<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Map of Science</title>
	<atom:link href="http://metamodern.com/2009/05/20/a-map-of-science/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://metamodern.com/2009/05/20/a-map-of-science/</link>
	<description>The Trajectory of Technology</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 May 2012 11:03:22 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: A Map of Science &#124; Secularity (under construction)</title>
		<link>http://metamodern.com/2009/05/20/a-map-of-science/comment-page-1/#comment-4594</link>
		<dc:creator>A Map of Science &#124; Secularity (under construction)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 01:03:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://metamodern.com/?p=3720#comment-4594</guid>
		<description>[...] A Map of Science. Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post.   By Colin Mackay  0 [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] A Map of Science. Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post.   By Colin Mackay  0 [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Video of my Oxford nanotechnology lecture</title>
		<link>http://metamodern.com/2009/05/20/a-map-of-science/comment-page-1/#comment-4533</link>
		<dc:creator>Video of my Oxford nanotechnology lecture</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Dec 2011 12:55:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://metamodern.com/?p=3720#comment-4533</guid>
		<description>[...] A Map of Science [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] A Map of Science [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Good and popular</title>
		<link>http://metamodern.com/2009/05/20/a-map-of-science/comment-page-1/#comment-4153</link>
		<dc:creator>Good and popular</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Jan 2011 05:23:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://metamodern.com/?p=3720#comment-4153</guid>
		<description>[...] [read more...] [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] [read more...] [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Forrest Bennett</title>
		<link>http://metamodern.com/2009/05/20/a-map-of-science/comment-page-1/#comment-4123</link>
		<dc:creator>Forrest Bennett</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Dec 2010 01:25:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://metamodern.com/?p=3720#comment-4123</guid>
		<description>This paper shows 20 different versions of the kind map shown above, and then attempts to build various consensus versions. 

Toward a Consensus Map of Science
Richard Klavans and Kevin W. Boyack
Journal of the American Society for Information Science and 
Technology (2009), vol. 60(2), pages TBD. Digital Object Identifier: DOI: 10.1002/asi.20991

A consensus map of science is generated from an analysis of twenty existing maps of science. These twenty maps occur in three basic forms: hierarchical, centric, and non-centric (or circular). The consensus map, generated from consensus edges that occur in at least half of the input maps, emerges in a circular form. The ordering of areas is as follows: mathematics is (arbitrarily) placed at the top of the circle, and is followed clockwise by physics, physical chemistry, engineering, chemistry, earth sciences, biology, biochemistry, infectious diseases, medicine, health services, brain research, psychology, humanities, social sciences, and computer science. The link between computer science and mathematics completes the circle. If the lowest weighted edges are pruned from this consensus circular map, a hierarchical map stretching from mathematics to social sciences results. The circular map of science is found to have a high level of correspondence with the twenty existing maps, and has a variety of advantages over hierarchical and centric forms. A one-dimensional Riemannian version of the consensus map is also proposed. 

http://mapofscience.com/images/pdf/09_consensus.pdf</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This paper shows 20 different versions of the kind map shown above, and then attempts to build various consensus versions. </p>
<p>Toward a Consensus Map of Science<br />
Richard Klavans and Kevin W. Boyack<br />
Journal of the American Society for Information Science and<br />
Technology (2009), vol. 60(2), pages TBD. Digital Object Identifier: DOI: 10.1002/asi.20991</p>
<p>A consensus map of science is generated from an analysis of twenty existing maps of science. These twenty maps occur in three basic forms: hierarchical, centric, and non-centric (or circular). The consensus map, generated from consensus edges that occur in at least half of the input maps, emerges in a circular form. The ordering of areas is as follows: mathematics is (arbitrarily) placed at the top of the circle, and is followed clockwise by physics, physical chemistry, engineering, chemistry, earth sciences, biology, biochemistry, infectious diseases, medicine, health services, brain research, psychology, humanities, social sciences, and computer science. The link between computer science and mathematics completes the circle. If the lowest weighted edges are pruned from this consensus circular map, a hierarchical map stretching from mathematics to social sciences results. The circular map of science is found to have a high level of correspondence with the twenty existing maps, and has a variety of advantages over hierarchical and centric forms. A one-dimensional Riemannian version of the consensus map is also proposed. </p>
<p><a href="http://mapofscience.com/images/pdf/09_consensus.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://mapofscience.com/images/pdf/09_consensus.pdf</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chemists deserve more credit (2): &#160;&#160;&#160;The 150th anniversary &#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;of the first international science conference</title>
		<link>http://metamodern.com/2009/05/20/a-map-of-science/comment-page-1/#comment-3817</link>
		<dc:creator>Chemists deserve more credit (2): &#160;&#160;&#160;The 150th anniversary &#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;of the first international science conference</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Sep 2010 04:24:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://metamodern.com/?p=3720#comment-3817</guid>
		<description>[...] A Map of Science [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] A Map of Science [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Map of Science &#171; ScienceRoll</title>
		<link>http://metamodern.com/2009/05/20/a-map-of-science/comment-page-1/#comment-3773</link>
		<dc:creator>Map of Science &#171; ScienceRoll</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Sep 2010 17:15:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://metamodern.com/?p=3720#comment-3773</guid>
		<description>[...] knowledge. You may remember when Wired published the &#8220;milky way&#8221; map of science or the map contrsucted by Nature using 800,000 scientific papers. Although, I think, these didn&#8217;t let us closer to get a [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] knowledge. You may remember when Wired published the &#8220;milky way&#8221; map of science or the map contrsucted by Nature using 800,000 scientific papers. Although, I think, these didn&#8217;t let us closer to get a [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Map of Science &#124; Science Report &#124; Biology News, Economics News, Computer Science News, Mathematics News, Physics News, Psychology News</title>
		<link>http://metamodern.com/2009/05/20/a-map-of-science/comment-page-1/#comment-3764</link>
		<dc:creator>Map of Science &#124; Science Report &#124; Biology News, Economics News, Computer Science News, Mathematics News, Physics News, Psychology News</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Sep 2010 09:51:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://metamodern.com/?p=3720#comment-3764</guid>
		<description>[...] knowledge. You may remember when Wired published the &#8220;milky way&#8221; map of science or the map contrsucted by Nature using 800,000 scientific papers. Although, I think, these didn&#8217;t let us closer to get a [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] knowledge. You may remember when Wired published the &#8220;milky way&#8221; map of science or the map contrsucted by Nature using 800,000 scientific papers. Although, I think, these didn&#8217;t let us closer to get a [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Inquiry in Engineering, Design in Science: Completing the Matrix</title>
		<link>http://metamodern.com/2009/05/20/a-map-of-science/comment-page-1/#comment-3520</link>
		<dc:creator>Inquiry in Engineering, Design in Science: Completing the Matrix</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jun 2010 07:26:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://metamodern.com/?p=3720#comment-3520</guid>
		<description>[...] A Map of Science [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] A Map of Science [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

