Claims

Coauthorship analysis of workshop organizers yields a 2,197-author network with six communities, 80% of nodes in the largest three, spanning diverse research lineages

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 2 studies · 2 associational r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q2 i? The coauthorship network of 22 workshop organizers contained 2,197 authors and over 4,000 publications, with Louvain detection yielding six communities and 80% of nodes in the largest three. → coauth-1 q2 i? The main clusters reflect distinct lineages: one tied to Carnegie Mellon University and intelligent tutoring systems, one centered on writing and literacy technology, and one connected to engineering areas such as image processing. → coauth-2

Evidence

coauth-1

Risha, Z. & Roschelle, J. (2026, July). A bibliographic analysis of digital learning platforms as research infrastructure. Digital Promise. https://doi.org/10.51388/20.500.12265/305

q2 · i? · associational · r1

Coauthorship network analysis in the R package Bibliometrix over publications of 22 workshop organizers retrieved from OpenAlex; only three of six workshops were indexed. The analysis "resulted in six total communities, with the majority (80%) of nodes falling into the largest three."

"The network had a total size of 2,197 authors and over 4,000 publications. We used Louvain community detection technique (Blondel et al., 2008) to create clusters of researchers based on their shared publications."

coauth-2

Risha, Z. & Roschelle, J. (2026, July). A bibliographic analysis of digital learning platforms as research infrastructure. Digital Promise. https://doi.org/10.51388/20.500.12265/305

q2 · i? · associational · r1

Qualitative characterization of the three main clusters from the same coauthorship analysis: Community 2 tied to "Carnegie Mellon University", Community 3 focused on "technology for writing and literacy education", and Community 1 linked to organizer Richard Baraniuk's engineering focus such as "image processing".

"Many researchers in this group, or closely connected to it, had strong ties to Carnegie Mellon University."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id coauthorship-network-six-communities
title Coauthorship analysis of workshop organizers yields a 2,197-author network with six communities, 80% of nodes in the largest three, spanning diverse research lineages
description Coauthorship analysis of workshop organizers yields a 2,197-author network with six communities, 80% of nodes in the largest three, spanning diverse research lineages
status review
evidence_strength moderate
newest_evidence 2026
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-09
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 2 — coauth-1, coauth-2

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.