# Citation Oriented AuthorRank for Scientific Publication Ranking
## 5 Conclusions  
In this paper, we aim to test whether and how topical AuthorRank can replace or enhance classical PageRank for publication ranking. From the results of our experiment, we can conclude that:  
(1) AuthorRank cannot replace PageRank for publication ranking. This conclusion is supported by the results from Tables 5 and 6. We also found that PRP with two priors, publication topic probability and citation transition probability, outperforms significantly the original topic-insensitive algorithm of PageRank, and is better than PRP with only the publication topic probability. (2) AuthorRank can improve publication ranking results, it also proves that the article written by influential authors often deserves a higher ranking in information retrieval. When we combine the results of PRP and AuthorRank by linear combination method and Cobb-Douglas combination, the results calculated by MAP and nDCG are better than PRP without AuthorRank. (3) By comparing the linear combination method with the Cobb-Douglas combination method, we found that calculating AuthorRank results by Average Author is the best method for improving publication ranking. This conclusion is supported by Tables 7-10. Although the Cobb-Douglas combination method for AuthorRank and PRP is better than the linear combination method, this advantage is not significant. We also found that AuthorRank is effective for assessing the importance of publications where content or citation metadata is missing or partially missing. When we do not have publication content information, we cannot use topic modeling to infer the topic distribution, but AuthorRank can still help us to estimate the prior probability of these papers. Conceptualization: X.L. ; methodology: [PERSON]; validation: [PERSON]; formal analysis: [PERSON]; data curation: [PERSON]; writing--original draft preparation: [PERSON]; writing--review and editing: [PERSON]; visualization: [PERSON]; supervision: [PERSON]; project administration: [PERSON]; funding acquisition: [PERSON]. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & **PRP\_2** & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**First Author**} & **Last Author** & **Max Author** & **Average Author** \\ \cline{2-6}  & & **\(\mathbf{\alpha=0.9}\)** & **\(\mathbf{\alpha=0.9}\)** & **\(\mathbf{\alpha=0.8}\)** & **\(\mathbf{\alpha=0.9}\)** \\ \hline nDCG@10 & 0.1229 & 0.1261 & 0.1257 & 0.1289 & 0.1319 \\ nDCG@30 & 0.1451 & 0.149 & 0.148 & 0.1489 & 0.1499 \\ nDCG@50 & 0.1621 & 0.1653 & 0.1641 & 0.1652 & 0.1666 \\ nDCG@100 & 0.1847 & 0.1871 & 0.1857 & 0.1881 & 0.1902 \\ nDCG@1000 & 0.2738 & 0.2764 & 0.2765 & 0.28 & 0.2813 \\ nDCG@all & 0.3445 & 0.3465 & 0.346 & 0.3472 & 0.3486 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 10: Cobb–Douglas Combination results (nDCG). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & **PRP\_2** & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**First Author**} & **Last Author** & **Max Author** & **Average Author** \\ \cline{2-6}  & & **\(\mathbf{\alpha=0.9}\)** & **\(\mathbf{\alpha=0.9}\)** & **\(\mathbf{\alpha=0.8}\)** & **\(\mathbf{\alpha=0.9}\)** \\ \hline MAP@10 & 0.2238 & 0.2309 & 0.2248 & 0.2314 & 0.2306 \\ MAP@30 & 0.1933 & 0.1953 & 0.1949 & 0.1966 & 0.1975 \\ MAP@50 & 0.1804 & 0.182 & 0.1809 & 0.1828 & 0.1845 \\ MAP@100 & 0.1619 & 0.1642 & 0.1637 & 0.163 & 0.1638 \\ MAP@1000 & 0.1199 & 0.1213 & 0.1199 & 0.1204 & 0.1209 \\ MAP@all & 0.0996 & 0.101 & 0.1009 & 0.1006 & 0.1013 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 9: Cobb–Douglas Combination results (MAP). **Funding:** This research was supported by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities, grant number 3132022289, the Liaoning Revitalization Talents Program, grant number XLYC1907084, the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation, grant number 2016M591421. **Institutional Review Board Statement:** Not applicable. **Informed Consent Statement:** Not applicable. **Data Availability Statement:** Not applicable. **Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest.