Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30735548›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Measuring national capability over big science's multidisciplinarity: A case study of nuclear fusion research.

Hyunuk Kim, Inho Hong, Woo-Sung Jung

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Hyunuk KimDepartment of Industrial and Management Engineering, Pohang University of Science and Technology, Pohang, Republic of Korea.
Inho HongDepartment of Physics, Pohang University of Science and Technology, Pohang, Republic of Korea.
Woo-Sung JungDepartment of Industrial and Management Engineering, Pohang University of Science and Technology, Pohang, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-9590-3859

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the era of big science, countries allocate big research and development budgets to large scientific facilities that boost collaboration and research capability. A nuclear fusion device called the "tokamak" is a source of great interest for many countries because it ideally generates sustainable energy expected to solve the energy crisis in the future. Here, to explore the scientific effects of tokamaks, we map a country's research capability in nuclear fusion research with normalized revealed comparative advantage on five topical clusters-material, plasma, device, diagnostics, and simulation-detected through a dynamic topic model. Our approach captures not only the growth of China, India, and the Republic of Korea but also the decline of Canada, Japan, Sweden, and the Netherlands. Time points of their rise and fall are related to tokamak operation, highlighting the importance of large facilities in big science. The gravity model points out that two countries collaborate less in device, diagnostics, and plasma research if they have comparative advantages in different topics. This relation is a unique feature of nuclear fusion compared to other science fields. Our results can be used and extended when building national policies for big science.

Indexed as

Nuclear FusionResearchBibliographies as TopicCanadaChinaHumansIndiaInterdisciplinary StudiesJapanModels, TheoreticalNetherlandsNuclear PhysicsRenewable EnergyRepublic of KoreaSweden

Identifiers

PMID30735548
PMCPMC6368312

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.