2026-09-18T19:51:29Zhttps://dspace.mit.edu/server/oai/requestoai:dspace.mit.edu:1721.1/1050322022-01-13T07:54:09Zcom_1721.1_7582com_1721.1_7581col_1721.1_131023
Carlo Ratti and Fiona Murray.
Claudel, Matthew (Matthew Christopher)
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Urban Studies and Planning.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Urban Studies and Planning
2016-10-25T19:50:23Z
2016-10-25T19:50:23Z
2016
2016
http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/105032
959613785
Thesis: S.M., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Urban Studies and Planning, 2016.
Cataloged from PDF version of thesis.
Includes bibliographical references (pages 59-62).
Academic research is increasingly cross-disciplinary and collaborative - around the globe and within institutions. In this context, what is the role and relevance of the campus? I examine the scholarly output and collaboration patterns of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology as they pertain to its interrelated organizational structures, including institutional affiliation and spatial configuration, over a 10-year time span. There are four significant results: 1. diverging trends in the composition of collaborative teams over time (size, faculty versus non-faculty, etc.) between papers and patents; 2. patterns of cross-building and cross-disciplinary collaboration are substantively different between papers and patents; 3. a network topology and community structure that reveals spatial versus institutional collaboration trends; and 4. a persistent relationship between proximity and collaboration, well fit with an exponential decay model, that is consistent for papers, patents, and for specifically cross-disciplinary work. These insights contribute an architectural dimension to the field of scientometrics, taking a first step toward empirical foundations for applied institutional policy and spatial planning.
by Matthew Claudel.
S.M.
62 pages
eng
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
M.I.T. theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. See provided URL for inquiries about permission.
http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582
Urban Studies and Planning.
The spatial and institutional factors of knowledge production at MIT
Thesis
application/pdf
false
Publication
unknown
unknown
<Publication xmlns="https://www.openaire.eu/cerif-profile/1.1/" id="aebe24d2-60a6-4eec-a103-7dad01ffe748">
<Type xmlns="https://www.openaire.eu/cerif-profile/vocab/COAR_Publication_Types">http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_1843</Type>
<Language>eng</Language>
<Title>The spatial and institutional factors of knowledge production at MIT</Title>
<PublishedIn>
<Publication>
</Publication>
</PublishedIn>
<PublicationDate>2016</PublicationDate>
<Authors>
<Author>
<DisplayName>Claudel, Matthew (Matthew Christopher)</DisplayName>
<Affiliation>
<OrgUnit>
</OrgUnit>
</Affiliation>
</Author>
</Authors>
<Editors>
</Editors>
<Publishers>
<Publisher>
<DisplayName>Massachusetts Institute of Technology</DisplayName>
<OrgUnit />
</Publisher>
</Publishers>
<License>http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582</License>
<Keyword>Urban Studies and Planning.</Keyword>
<Abstract>Academic research is increasingly cross-disciplinary and collaborative - around the globe and within institutions. In this context, what is the role and relevance of the campus? I examine the scholarly output and collaboration patterns of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology as they pertain to its interrelated organizational structures, including institutional affiliation and spatial configuration, over a 10-year time span. There are four significant results: 1. diverging trends in the composition of collaborative teams over time (size, faculty versus non-faculty, etc.) between papers and patents; 2. patterns of cross-building and cross-disciplinary collaboration are substantively different between papers and patents; 3. a network topology and community structure that reveals spatial versus institutional collaboration trends; and 4. a persistent relationship between proximity and collaboration, well fit with an exponential decay model, that is consistent for papers, patents, and for specifically cross-disciplinary work. These insights contribute an architectural dimension to the field of scientometrics, taking a first step toward empirical foundations for applied institutional policy and spatial planning.</Abstract>
<Access xmlns="http://purl.org/coar/access_right"
>
</Access>
</Publication>