Аннотації
07.03.2019
Проаналізовано останні наукові дослідження, які полягають у оцінюванні науково-дослідної діяльності суб’єктів та об’єктів наукових середовищ. Отримані за результатами аналізу висновки можуть бути основою створення критерію або комплексу критеріїв з вибору наукових партнерів для створення спільних проектів та проведення спільної науково-дослідної діяльності в рамках консорціумів, наукових спільнот тощо. Визначено, що кожна із систем оцінювання формує власні переваги тих або інших критеріїв, визначає власні вагові коефіцієнти, в результаті один і той же об’єкт або суб’єкт може мати різну суму балів. В роботі описано основні недоліки відомих методів оцінювання наукової діяльності та запропоновано шляхи їх вирішення.
The work analyzes the latest scientific researches which cover the assessment of the research activities of subjects and objects of scientific environments. The conclusions obtained from the analysis can be the basis for establishing a criterion or a set of criteria for choosing scientific partners to create collaborative projects and conduct joint research activities within consortia, scientific communities, etc. It is determined that each of the evaluation systems generates own advantages of certain criteria, defines own weight coefficients, as a result, one and the same object or subject may have different sum of points. The paper describes the main disadvantages of well-known methods for evaluating scientific activity and proposes ways of their solution.
1. Biloshchytskyi, A., Kuchansky, A., Andrashko, Yu., Biloshchytska, ., Kuzka, O., & Terentyev, O. (2017). Evaluation methods of the results of scientific research activity of scientists based on the analysis of publication citations. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 3/2 (87), 4–10. doi: 10.15587/1729-4061.2017.103651
2. Biloshchytskyi, A., Myronov, O., Reznik, R., Kuchansky, A., Andrashko, Yu., Paliy, S. & et al. (2017). A method to evaluate the scientific activity quality of HEIs based on a scientometric subjects presentation model. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 6/2 (90), 16–22. doi: 10.15587/1729-4061.2017.118377
3. Biloshchytskyi, A., Kuchansky, A., Andrashko, Yu., Biloshchytska, S., Dubnytska, A. & Vatskel, V. (2017). The Method of the Scientific Directions Potential Forecasting in Infocommunication Systems of an Assessment of the Research Activity Results. 2017 IEEE International Conference «Problems of Infocommunications. Science and Technology» (PIC S&T). P. 69–72. doi: 10.1109/INFOCOMMST.2017.8246352
4. Biloshchytskyi, А., Kuchansky, A., Andrashko, Yu., Biloshchytska, S. & Kuzka О. (2017). Conceptual model of information technology for evaluating the results of research work. Management of development of complex systems, 30, 163–168.
5. Biloshchytskyi, A., Kuchansky, А., Andrashko, Yu., Paliy, S., Biloshchytska, S., Bronin, S. & et al. (2018). Development of technical component of the methodology for project-vector management of educational environment. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 2/2 (92), 4–13. doi: 10.15587/1729-4061.2018.126301
6. Kuchansky, А., Andrashko, Yu., Biloshchytskyi, А., Danchenko, O., Ilarionov, O., Vatskel, I. & et al. (2018). The method for evaluation of educational environment subjects’ performance based on the calculation of volumes of m-simplexes. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 2/4 (92), 15–25. doi: 10.15587/1729-4061.2018.126287
7. Biloshchytskyi, A., Biloshchytska, S., Kuchansky, А., Bielova, O. & Andrashko, Yu. (2018). Infocommunication system of scientific activity management on the basis of project-vector methodology. 2018 14th International Conference on Advanced Trends in Radioelecrtronics, Telecommunications and Computer Engineering (TCSET), Lviv – Slavske. P. 200–203. doi: 10.1109/TCSET.2018.8336186
8. Otradskaya, T., Gogunskii, V., Antoshchuk, S. & Kolesnikov, O. (2016). Development of parametric model of prediction and evaluation of the quality level of educational institutions. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 5/3 (83), 12–21. doi: 10.15587/1729-4061.2016.80790
9. Morozov, V., Stechenko, G. & Kolomiiets, A. (2017). «Learning Through Practice» in IT Management Projects Master Program Implementation Approach. 2017 9th IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Data Acquisition and Advanced Computing Systems: Technology and Applications (IDAACS): Bucharest, 2, 935–939. doi: 10.1109/IDAACS.2017.8095223
