Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40989399›Full record

ArticlePeerJ. Computer science2025

Identification of core sub-team on scientific collaboration networks with Shapley method.

Lixin Zhou, Chen Liu, Xue Song

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ. Computer science, 2025. 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.

Lixin ZhouSchool of Intelligent Emergency Management, University of Shanghai for Science and Technology, Shanghai, China.
Chen LiuSchool of Intelligent Emergency Management, University of Shanghai for Science and Technology, Shanghai, China.
Xue SongBusiness School, University of Shanghai for Science and Technology, Shanghai, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Identifying the core sub-teams that drive productivity in scientific collaboration networks is essential for research evaluation and team management. However, existing methods typically rank individual researchers by bibliometric impact or select structurally cohesive clusters, but rarely account for both collaboration patterns and joint scientific output. To address this limitation, we propose a novel two-dimensional framework that integrates network topology with research performance to identify core sub-teams. Specifically, we measure each sub-team's marginal structural contribution using the Shapley value and quantify its collective impact using a sub-team H-index. To efficiently identify high-contributing sub-teams, we employ the Monte Carlo Tree Search algorithm, along with an approximation strategy to estimate Shapley values under computational constraints. We evaluate our method on 61 real-world scientific collaboration teams from Web of Science and Baidu Scholar data. Experimental results validate the effectiveness of our method in identifying core sub-teams, with the highest collaborative and citation impact. The proposed method offers a valuable analytical tool for research managers and funding agencies seeking to locate high-impact collaborative clusters, and it provides a generalizable framework for studies requiring the integration of structural and performance-based indicators in network analysis.

Indexed as

Core sub-teamMCTSScientific collaboration networksShapley value analysis

Identifiers

PMID40989399
PMCPMC12453774

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.