In a previous post, I looked at how Google Scholar ranks co-authors. While I had the data available I wondered whether paper authorship could be used in other ways. A few months back, John Cook posted about using Jaccard index and jazz albums. The idea is to look at the players on two jazz albums and examine the overlap.
Pandoc-flavored Markdown makes it really easy to cite and reference things. You can write something like this (assuming you use this references.bib BibTeX file): --- title: "Some title" bibliography: references.bib --- According to @Lovelace:1842, computers can calculate things.
My longstanding workflow for writing, citing, and PDF management When I started my first master’s degree program in 2008, I decided to stop using Word for all my academic writing and instead use plain text Markdown for everything. Markdown itself had been a thing for 4 years, and MultiMarkdown—a pandoc-like extension of Markdown that could handle BibTeX bibliographies—was brand new.
A new R package, cffr, has beendeveloped,peer-reviewed byrOpenSci and accepted by CRAN. Thispackage has a single purpose: to create a valid CITATION.cff file using themetadata of any R package.CITATION.cff files and why they matter A Citation File Format (CFF) is aplain text file with human- and machine-readable citation information forsoftware (and datasets)1. Under the hood, a CFF file is a YAML file.
I teach R to a lot of scientists, those that are new to science (i.e. students)as well as more established scientists, new to R.I find that after all their struggles of dealing with dates,or remembering where to put the comma, they’re so grateful to actual have an analysis,that they often forget or aren’t aware of the next steps.
Scientists rarely cite research software they use as part of a research project. As a consequence, the software and the time spent developing and maintaining it becomes an invisible scholarly contribution. Furthermore, this lack of visibility means that incentives to produce high quality, sustainable software are missing. Among many reasons why software is not cited, one is the lack of a clear citation information from package developers.
Our website is based on Markdown content rendered with Hugo.Markdown content is in some cases knit from R Markdown, but with less functionality than if one rendered R Markdown to html as in the blogdown default.In particular, we cannot use the usual BibTex + CSL + Pandoc-citeproc dance to handle a bibliography.Thankfully, using the rOpenSci package RefManageR, we can still make our own bibliography from a BibTeX file without formatting
citecorp is a new (hit CRAN in late August) R package for working with data from theOpenCitations Corpus (OCC).OpenCitations, run by David Shotton and Silvio Peroni,houses the OCC, an open repository of scholarly citation dataunder the very open CC0 license.
Time for an update to a previous post. For the past few years, I have been using an automated process to track citations to my lab’s work on Google Scholar (details of how to set this up are at the end of this post). Due to the nature of how Google Scholar tracks citations, it means that citations get added (hooray!) but might be removed (booo!). Using a daily scrape of the data it is possible to watch this happening.
I read this recent paper about very highly cited papers and science funding in the UK. The paper itself was not very good, but the dataset which underlies the paper is something to behold, as I’ll explain below. The idea behind the paper was to examine very highly cited papers in biomedicine with a connection to the UK. Have those authors been successful in getting funding from MRC, Wellcome Trust or NIHR?