{ "version": "https://jsonfeed.org/version/1.1", "title": "chem-bla-ics", "description": "Chemblaics (pronounced chem-bla-ics) is the science that uses open science and computers to solve problems in chemistry, biochemistry and related fields.", "home_page_url": "https://chem-bla-ics.linkedchemistry.info/", "feed_url": "https://chem-bla-ics.linkedchemistry.info/2024/08/11/scholarly-discussions.json", "icon": "https://chem-bla-ics.linkedchemistry.info/assets/images/chem-bla-ics_logo.png", "language": "en", "authors": [ { "name": "Egon Willighagen", "url": "https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7542-0286", "_orcid": "0000-0001-7542-0286" } ], "items": [ { "id": "https://doi.org/10.59350/y9chc-zb166", "url": "https://chem-bla-ics.linkedchemistry.info/2024/08/11/scholarly-discussions.html", "title": "Scholarly discussions through the eyes of CiTO (and Wikidata)", "content_html": "

Diabetes was already discussed in literature back in 1838-1839 (doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(02)96038-1,\ndoi:10.1016/S0140-6736(02)96066-6, and doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(02)83966-6).\nThese three papers show a short discussion. Papers were a lot shorter back in the days, and the discussion actually shows why papers are longer now\n(tho I am not sure they really got sufficiently more reproducible, but that’s another discussion).

\n\n

Traditional citation counts do not make this discussion obvious, but if we make our publishing sufficiently FAIR (it’s far from that, right now),\nthen we can get a step closer. For example, with the Citation Typing Ontology\nwe can show how the papers relate to each other:

\n\n

\"\"

\n\n

This network is based on public knowledge in Wikidata and actually can be easily reproduced by anyone\nwith this query:

\n\n
#defaultView:Graph\nSELECT DISTINCT ?focus1 ?focus1Label ?focus2 ?focus2Label ?edgeLabel WHERE {\n  VALUES ?focus1 { wd:Q124174475 wd:Q124174776 wd:Q124174815 }\n  VALUES ?focus2 { wd:Q124174475 wd:Q124174776 wd:Q124174815 }\n  ?focus1 p:P2860 ?citation .\n  ?citation ps:P2860 ?focus2 ; pq:P3712 ?edge .\n  ?edge rdfs:label ?edgeLabel . FILTER(LANG(?edgeLabel) = \"en\")\n  ?focus1 rdfs:label ?focus1Label . FILTER(LANG(?focus1Label) = \"en\")\n  ?focus2 rdfs:label ?focus2Label . FILTER(LANG(?focus2Label) = \"en\")\n}\n
\n\n

The two “focus” values are an identical list of the articles I want to see. To make sure to get citations between all of them,\nI have to give them twice.

\n\n

In the above example I have used VALUES for this, but I can also generate the controlled list of items between the citations\nI want to visualize with any SPARQL fragment too. This query does that (or here as\nGitHub Gist, but something else too: it uses a trick I learned\nfrom Finn Nielsen from this patch\nfrom the Scholia project (doi:10.1007/978-3-319-70407-4_36)).

\n\n

Here, I select the articles by replacing the above VALUES lines with this fragment (P50 is ‘author’ and Q20895241 is me in Wikidata):

\n\n
  ?focus1 wdt:P50 wd:Q20895241 .\n  ?focus2 wdt:P50 wd:Q20895241 .\n
\n\n

And, to be honest, then I get this network which is much richer than I expected:

\n\n

\"\"

\n\n

I wonder how far we can push this. Can we also do this for the Journal of Cheminformatics?\nAfter all, this journal had a CiTO Pilot and, indeed,\nthe results do not disappoint! All I had to do was replace the focus section:

\n\n
  ?focus1 wdt:P1433 wd:Q6294930 .\n  ?focus2 wdt:P1433 wd:Q6294930 .\n
\n\n

References

\n
\n
DR. CLANNY’S CASE OF DIABETES. (1838). The Lancet, 30(780), 703. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(02)96066-6 CrossRef Scholia
\n
Nielsen, F. Å., Mietchen, D., & Willighagen, E. (2017). Scholia, Scientometrics and Wikidata. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science (pp. 237–259). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70407-4_36 CrossRef Scholia
\n
Reid Clanny, W. (1839). SUGAR IN THE BLOOD OF DIABETIC PATIENTS. The Lancet, 31(804), 670. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(02)83966-6 CrossRef Scholia
\n
REIDCLANNY, W., & REIDCLANNY, W. (1838). CASE OF DIABETES. The Lancet, 30(779), 655–657. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(02)96038-1 CrossRef Scholia
\n
", "summary": "Diabetes was already discussed in literature back in 1838-1839 (doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(02)96038-1, doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(02)96066-6, and doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(02)83966-6). These three papers show a short discussion. Papers were a lot shorter back in the days, and the discussion actually shows why papers are longer now (tho I am not sure they really got sufficiently more reproducible, but that’s another discussion).", "image": "https://chem-bla-ics.linkedchemistry.info/assets/images/clannyNetwork.png", "date_published": "2024-08-11T00:00:00+00:00", "date_modified": "2024-08-11T00:00:00+00:00", "tags": ["cito","wikidata"], "_references": [ { "url": "https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(02)96038-1", "doi": "10.1016/S0140-6736(02)96038-1" } , { "url": "https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(02)96066-6", "doi": "10.1016/S0140-6736(02)96066-6" } , { "url": "https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(02)83966-6", "doi": "10.1016/S0140-6736(02)83966-6" } , { "url": "https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70407-4_36", "doi": "10.1007/978-3-319-70407-4_36" } ], "authors": [ { "name": "Egon Willighagen", "url": "https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7542-0286" } ] } ] }