|
|
|
|
|
|
Curious Cat Science and Egineering blog full tag cloud
The annual ranking of research Universities are available from Shanghai’s Jiao Tong University. The methodology values publications and faculty awards which provides a better ranking of research (rather than teaching). Results from the 2008 rankings of Top 500 Universities worldwide, country representation of the top schools:
| location | Top 100 | % of World Population |
% of World GDP | % of top 500 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| USA | 54 | 4.6% | 27.2% | 31.6% |
| United Kingdom | 11 | 0.9 | 4.9 | 8.3 |
| Germany | 6 | 1.3 | 6.0 | 8.0 |
| Japan | 4 | 2.0 | 9.0 | 6.2 |
| Canada | 4 | 0.5 | 2.6 | 4.2 |
| Sweden | 4 | 0.1 | 0.8 | 2.2 |
| France | 3 | 0.8 | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Switzerland | 3 | 0.1 | 0.8 | 1.6 |
| Australia | 3 | 0.3 | 1.6 | 3.0 |
| Netherlands | 2 | 0.2 | 1.4 | 2.4 |
| Denmark | 2 | 0.1 | 0.6 | 0.8 |
| Finland | 1 | 0.1 | 0.4 | 1.2 |
| Norway | 1 | 0.1 | 0.7 | 0.8 |
| Israel | 1 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 1.2 |
| Russia | 1 | 2.2 | 2.0 | 0.4 |
| China | 20.5 | 6.6 | 6.0 | |
| India | 17.0 | 1.9 | 0.4 |
There is little change in most of the data from last year, which I think is a good sign, it wouldn’t make much sense to have radical shifts over a year in these rankings. Japan lost 2 schools in the top 100, France lost 1. Denmark (Aarhus University) and Australia (University of Sydney) gained 1. Last year there was a tie so there were 101 schools in the top 100.
The most dramatic data I noticed is China’s number of top 500 schools went from 14 to 30, which made me a bit skeptical of what caused that quick change. Looking more closely last year they reported the China top 500 totals as (China 14, China-Taiwan 6 and China-Hong Kong 5). That still gives them an impressive gain of 5 schools.
Singapore has 1 in the 102-151 range. Taiwan has 1 ranked in the 152-200 range, as do Mexico, Korea and Brazil. China has 9 in the 201-302 range (including 3 in Hong Kong). India has 2 in the 303-401 range.
University of Wisconsin - Madison is 17th again 
My father taught there while I grew up.
(more…)
Cooking and Cognition: How Humans Got So Smart
To understand what caused the cognitive spurt, Khaitovich and colleagues examined chemical brain processes known to have changed in the past 200,000 years. Comparing apes and humans, they found the most robust differences were for processes involved in energy metabolism.
The finding suggests that increased access to calories spurred our cognitive advances, said Khaitovich, carefully adding that definitive claims of causation are premature.
Nice example of scientific discovery in action. The direct link from cooking to brain development is far from proven but it is interesting. I also like “the same very boring stone tools for almost 2 million years” - maybe that is because I am too cynical (but while evolution is amazing - sometimes it is amazing how slow progress is).
Related: Brain Development Gene is Evolving the Fastest - Mapping Where Brains Store Similar Information - posts on science and out brains
Why did China’s scientific innovation, once so advanced, suddenly collapse
The Chinese began printing 600 years before Johannes Gutenberg introduced the technique in Germany. They built the first chain drive 700 years before the Europeans. And they made use of a magnetic compass at least a century before the first reference to it appeared elsewhere. So why, in the middle of the 15th century, did this advanced civilisation suddenly cease its spectacular progress?
…
Needham never fully worked out why China’s inventiveness dried up. Other academics have made their own suggestions: the stultifying pursuit of bureaucratic rank in the Middle Kingdom and the absence of a mercantile class to foster competition and self-improvement; the sheer size of China compared with the smaller states of Europe whose fierce rivalries fostered technological competition; its totalitarianism.
Related: Science and Engineering in Politics - Economic Benefits from Engineering - Chinese Engineering Innovation Plan - Best Research University Rankings (2007)
Several years ago we posted about the report on the USA Under-counting Engineering Graduates. The authors, and two others, have written a new report that provides some useful additions - Getting the Numbers Right: International Engineering Education in the United States, China, and India
Related: Filling the Engineering Gap by Vivek Wadhwa - Engineering Economic Benefits - posts on engineering education - Science Serving Society - Authors of Scientific Articles by Country - Educating the Engineer of 2020: NAE Report
Quakes lakes risk ’slurry tsunami’
Related: Quake Lifts Island Ten Feet Out of Ocean - Civil Engineers: USA Infrastructure Needs Improvement - China’s Technology Savvy Leadership - Megaflood Created the English Channel
The top five countries in terms of installed capacity are:
Global capacity was increase by 27% in 2007. Record installations in US, China and Spain:
“We’re on track to meeting our target of saving 1.5 billion tons of CO2 per year by 2020”, said Steve Sawyer, “but we need a strong, global signal from governments that they are serious about moving away from fossil fuels and protecting the climate.”
