Click on any of the maps to load a high-resolution (vector-based) PDF file.
Orange circles represent fields, with larger, darker circles indicating larger field size as measured by Eigenfactor® score. Blue arrows represent citation flow between fields. An arrow from field A to field B indicates citation traffic from A to B, with larger, darker arrows indicating higher citation volume.
The map was creating using our information flow method for mapping large networks. Using data from Thomson-Reuters 2004 Journal Citation Reports (JCR), we partitioned 6,128 journals connected by 6,434,916 citations into 88 modules. For visual simplicity, we show only the most important links, namely those that a random surfer traverses at least once in 5000 steps, and the modules that are connected by these links. You can make your own maps by going to mapequation.org.
Our map browser allows you to explore this map dynamically in greater detail.
This map of the social sciences was creating using the same methods describe above on the set of social science journals listed in the Journal Citation Reports. This figure was originally published in Rosvall and Bergstrom (2008): PNAS 105:1118-1123
We created this map by clustering 1.7 million articles in the field of computer science, using the map equation approach to analyze data from Microsoft Academic Search. The image was originally published in D. Butler, Nature (2011) 476:18.
The two maps above show the flow of citations between the fields of Ecology and Evolution and the field of Medicine. These maps use the map equation on journal-level citation data from the Journal Citation Reports. All direct and two-step links between evolution and medicine are highlighted in light blue; direct citations from evolution to medicine are shown in 2004 in dark blue. Citations between these two fields increased many-fold from 1995 to 2004. The 2004 map was originally published in Stearns and Nesse (2008) Evolutionary Applications 1:28-48. It was also published in Science (2009) 324:162.
This map of the sciences was created by clustering journal-level citation data from the 2004 edition of the Thomson-Reuters Journal Citation Reports, using the Hierarchical Map Equation methodology (Bergstrom and Rosvall 2010). At the highest level, scholarship splits into four domains: the life sciences, the social sciences, the earth sciences, and the physical sciences. The physical sciences are further subdivided into a chemistry and physics cluster, and a mathematics and engineering cluster. Each domain or cluster is yet further subdivide in fields, incaded by the colored discs. An arrow from field A to field B indicates citation traffic from A to B, with larger, darker arrows indicating higher citation volume. For visual simplicity, we show only the most import ant links in the network. The figure was originally published in Rosvall and Bergstrom (2010) PLoS One 6:e18209.
This map, constructed using journal-level citation data from the Journal Citation reports, highlights the role of neuroeconomics in bringing together research in economics and in neuroscience. In 1997, there were no citations from either of these disciplines to the other. In 2010, we observe 195 citations from economics journals to neuroscience journals, and 74 citations from neuroscience journals to economics journals. These are the Eigenfactor results mentioned in The Chronicle article about neuroeconomics.