10. Morozov, V., Kalnichenko, O. & Liubyma, I. (2017). Projects change management in based on the projects configuration management for developing complex projects. 2017 9th IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Data Acquisition and Advanced Computing Systems: Technology and Applications (IDAACS): Bucharest, 2, 939–942. doi: 10.1109 / IDAACS.2017.8095224
11. Kolesnіkov, О., Gogunskii, V., Kolesnіkova, K., Lukianov, D. & Olekh, T. (2016). Development of the model of interaction among the project, team of project and project environment in project system. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 5/9 (83), 20–26. doi: 10.15587/1729-4061.2016.80769
12. Kolesnikova, K., Lukianov, D., Gogunskii, V., Iakovenko, V., Oborska, G., Negri, A. & et al. (2017). Communication management in social networks for the actualization of publications in the world scientific community on the example of the network researchgate. Eastern-European Journal Of Enterprise Technologies, 4/3 (88), 27–35. doi:10.15587/1729-4061.2017.108589
13. Teslia, I. & Latysheva, T. (2016). Development of conceptual frameworks of matrix management of project and programme portfolios. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 1/3 (79), 12–18. doi: 10.15587/1729-4061.2016.61153
14. Fu, F., Hauert, C., Nowak, M.A. & Wang, L. (2008). Reputation-based partner choice promotes cooperation in social networks, Physical Review, E 78, 026117.
15. Wagner, C.S. & Leydesdorff, L. (2005). Network structure, self-organization, and the growth of international collaboration in science, Research Policy, 34 (10), 1608–1618.
16. Zhang, S., & Poulin, D. (1996). Partnership Management Within the Virtual Enterprise in a Network. International Conference on Engineering Management and Control. Р. 645-650.
17. Talluri, S. & Baker, R.C. (1996). A quantitative Framework for Designing Efficient Business Process Alliances. International Conference on Engineering Management and Control. Р. 656-661.
18. Chu, X.N., Tso, S.K., Zhang, W.J. & Li, Q. (2000). Partners Selection for Virtual Enterprises. Proceedings of the 3th World Congress on Intelligent Control and Automation. Р. 164-168.
19. Feng, W.D., Chen, J. & Zhao, C.J. (2000). Partners Selection Process and Optimization Model for Virtual corporations Based on Genetic Algorithms. Journal of Tsinghua University (Science and Technology), 40, 120-124.
20. Huilin, Xu, &Andrashko, Yu. (2019). The problem of partnership choices for scientific projects cooperation. Management of development of complex systems, 37, 111–115.
21. Holovenkin, V. (2008). Determination of ratings of scientific and pedagogical workers as a lever for achieving the criteria of a research university. Kiev Polytechnic, 31. Retrieved from: http://kpi.ua/831-5
22. Bushuyev, S., Biloshchytskyi, A. & Gogunskyi, V. (2014). Science-based bases: characteristics, possibilities and tasks. Management of development of complex systems, 18, 145-152.
23. Biloshchytskyi, A., Kuchansky, A., Andrashko, Yu., Biloshchytska, S., Kuzka, O., Shabala, Ye. & et al. (2017). A method for the identification of scientists' research areas based on a cluster analysis of scientific publications. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 5/2 (89), 4–10. doi:10.15587/1729-4061.2017.112323
24. Myronov, O. & Biloshchytskyi, A. (2015). Development of a mathematical model for the representation, management and evaluation of scientometric subjects. Management of development of complex systems, 23/1, 147–152.
25. Hirsch, J.E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. PNAS, 102/46, 16569–16572. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0507655102
26. Egghe, L. (2006). Theory and practice of the g-index. Scientometrics, 69/1, 131–152. doi:10.1007/s11192-006-0144-7
27. Zhang, C.-T. (2009). The e-Index, Complementing the h-Index for Excess Citations. PLoS ONE, 4/5, e5429. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0005429
28. Kosmulski, М. (2006). A new Hirsch-type index saves time and works equally well as the original h-index. International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, 3/2, 4–6.
29. Egghe, L. (2010). The Hirsch index and related impact measures. TOC, 44/1, 65-114. doi: 10.1002/aris.2010. 1440440109