Search bioRxivSearch

bioRxiv · 10.1101/518605

Do Synthesis Centers Synthesize? A Semantic Analysis of Diversity and Performance

Abstract

Synthesis centers are a recently-developed form of scientific organization that catalyzes and supports a form of interdisciplinary research that integrates diverse theories, methods and data across spatial or temporal scales, scientific phenomena, and forms of expertise to increase the generality, parsimony, applicability, or empirical soundness of scientific explanations. Research has shown the synthesis working group to be a distinctive form of scientific collaboration that reliably produces consequential, high-impact publications, but no one has asked: do synthesis working groups produce publications that are substantially more diverse than those produced outside of synthesis centers, and if so, how and with what effects? We have investigated these questions through a novel textual analysis. We found that if diversity is measured solely by mean difference in the Rao-Stirling (aggregate) measure of diversity, then the answer is no. But synthesis center papers have significantly greater variety and balance, but significantly lower disparity, than papers in the reference corpus. Synthesis center influence is mediated by the greater size of synthesis center collaborations (numbers of authors, distinct institutions, and references) but even when taking size into account, there is a persistent direct effect: synthesis center papers have significantly greater variety and balance, but less disparity, than papers in the reference corpus. We conclude by inviting further exploration of what this novel textual analysis approach might reveal about interdisciplinary research and by offering some practical implications of our results.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Hackett, E. J., Leahey, E., Parker, J. N., Rafols, I., Hampton, S., Corte, U., Drake, J. M., Penders, B., Sheble, L., Vermeulen, N., Vision, T.. 2019-01-13. Do Synthesis Centers Synthesize? A Semantic Analysis of Diversity and Performance. https://doi.org/10.1101/518605

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related preprints

Evaluating Large Language Models as Tools to Navigate Researchers in Rapidly Evolving Research Landscapes: A Case Study in Cancer Drug Response Prediction

Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as promising tools for assisting researchers in automating and accelerating the synthesis of literature reviews. However, their reliability is a significant concern due to issues like factual inaccuracies and hallucinations. The key question is whether LLMs can reliably provide comprehensive, up-to-date overviews and analyses. This study evaluates the performance of three leading LLMs (OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google's Gemini, and DeepSeek) on the complex task of generating a comprehensive survey paper on deep learning for cancer Drug Response Prediction (DRP). By testing both standard and Deep Research (DR) / Deep Think (DT) modes of LLMs with prompts of varying detail, this paper assesses key academic dimensions, including reference management, content quality, and analytical depth. Key findings reveal that while DR modes of LLMs significantly improve reliability by eliminating hallucinations, performance variations exist across models and prompts. A trade-off between reference quantity and integration quality was observed, and even the best-performing models lacked the analytical depth of human experts, often requiring extensive human supervision. The study concludes that LLMs currently serve as powerful assistive tools but still cannot replace the critical validation and synthesis provided by human researchers. Choosing the best LLM to use depends on the task in hand, while several strategies can be implemented to improve the produced output.

scientific communication and education

Delivering on the Vision of Bench to Bedside: A Rare Disease Funding Community Collaboration to Develop Effective Therapies for Neurofibromatosis Type 1 Tumors

The time from target identification to new drug approval is often measured in decades. This can be even more challenging for rare diseases. Indeed, 95% of rare diseases do not have a specific therapy approved. Coordinated efforts to support research along the drug development pipeline can provide long term and comprehensive support to enable scientific breakthroughs for rare diseases. However, this requires coordination across multiple stakeholders. The present article analyzes the funding efforts of four major federal and philanthropic organizations to accelerate the advancement of MEK inhibitors to human clinical trials for NF1-associated tumors.

scientific communication and education

Investigating on-road lane maintenance and speed regulation in post-stroke driving: a pilot case-control study

The post-stroke population is expected to rise and the cohort of post-stroke individuals who wish to return to driving is likely to rapidly increase too. Stroke can adversely affect coordination and judgement of drivers due to the executive dysfunction, which is relatively common in the post-stroke population but often undetected. Quantitatively examining vehicle control performance in post-stroke driving becomes essential to inspect whether and where post-stroke drivers are risky. To date, it is unclear as to which indicators, such as lane keeping or speed control, can differentiate driving performance of post-stroke drivers from that of normal (neurotypical) older drivers. By employing a case-control design using advanced vehicle movement tracking and analysis technology, this pilot study aimed to compare the variations in driving trajectory, lane keeping and speed control between the two groups using spatial and statistical techniques. The results showed that the mean Standard Deviation of Lane Deviation (SDLD) in post-stroke participants was higher than those of normal participants in complex driving tasks (U-turn and left turn) but almost the same in simple driving tasks (straight-line sections). No statistically significant differences were found in the speed maintenance between the post-stroke drivers and the normal adults. The findings indicate that, although older drivers can still drive as they need to after a stroke, the decline in cognitive abilities still imposes higher cognitive workload and more effort for post-stroke older drivers. Future studies can investigate post-stroke adults driving behaviour at more challenging driving scenarios, or design driving intervention program to improve their executive function in driving.

scientific communication and education