Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Swift publication statistics: a comparison with other major observatories

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1212.2719 v2 pith:2Z7FTZKR submitted 2012-12-12 astro-ph.IM astro-ph.HE

classification astro-ph.IMastro-ph.HE
keywords swiftgrbsnumberyeardataotherpublicationscitations
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Swift is a satellite equipped with gamma-ray, X-ray, and optical-UV instruments aimed at discovering, localizing and collecting data from gamma-ray bursts (GRBs). Launched at the end of 2004, this small-size mission finds about a hundred GRBs per year, totaling more than 700 events as of 2012. In addition to GRBs, Swift observes other energetic events, such as AGNs, novae, and supernovae. Here we look at its success using bibliometric tools; that is the number of papers using Swift data and their impact (i.e., number of citations to those papers). We derived these for the publication years 2005 to 2011, and compared them with the same numbers for other major observatories. Swift provided data for 1101 papers in the interval 2005-2011, with 24 in the first year, to 287 in the last year. In 2011, Swift had more than double the number of publications as Subaru, it overcame Gemini by a large fraction, and reached Keck. It is getting closer to the ~400 publications of the successful high-energy missions XMM-Newton and Chandra, but is still far from the most productive telescopes VLT (over 500) and HST (almost 800). The overall average number of citations per paper, as of November 2012, is 28.3, which is comparable to the others, but lower than Keck (41.8). The science topics covered by Swift publications have changed from the first year, when over 80% of the papers were about GRBs, while in 2011 it was less than 30%.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Pith tools