390/sym13040553
  21. Gladka, M., Kravchenko, O., Hladkyi, Y., Borashova, S. (2021). Qualification and Appointment of Staff for Project Work in Implementing IT Systems Under Conditions of Uncertainty. 2021 IEEE International Conference on Smart Information Systems and Technologies (SIST). doi: http://doi.org/10.1109/sist50301.2021.9465897
  22. Kolomiiets, A., Morozov, V. (2020). Investigation of Optimization Models in Decisions Making on Integration of Innovative Projects. Lecture Notes in Computational Intelligence and Decision Making, 51–64. doi: http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-54215-3_4
  23. Boyko, R., Shumyhai, D., Gladka, M. (2016). Сoncept, Definition and Use of an Agent in the Multi-agent Information Management Systems at the Objects of Various Nature. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, 59–63. doi: http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48923-0_8
  24. Biloshchytskyi, A., Kuchansky, A., Andrashko, Y., Omirbayev, S., Mukhatayev, A., Faizullin, A., Toxanov, S. (2021). Development of the set models and a method to form information spaces of scientific activity subjects for the steady development of higher education establishments. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 3 (2 (111)), 6–14. doi: http://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2021.233655
  25. Kuchansky, A., Biloshchytskyi, A., Andrashko, Y., Biloshchytska, S., Honcharenko, T., Nikolenko, V. (2019). Fractal time series analysis in non-stationary environment. 2019 IEEE International Scientific-Practical Conference: Problems of Infocommunications Science and Technology, 236–240. doi: http://doi.org/10.1109/picst47496.2019.9061554
  26. Mulesa, O., Geche, F., Batyuk, A., Myronyuk, I. (2018). Using a system approach in the process of the assessment problem analysis of the staff capacity within the health care institution. IEEE Conference: Computer science and information technologies (CSIT 2018), 177–180. doi: http://doi.org/10.1109/stc-csit.2018.8526749
  27. Mulesa, O., Geche, F., Voloshchuk, V., Buchok, V., Batyuk, A. (2017). Information Technology for time series forecasting with considering fuzzy expert evaluations. IEEE Conference: Computer Science and Information Technologies, 105–108. doi: http://doi.org/10.1109/stc-csit.2017.8098747
  28. Mulesa, O., Geche, F. (2016). Designing fuzzy expert methods of numeric evaluation of an object for the problems of forecasting. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 3 (4 (81)), 37–43. doi: http://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2016.70515
  29. Chen, L., Jagota, V., Kumar, A. (2021). Research on optimization of scientific research performance management based on BP neural network. International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management. doi: http://doi.org/10.1007/s13198-021-01263-z
  30. Liu, L., Ran, W. (2019). Research on supply chain partner selection method based on BP neural network. Neural Computing and Applications, 32 (6), 1543–1553. doi: http://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-019-04136-6
  31. Han, J., Teng, X., Cai, X. (2019). A novel network optimization partner selection method based on collaborative and knowledge networks. Information Sciences, 484, 269–285. doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2019.01.072
  32. Wi, H., Oh, S., Mun, J., Jung, M. (2009). A team formation model based on knowledge and collaboration. Expert Systems with Applications, 36 (5), 9121–9134. doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2008.12.031
  33. Lungeanu, A., Huang, Y., Contractor, N. S. (2014). Understanding the assembly of interdisciplinary teams and its impact on performance. Journal of Informetrics, 8 (1), 59–70. doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2013.10.006
  34. Lungeanu, A., Sullivan, S., Wilensky, U., Contractor, N. S. (2015). A computational model of team assembly in emerging scientific fields. 2015 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC). doi: http://doi.org/10.1109/wsc.2015.7408559
  35. Lungeanu, A., Carter, D. R., DeChurch, L. A., Contractor, N. S. (2018). How Team Interlock Ecosystems Shape the Assembly of Scientific Teams: A Hypergraph Approach. Communication Methods and Measures, 12 (2-3), 174–198. doi: http://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2018.1430756
  36. Wang, Q., Ma, J., Liao, X., Du, W. (2017). A context-aware researcher recommendation system for university-industry collaboration on R&D projects. Decision Support Systems, 103, 46–57. doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2017.09.001
  37. Lizunov, P., Biloshchytskyi, A., Kuchansky, A., Andrashko, Y., Biloshchytska, S. (2020). The use of probabilistic latent semantic analysis to identify scientific subject spaces and to evaluate the completeness of covering the results of dissertation studies. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 4 (4 (106)), 21–28. doi: http://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2020.209886
  38. Biloshchytskyi, A., Kuchansky, A., Andrashko, Y., Mukhatayev, A., Toxanov, S., Faizullin, A. (2020). Methods of Assessing the Scientific Activity of Scientists and Higher Education Institutions. 2020 IEEE 2nd International Conference on Advanced Trends in Information Theory (ATIT), 162–167. doi: http://doi.org/10.1109/atit50783.2020.9349348
  39. Biloshchytskyi, A., Kuchansky, A., Paliy, S., Biloshchytska, S., Bronin, S., Andrashko, Y. et. al. (2018). Development of technical component of the methodology for project­vector management of educational environments. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 2 (2 (92)), 4–13. doi: http://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2018.126301

Downloads

Published

2021-12-29

How to Cite

Xu, H., Kuchansky, A., & Gladka, M. (2021). Devising an individually oriented method for selection of scientific activity subjects for implementing scientific projects based on scientometric analysis. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 6(3 (114), 93–100. https://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2021.248040

Issue

Vol. 6 No. 3 (114) (2021): Control processes

Section

Control processes

License

Copyright (c) 2021 Huilin Xu, Alexander Kuchansky, Myroslava Gladka

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

The consolidation and conditions for the transfer of copyright (identification of authorship) is carried out in the License Agreement. In particular, the authors reserve the right to the authorship of their manuscript and transfer the first publication of this work to the journal under the terms of the Creative Commons CC BY license. At the same time, they have the right to conclude on their own additional agreements concerning the non-exclusive distribution of the work in the form in which it was published by this journal, but provided that the link to the first publication of the article in this journal is preserved.

A license agreement is a document in which the author warrants that he/she owns all copyright for the work (manuscript, article, etc.).
The authors, signing the License Agreement with TECHNOLOGY CENTER PC, have all rights to the further use of their work, provided that they link to our edition in which the work was published.
According to the terms of the License Agreement, the Publisher TECHNOLOGY CENTER PC does not take away your copyrights and receives permission from the authors to use and dissemination of the publication through the world's scientific resources (own electronic resources, scientometric databases, repositories, libraries, etc.).
In the absence of a signed License Agreement or in the absence of this agreement of identifiers allowing to identify the identity of the author, the editors have no right to work with the manuscript.
It is important to remember that there is another type of agreement between authors and publishers – when copyright is transferred from the authors to the publisher. In this case, the authors lose ownership of their work and may not use it in any way.