4.5 Article

A SIR epidemic model for citation dynamics

Journal

EUROPEAN PHYSICAL JOURNAL PLUS
Volume 136, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1140/epjp/s13360-021-01199-0

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (FAPESP) [2020/03041-3]
  2. Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior-Brasil (CAPES) [001]
  3. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico (CNPq)
  4. [305058/2017-7]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study of citations in scientific literature, also known as the 'science of science,' reveals that citations have a cascading effect and can explain many patterns in citation behavior. By using the SIR epidemic model, researchers can gain insights into the citation dynamics of well-cited papers and their impact on academic communities. There is a good, though not perfect, agreement between journal rankings based on epidemiological parameters and impact factors.
The study of citations in the scientific literature crosses the boundaries between the traditional branches of science and stands on its own as a most profitable research field dubbed the 'science of science.' Although the understanding of the citation histories of individual papers involves many intangible factors, the basic assumption that citations beget citations can explain most features of the empirical citation patterns. Here, we use the SIR epidemic model as a mechanistic model for the citation dynamics of well-cited papers published in selected journals of the American Physical Society. The estimated epidemiological parameters offer insight into unknown quantities as the size of the community that could cite a paper and its ultimate impact on that community. We find a good, though imperfect, agreement between the rank of the journals obtained using the epidemiological parameters and the impact factor rank.Graphic abstract

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available