Related papers: Analyzing research performance: proposition of a n…
I propose the index $h$, defined as the number of papers with citation number higher or equal to $h$, as a useful index to characterize the scientific output of a researcher.
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…
Indexes that account for good representations of an individual's productivity are theme of major importance for the evaluation and comparison among researchers. Recently, a new index was proposed combining productivity with impact such that…
Ranking scientific authors is an important but challenging task, mostly due to the dynamic nature of the evolving scientific publications. The basic indicators of an author's productivity and impact are still the number of publications and…
Is more always better? We address this question in the context of bibliometric indices that aim to assess the scientific impact of individual researchers by counting their number of highly cited publications. We propose a simple model in…
In order to take multiple co-authorship appropriately into account, a straightforward modification of the Hirsch index was recently proposed. Fractionalised counting of the papers yields an appropriate measure which is called the hm-index.…
The concept of h-index has been proposed to easily assess a researcher's performance with a single two-dimensional number. However, by using only this single number, we lose significant information about the distribution of the number of…
Evaluation of researchers' output is vital for hiring committees and funding bodies, and it is usually measured via their scientific productivity, citations, or a combined metric such as h-index. Assessing young researchers is more critical…
The ongoing discussion regarding the utilization of individual research performance for academic hiring, funding allocation, and resource distribution has prompted the need for improved metrics. While traditional measures such as total…
We provide a comprehensive and critical review of the h-index and its most important modifications proposed in the literature, as well as of other similar indicators measuring research output and impact. Extensions of some of these indices…
While computer modeling and simulation are crucial for understanding scientometrics, their practical use in literature remains somewhat limited. In this study, we establish a joint coauthorship and citation network using preferential…
Ranking groups of researchers is important in several contexts and can serve many purposes such as the fair distribution of grants based on the scientist's publication output, concession of research projects, classification of journal…
Author performance indices (such as h-index and its variants) fail to resolve ties while ranking authors with low index values (majority in number) which includes the young researchers. In this work we leverage the citations as well as…
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…
h-index has become the most popular indicator for quantifying a scientist's scientific impact in various scientific fields. h-index is defined as the largest number of papers with citation number larger than or equal to h and it treats each…
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)…
We introduce a new centrality index for bipartite network of papers and authors that we call $K$-index. The $K$-index grows with the citation performance of the papers that cite a given researcher and can seen as a measure of scientific…
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 use of quantitative indicators of scientific productivity seems now quite widespread for assessing researchers and research institutions. There is a general perception, however, that these indicators are not necessarily representative…
I propose the R-Index, defined as the difference between the sum of review responsibilities for a researcher's publications and the number of reviews they have completed, as a novel metric to effectively characterize a researcher's…