Related papers: Socializing the h-index
The Hirsch index (commonly referred to as h-index) is a bibliometric indicator which is widely recognized as effective for measuring the scientific production of a scholar since it summarizes size and impact of the research output. In a…
A widely used measure of scientific impact is citations. However, due to their heavy-tailed distribution, citations are fundamentally difficult to predict. Instead, to characterize scientific impact, we address two analogous questions asked…
We use confirmatory factor analysis to derive a unifying measure of comparison of scientists based on bibliometric measurements, by utilizing the h-index, some similar h-type indices as well as other common measures of scientific…
I describe a simple modification which can be applied to any citation count-based index (e.g. Hirsch's h-index) quantifying a researcher's publication output. The key idea behind the proposed approach is that the merit for the citations of…
The evaluation of a researcher's performance has traditionally relied on various bibliometric measures, with the h-index being one of the most prominent. However, the h-index only accounts for the number of citations received in a…
In this paper, we propose a measure to assess scientific impact that discounts self-citations and does not require any prior knowledge on the their distribution among publications. This index can be applied to both researchers and journals.…
There are various mathematical models proposed in the recent literature for estimating the h-index through bibliometric measures, such as number of articles (P) and citations received (C). These models have been previously empirically…
I propose a new measure, the w-index, as a particularly simple and useful way to assess the integrated impact of a researcher's work, especially his or her excellent papers. The w-index can be defined as follows: If w of a researcher's…
Using bibliometric data artificially generated through a model of citation dynamics calibrated on empirical data, we compare several indicators for the scientific impact of individual researchers. The use of such a controlled setup has the…
I introduce a decomposition of the h-index, which is nowadays the leading criterion to assess the relevance of a scientist in his/her research field. According to the proposed decomposition, the h-index is the product of two indicators, the…
The two most used citation impact indicators in the assessment of scientific journals are, nowadays, the impact factor and the h-index. However, both indicators are not field normalized (vary heavily depending on the scientific category)…
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…
J. E. Hirsch (2005) introduced the h-index to quantify an individual's scientific research output by the largest number h of a scientist's papers, that received at least h citations. This so-called Hirsch index can be easily modified to…
What is the value of a scientist and its impact upon the scientific thinking? How can we measure the prestige of a journal or of a conference? The evaluation of the scientific work of a scientist and the estimation of the quality of a…
The h-index -- the value for which an individual has published at least h papers with at least h citations -- has become a popular metric to assess the citation impact of scientists. As already noted in the original work of Hirsch and as…
Rather than "measuring" a scientist impact through the number of citations which his/her published work can have generated, isn't it more appropriate to consider his/her value through his/her scientific network performance illustrated by…
Citation and publication profiles are gaining importance for the evaluation of top researchers when it comes to the appropriation of funding for excellence programs or career promotion judgments. Indicators like the Normalized Mean Citation…
An important issue in bibliometrics is the weighing of co-authorship in the production of scientific collaborations, which are becoming the standard modality of research activity in many disciplines. The problem is especially relevant in…
The ongoing growth in the volume of scientific literature available today precludes researchers from efficiently discerning the relevant from irrelevant content. Researchers are constantly interested in impactful papers, authors and venues…
Accurately evaluating scholarly influence is essential for fair academic assessment, yet traditional bibliometric indicators - dominated by publication and citation counts - often favor hyperprolific authors over those with deeper,…