Meeting energy needs using wind power is growing very rapidly, which is a great thing. It is still a small contributor to our overall energy needs but every bit helps.
Related: USA Wind power capacity - Capture Wind Energy with a Tethered Turbine - Wind Power Technology Breakthrough
China’s Sci-Tech Savvy Leadership by Jocelyn Ford
Ancient China is famous for its early scientific advances, some of which predated western developments by centuries. Its inventions include paper, printing, gunpowder and the compass.
…
Leadership does matter, but so does the system. It seems to me it should take a lot longer for China to build a sci-tech friendly system than for the U.S. to bring in sci-tech friendly leadership. That’s where you come in Ira & co.
If I may make one final comment: in my ideal world, borders shouldn’t matter. Victory by the best system, with the best leaders, will hopefully be a victory for all earthlings.
…
CHINA’S POLITBURO (2007): Decline of the engineer. Last fall China introduced a new top lineup that included two law graduates, as well as an economist, and graduates in history, journalism, management and business administration.
I agree that the increase in science and engineering investment around the globe is a positive development. But the USA faces loses that it has enjoyed due to past technology leadership.
China benefits greatly from such scientific knowledge at the highest level of government. The top 9 leaders in China are know as the “Politburo Standing Committee,” the new additions in 2007 were:
Xi Jinping, 54, studied chemical engineering at the Qinghua University and later earned a doctorate in law.
Li Keqiang, 52, obtained MA and doctorate of Economics after attending the on-the-job postgraduate program on Economics at the School of Economics of Peking University.
He Guoqiang, 63, B.S. Beijing Institute of Chemical Engineering.
Zhou Yongkang, 64 “Graduated from the Exploration Department, Beijing Petroleum Institute, majoring in geophysical exploration. With a university education. Senior engineer with a rank equivalent to professor. ” Funny, I don’t remember any U.S. politician exalting their experience as “equivalent to a professor.”
They joined the nine-member echelon with the five remaining members of the previous standing committee, namely Hu Jintao, Wu Bangguo, Wen Jiabao, Jia Qinglin and Li Changchun.
Related: Science Investment, Diplomacy and Economics - Asia: Rising Stars of Science and Engineering - China’s Engineering Innovation Plan - Once Again Engineering Graduates Lead Ranks of S&P 500 CEOs - Authors of Scientific Articles by Country - Best Research University Rankings (2007)
The Webometrics Ranking of World Universities provides another estimate of the top universities. The methodology is far ideal however I still find it interesting. The various attempts to rank schools can provide a general idea of impact of various institutions (though the measures are fairly crude). Still a sensible picture (especially at the country level) can emerge. And the various rankings should be a able to track shifts in the most influential institutions and relative country strength over time. How quickly those rankings track changes will vary depending on the measures used. I would imagine most will lag the “real” changes as it is easy to imagine many measures that would lag. Still, as I have said before, I expect the USA will lose in relative ranking compared to China, India, Japan, Singapore, Mexico…
The ranking methodology used here weighed rankings in: Jiao Tong academic rankings, Essential Science Indicators, Google Scholar, Alexa (a measure of web site visits to universities) and The Times Higher World University Rankings.
Country representation of the top universities (number of top schools in each country):
| location | Webometrics Top 100 |
Jiao Tong Top 101 |
% of World Population |
% of World GDP* |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| USA | 53 | 54 | 4.6% | 30.4% |
| Germany | 10 | 5 | 1.3 | 6.3 |
| Canada | 8 | 4 | 0.5 | 2.5 |
| United Kingdom | 6 | 10 | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| Australia | 3 | 2 | 0.3 | 1.6 |
| Japan | 1 | 6 | 2.0 | 10.3 |
| The rest of Europe | 16 | 13 | ||
| Brazil | 1 | 0 | 2.8 | 1.8 |
| Mexico | 1 | 0 | 1.6 | 1.7 |
| Israel | 0 | 1 | 0.1 | 0.3 |
* IMF, World Economic Outlook Database, September 2006 (2005 data)
(more…)
Great report - The Atlas of Ideas: How Asian innovation can benefit us all by Charles Leadbeater and James Wilsdon:
| Year | China | France | Germany | Japan | Korea | UK | US | EU-15 |
| 1995 | 2.05 | 6.09 | 7.62 | 8.65 | 0.79 | 8.88 | 33.54 | 34.36 |
| 1998 | 2.90 | 6.48 | 8.82 | 9.42 | 1.41 | 9.08 | 31.63 | 36.85 |
| 2001 | 4.30 | 6.33 | 8.68 | 9.52 | 2.01 | 8.90 | 31.01 | 36.55 |
| 2004 | 6.52 | 5.84 | 8.14 | 8.84 | 2.70 | 8.33 | 30.48 | 35.18 |
Excellent reading, the report is full of useful information I have not been able to obsorb yet.
