The impact of knowledge transfer induced by universities on economy, society, and culture is widely acknowledged; nevertheless, this aspect is often neglected by university rankings. Here, we considered three of the most popular global university rankings and specific knowledge transfer indicators by U-multirank, a European ranking system launched by the European Commission, in order to answer to the following research question: how do the world top universities, evaluated according to global university rankings, perform from a knowledge transfer point of view? To this aim, the top universities have been compared with the others through the calculation of a Global Performance Indicator in Knowledge Transfer (GPI KT), a hierarchical clustering, and an outlier analysis. The results show that the universities best rated by global rankings do not always perform as well from knowledge transfer point of view. By combining the obtained results, it is possible to state that only 5 universities (Berkeley, Stanford, MIT, Harvard, CALTEC), among the top in the world, exhibit a high-level performance in knowledge transfer activities. For a better understanding of the success factors and best practices in knowledge transfer, a brief description of the 5 cited universities, in terms of organization of technology transfer service, relationship with business, entrepreneurship programs, and, more generally, third mission activities, is provided. A joint reading of the results suggests that the most popular global university rankings probably fail to effectively photograph third mission activities because they can manifest in a variety of forms, due to the intrinsic and intangible nature of third mission variables, which are difficult to quantify with simple and few indicators.

Rankings are a well-established tool to evaluate the performance of actors in different sectors of the economy, and their use is increasing even in the context of the startup ecosystem, both on a regional and on a global scale. Although rankings meet the demand for measurability and comparability, they often provide an oversimplified picture of the status quo, which, in particular, overlooks the variability of the socio-economic conditions in which the quantified results are achieved. In this paper, we describe an approach based on constructing a network of world countries, in which links are determined by mutual similarity in terms of development indicators. Through the instrument of community detection, we perform an unsupervised partition of the considered set of countries, aimed at interpreting their performance in the StartupBlink rankings. We consider both the global ranking and the specific ones (quality, quantity, business). After verifying if community membership is predictive of the success of a country in the considered ranking, we rate country performances in terms of the expectation based on community peers. We are thus able to identify cases in which performance is better than expected, providing a benchmark for countries in similar conditions, and cases in which performance is below the expectation, highlighting the need to strengthen the innovation ecosystem.

The development of early warning systems for systemic crises has recently received growing interests. Recent studies have proposed possible solutions to address this challenging topic, in particular by means of cutting-edge artificial intelligence (AI) approaches. Financial data are fundamentally characterized by intrinsic temporal dynamics and the presence of both short-/long-term interactions. Hence, it is of paramount importance, when validating the proposed solutions to adopt validation strategies which consider this aspect. To this aim, we show here how Temporal Cross Validation (TCV) deeply affects the models’ learning. Moreover, to take into account the data imbalance often characterizing these models, we combine the TCV with a popular solution, which is the SMOTE (Synthetic Minority Oversampling TEchnique) algorithm.