Page 214 - Journal of Library Science in China, Vol.47, 2021
P. 214

Ronda J. ZHANG & Fred Y. YE / Measuring knowledge hardness for quantifying backbone knowledge  213


                 The data in Table 4 show that the knowledge hardness of Information Science is greater than that
               of Library Science, which aligns with intuitive understanding. The knowledge hardness of Library
               and Information Science lies exactly between that of Library Science and Information Science,
               which is also consistent with general perception.


               4 Discussion and extension


               The aforementioned approach can lead to the idea of expanding core knowledge around
               formulaic and tabular knowledge, resulting in a Core-Periphery structure of knowledge, as shown
               in Figure 1.






























                               Figure 1. The Core-Periphery Construction of Knowledge Expansion

                 Although after knowing the knowledge hardness calculation formulas (1) or (3), one might be
               tempted to artificially increase the number of diagrams to boost the knowledge hardness score,
               it is essential to discern whether the diagrams are genuinely needed to reveal the essence of the
               knowledge. Only essential diagrams should be considered for the calculations, which can serve as
               an anti-fraud criterion.
                 “Essential diagrams” can be further categorized into “absolutely essential” and “relatively
               essential”. For instance, to comprehensively present the biochemical metabolism knowledge
               centered around the tricarboxylic acid cycle (TCA cycle, also known as the Krebs cycle), one must
               use Figure 2. This is an absolutely essential diagram:
   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219