# Bibliometric Analysis of Social Robotics Research: Identifying Research Trends and Knowledgebase
## 3 Results
### Research Trends in Social Robotics
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline \# & **Cluster Label** & **Country** & **Institution** & **Journals/Conferences** & **Authors** \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{1} & & USA & Osaka Univ. & \multirow{3}{*}{IJSR**} \\  & & Japan & Univ. Twente & \\  & & UK & Advanced Telecom. - Research & \\  & & Germany & Inst. & & \\  & & The Netherlands & Univ. Washington & & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{2} & & USA & Univ. Bielefeld & \multirow{3}{*}{LNAI} & [PERSON] \\  & & Japan & Univ. Hertfordshire & & \\  & & UK & Osaka Univ. & & \\  & & Germany & MIT & & \\  & & France & & \\  & & France & & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{3} & & & USA & Univ. Hertfordshire & \multirow{3}{*}{IJSR} & [PERSON] \\  & & UK & Vige Univ. Bressel & & \\  & & Japan & Univ. Bielefeld & \multirow{3}{*}{LNAI} & [PERSON] \\  & & France & Osaka Univ. & & \\ \cline{1-1}  & & Italy & Univ. Bakesboli & & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{4} & & USA & Ecole Polytech Lausanne & LNCS & [PERSON] \\  & & Belgium & Univ. Libre Bruelles & LNAI & [PERSON] \\  & & Italy & NYU & Adaptive Behavior & \multirow{3}{*}{[PERSON] \\  & & UK & Georgia Inst. Technol. & \\  & & Switzerland & Univ. Lusanne & & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{5} & & USA & Univ. Carlos III Madrid & \multirow{3}{*}{ACM/IEEE HRI} & [PERSON] [PERSON] \\  & & Japan & Osaka Univ. & & \\ \cline{1-1}  & & Netherlands & Univ. Toronto & & \\ \cline{1-1}  & & Spain & Tech. Univ. Munich & & \\ \cline{1-1}  & & UK & Eindhoven Univ. Technol. & & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{6} & & USA & Roswell Park Cancer Inst. & \multirow{3}{*}{Journal of Endourology} & Guru, K.A. \\  & & UK & Univ. N. Carolina & & \\ \cline{1-1}  & & Italy & Cleveland Clinic & & \\ \cline{1-1}  & & South Korea & Univ. Michigan & & \\ \cline{1-1}  & & France & & \\ \cline{1-1}  & & France & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Bibliometric taxonomy of social robotics. Most frequent countries, institutions, publishers and authors are shown. Social robotics is a heterogeneous field. The classification includes a cluster of case studies for specific applications, technologies and assessment tools. On average, clusters span from 2010-2013, with swarm robotics and the assessment of robotic surgery being the oldest and youngest clusters, respectively. The USA is the country with the largest participation in every cluster, followed by England and Japan. At the institution level, there is no dominance. We identified 32 different institutions frequently publishing in either cluster, with Osaka University appearing in the top ranking of four of them being the most frequent one. In the case of journals and conferences, lecture notes on artificial intelligence appears in seven of the clusters, while the International Journal of Social Robotics and the ACM-IEEE international conference on human robot interaction appear in five. An overall distribution of the largest publishing venues is shown in Table 4. Finally, the authors having more publications in the network are [PERSON], [PERSON], [PERSON], [PERSON], [PERSON], [PERSON], [PERSON], [PERSON] and [PERSON]. In the following sections, we discuss the contents of the clusters, highlighting the core aspects investigated within them. The first one, robots as social partners, collects case studies where researchers observe individuals interacting with robots in order to understand patterns of human behavior or explore the challenge in building and designing robots for specific scenarios of interaction. In this cluster, robots are usually applied as caregivers, game partners or guides [29, 36]. The cluster also covers literature on collaborative robotics [37], a type of highly autonomous, mobile robot that can also serve as a collaborator in industrial settings. We found research on the challenges of task planning and programming of this type of robotics, pointing towards the need for better performance evaluation tools, ease of adaptability and safety and compliance [38]. Cluster 2, human factors and ergonomics in human robot interaction, focuses on the human views of robotics.