Fionn Murtagh’s Blog

Themes: information economy, intellectual property, research

Innovation in Research Publishing and in Funding Proposals, both Quality and Quantifying

leave a comment »

How is this to be assessed: both the quantification of, and the quality of, innovation in research publications, and in research proposals requesting research funding.  This important paper, by me, and Michael Orlov and Boris Mirkin (Michael and Boris in the National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow): “Qualitative judgement of research impact: domain taxonomy as a fundamental framework for judgement of the quality of research”. 
This is published in Journal of Classification, vol. 35, pp. 5-28, 2018.   (Published article; preprint of this.)

In this article, Murtagh et al. (2018), we present the case for (i) stratification rather than ranking, (ii) qualitative analytics based on taxonomies of the domain. This work aims to be both monitoring and revealing, in regard to research work, towards decision-making, on the part of publication editors and research funders.

A very important issue raised: Horizon 2020 FET-Open (Future Emerging Technologies) recorded less than 1.4% successful research proposals. Ethically and in all respects, there should be analytics carried out in regard to the more than 98% rejected research funding proposals. This should lead to studying what has been proposed and then rejected, to know all that was proposed in regard to continuing importance to be carried out, and also what entire sets of objectives that had been at issue, and whether such objectives can be pursued in some other way.

When a Director of the main research funding agency in Ireland, this methodology was initially discussed in my Sixth Boole Lecture, April 2008, Boole Lecture Theatre, University College Cork, and published:
F. Murtagh, “The Correspondence Analysis platform for uncovering deep structure in data and information”, Sixth Boole Lecture, Computer Journal, 53 (3), 304-315, 2010.

This continues to be at issue in my most recent book, F. Murtagh, Data Science Foundations: Geometry and Topology of Complex Hierarchic Systems and Big Data Analytics, Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2017. (Publisher’s website.)

I will take this assessment of innovation in research publishing and relate that also to the relevance and the role of rejected journal submissions. That will be so important for the countries that now produce the vast majority of journal submissions. Motivation for this comes also from an outstanding research publication of mine, published in an innovative journal, and the previous submission to a journal where I had published previous work, that had a reviewer report with this statement: “This is not state of the art, it is all new work, therefore it must be rejected.”

Following that, for journal submissions, it may be useful to take such study to the research funding agencies in many countries, that I support in reviewing and recommending or not recommending research funding.

Advertisements

Written by Fionn Murtagh

2018/06/03 at 23:04

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: