Fig. 4
From: The preeminence of ethnic diversity in scientific collaboration
The relationship between ethnic diversity and impact. a Distribution of \(d_{\mathrm {{eth}}}^{\mathrm {G}}\) in real data. Papers were partitioned into two categories: diverse (highlighted in the darker tones, with \(d_{\mathrm {{eth}}}^{\mathrm {G}} > \tilde d_{\mathrm {{eth}}}^{\mathrm {G}}\)) and non-diverse (highlighted in the lighter tones, with \(d_{\mathrm {{eth}}}^{\mathrm {G}} \le \tilde d_{\mathrm {{eth}}}^{\mathrm {G}}\)), where the tilde denotes the median. b The same as (a), but for randomized data. c and d The same as (a, b), respectively, but with \(d_{\mathrm {{eth}}}^{\mathrm {I}}\) instead of \(d_{\mathrm {{eth}}}^{\mathrm {G}}\). e \(\langle c_5^{\mathrm {G}}\rangle\) against publication year in real data. f The same as (e), but for randomized data. g \(\langle c_5^{\mathrm {G}}\rangle\) against number of authors per paper in real data. h The same as (g), but for randomized data. i \(\langle c_5^{\mathrm {I}}\rangle\) against number of collaborators per scientist in real data. j The same as (i), but for randomized data
