Related papers: Rivals for the crown: Reply to Opthof and Leydesdo…
We offer a brief response to the criticism put forward by Pavon Valderrama about our recent paper on "How (not) to renormalize integral equations with singular potentials in effective field theory".
Ageing of publications, percentage of self-citations, and impact vary from journal to journal within fields of science. The assumption that citation and publication practices are homogenous within specialties and fields of science is…
Bibliometrics plays an increasingly important role in research evaluation. However, no gold standard exists for a set of reliable and valid (field-normalized) impact indicators in research evaluation. This opinion paper recommends that…
Most publication and citation indicators are based on datasets with multi-authored publications and thus a change in counting method will often change the value of an indicator. Therefore it is important to know why a specific counting…
The statistics community, which has traditionally lacked a transparent and open peer-review system, faces a challenge of inconsistent paper quality, with some published work containing substantial errors. This problem resonates with…
We reply to a recent comment by H. W. Diehl and M. Shpot (cond-mat/0106502) criticizing our paper J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 34 (2001) L327-332. We show that the approximation we use for evaluating higher-loop integrals is consistent with…
This expository note introduces a normalization of the indexing of the lower and upper numbering ramification subgroups of local class field theory. We then look at how this normalization interacts with base change for Langlands parameters.
Systematic evaluations of publicly funded research typically employ a combination of bibliometrics and peer review, but it is not known whether the bibliometric component introduces biases. This article compares three alternative mechanisms…
We generated networks of journal relationships from citation and download data, and determined journal impact rankings from these networks using a set of social network centrality metrics. The resulting journal impact rankings were compared…
The recently proposed Euclidean index offers a novel approach to measure the citation impact of academic authors, in particular as an alternative to the h-index. We test if the index provides new, robust information, not covered by existing…
Citation networks have fed numerous works in scientific evaluation, science mapping (and more recently large-scale network studies) for decades. The variety of citation behavior across scientific fields is both a research topic in sociology…
Journal field classifications in Scopus are used for citation-based indicators and by authors choosing appropriate journals to submit to. Whilst prior research has found that Scopus categories are occasionally misleading, it is not known…
Eigenfactor.org, a journal evaluation tool which uses an iterative algorithm to weight citations (similar to the PageRank algorithm used for Google) has been proposed as a more valid method for calculating the impact of journals. The…
We present the problem of finding comparable researchers for any given researcher. This problem has many motivations. Firstly, know thyself. The answers of where we stand among research community and who we are most alike may not be easily…
In reaction to a previous critique(Opthof & Leydesdorff, 2010), the Center for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS) in Leiden proposed to change their old "crown" indicator in citation analysis into a new one. Waltman et al. (2011)argue…
We refute the criticism expressed in a comment by P. Talkner and P. H\"anggi [Phys. Rev. E 102, 066101 (2020)] on our paper Phys. Rev. E 101, 050101(R) (2020). We first make clear that our paper is free of any technical mistakes. We then…
We firstly show that the standard interpretation of natural quantification in mathematical logic does not provide a satisfying account of its original richness. In particular, it ignores the difference between generic and distributive…
Fundamental to much work in small-x QCD is a k_T-factorization formula. Normal expectations in theoretical physics are that when such a result is used, citations should be given to where the formula is justified. We demonstrate by examining…
The h-index is a popular bibliometric indicator for assessing individual scientists. We criticize the h-index from a theoretical point of view. We argue that for the purpose of measuring the overall scientific impact of a scientist (or some…
The journal Impact Factor (IF) is not comparable among fields of Science and Social Science because of systematic differences in publication and citation behaviour across disciplines. In this work, a decomposing of the field aggregate…