

The Map of Science: a directed citation graph showing the interdependence of fields - DaniFong
http://infoproc.blogspot.com/2008/12/map-of-science.html

======
robg
If neuroscience is ever going to truly succeed, that link with mathematics
better get more firmly established (even as it's surely underestimated based
on the journals sampled). With the number of neurons and possible synapses,
there needs to be advanced computational work to tame the complexity. The NIPS
conference, for instance, is already decently big. But we need many more folks
from that physics and engineering cluster.

~~~
DaniFong
Hah, nice catch!

It seems to me (though I am very biased!) that most of the landmark papers in
the aggregate behavior of neural networks are mostly in physics (eg: Hopfield
networks) and in computer science (eg: Perceptrons, Minsky).

~~~
robg
You're right, but it quickly moved away from physics. McClelland and Rumelhart
also did the seminal work in cognitive science in the 80s.

Here's an upcoming review: [http://www-
psych.stanford.edu/~jlm/papers/McClellandIPTOPiCS...](http://www-
psych.stanford.edu/~jlm/papers/McClellandIPTOPiCS.pdf)

Then there are folks like Sejnowski
(<http://www.salk.edu/faculty/sejnowski.html>;
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_Sejnowski>) who pushed the field more into
biology.

Still, I'm really surprised by the current chasm, if that map is reflective of
the state of the field.

EDIT: For spelling.

~~~
DaniFong
Thanks for the links.

~~~
robg
Happy to help. I learn so much around here, it's rare I can return the favor.

------
mct
See also <http://www.mapofscience.com/>

------
JacobAldridge
Since there have been several comments about what it should look like or
possible errors, I note the original source is from 2004.

<http://www.eigenfactor.org/map/maps.htm>

Have there been major changes in four years? Don't ask me - my Journalism
degree didn't even warrant its own dot on the social sciences map.

------
bbgm
Eigenfactor is very cool (as is Carl) and allows you to do stuff like this

[http://plindenbaum.blogspot.com/2008/06/pubmed-impact-
factor...](http://plindenbaum.blogspot.com/2008/06/pubmed-impact-factors-
sorting-and.html)

Wish it were more mainstream since there are a lot of interesting
possibilities.

------
tsally
Looks like no one cites Computer Science papers. Not surprising, but
interesting.

------
manny
Mathematics and chemistry need to be bigger.

Hell, maybe they are and its really the map that is inaccurate...