Related: Diplomacy and Science Research - The World’s Best Research Universities - Engineering the Future Economy - Worldwide Science and Engineering Doctoral Degree Data - USA Under-counting Engineering Graduates - Increasing American Fellowship Support for Scientists and Engineers
(more…)
Today more and more locations are becoming viable for world class research and development. Today the following have significant ability: USA, Europe (many countries), Japan, Canada, China, Brazil, Singapore, Israel, India, Korea and Australia (I am sure I have missed some this is just what come to mind as I type this post) and many more are moving in that direction.
The continued increase of viable locations for significant amounts of cutting edge research and development has huge consequences, in many areas. If paths to research and development are blocked in one location (by law, regulation, choice, lack of capital, threat of significant damage to the career of those who would choose such a course…) other locations will step in. In some ways this will be good (see below for an explanation of why this might be so). Promising new ideas will not be stifled due to one roadblock.
But risks of problems will also increase. For example, there are plenty of reasons to want to go carefully in the way of genetically engineered crops. But those seeking a more conservative approach are going to be challenged: countries that are acting conservatively will see other countries jump in, I believe. And even if this didn’t happen significantly in the area of genetically engineered crops, I still believe it will create challenges. The ability to go elsewhere will make those seeking to put constraints in place in a more difficult position than 50 years ago when the options were much more limited (It might be possible to stop significant research just by getting a handful of countries to agree).
Debates of what restrictions to put on science and technology research and development will be a continuing and increasing area of conflict. And the solutions will not be easy. Hopefully we will develop a system of diplomacy that works, but that is much easier said than done. And the United States will have to learn they do not have the power to dictate terms to others. This won’t be an easy thing to accept for many in America. The USA will still have a great deal of influence, due mainly to economic power but that influence is only the ability to influence others and that ability will decline if diplomacy is not improved. Diplomacy may not seem to be a science and engineering area but it is going to be increasingly be a major factor in the progress of science and engineering. (more…)
Shanghai’s Jiao Tong University produces a ranking of the top universities annually (since 2003). The methodology used focuses on research (publications) and faculty quality (Fields and Nobel awards and citations). While this seems a very simplistic ranking it still provides some interesting data: highlights from the 2006 rankings of Top 500 Universities worldwide include:
Country representation in the top schools:
| location | Top 101 | % of World Population |
% of World GDP | % of top 500 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| USA | 54 | 4.6% | 28.4% | 33.4% |
| United Kingdom | 10 | 0.9 | 5.1 | 8.6 |
| Japan | 6 | 2.0 | 11.2 | 6.4 |
| Canada | 4 | 0.5 | 2.4 | 8.0 |
| The rest of Europe | 18 | 4.4 | ||
| Australia | 2 | 0.3 | 1.5 | 3.2 |
| Israel | 1 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 1.4 |
Update: see our post on 2007 best research universities results
Top 10 schools:
China Builds a Better Internet (site broke the link so I removed it)
China is looking to become a scientific leader, with projects like China’s Next Generation Internet, to strengthen their economy by creating
IPv6 is coming, in fact it is already here, though in a limited way. The work started in 1994 when the IPv6 working group was established and proposed standard adopted by the Internet Engineering Steering Group.
IEEE-USA chief calls for IPv6 adoption:
This hardly seems impressive compared to the growth of Google say. However the amounts of money for global R&D are huge and so changes as less dramatic than other areas. Still this is significant and seems likely to continue to move in this direction.
(more…)
China Makes Huge Breakthrough in Wind Power Technology by Zijun Li:
US$425 million to boost Chinese innovation by Fu Jing:
“The boost has shown the government’s determination for China to become an innovative country by 2020,” said the foundation’s vice-president Zhu Zuoyan. He added that the foundation’s research funding is set to grow by about 20 per cent a year for the next five years.
…
According to government plans, China’s total investment in science and technology should reach 2.5 per cent of its gross domestic product by 2020 — a share similar to that spent by industrialised nations.
By that time, China aims to be spending about US$112 billion annually on research and development (see China announces 58-point plan to boost science).
U.S. National Science Foundation Celebrates Opening of Beijing Office
“It is important for the U.S. scientific community, especially young researchers, to be aware of and consider collaborating with colleagues in China in this environment,” said Beijing office Director William Chang.
The NSF Beijing Office is NSF’s third foreign office. NSF also maintains research offices in Paris and Tokyo.
Testimony of Vivek Wadhwa to the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Education and the Workforce,
May 16, 2006.
Vivek Wadhwa has continued the work published in the Duke study: Framing the Engineering Outsourcing Debate. In the testimony he provides an update on the data provided in the report.
Differentiating between dynamic and transactional engineers is a start, but we also need to look at specific fields of engineering where the U.S can maintain a distinct advantage. Professor Myers lists specializations such as systems biology and personalized medicine, genomics, proteomics, metabolomics that he believes will give the U.S a long term advantage.
Our education system gives our students broad exposure to many different fields of study. Our engineers learn biology and art, they gain significant practical experience and learn to innovate and become entrepreneurs. Few Indian and Chinese universities provide such advantages to their students.
The dynamic and transactional differences were mentioned in his business week article: Filling the Engineering Gap.
The conclusion he presents seems wise to me.
Curious Cat Science and Engineering Blog © curiouscat.com 2005-2008 powered by WordPress
USA High School Alumni
