Related papers: A two-dimensional index to quantify both scientifi…
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,…
The most commonly used publication metrics for individual researchers are the the total number of publications, the total number of citations, and Hirsch's $h$-index. Each of these is cumulative, and hence increases throughout a…
I study the measurement of scientists' influence using bibliographic data. The main result is an axiomatic characterization of the family of citation-counting indices, a broad class of influence measures which includes the renowned h-index.…
Focusing specifically on physics periodicals, I show that the journal Impact Factor is not correlated with Hirsch's $h$-index. This implies that the Impact Factor is not a good measure of research quality or influence because the $h$-index…
h-index retrieved by citation indexes (Scopus, Google scholar, and Web of Science) is used to measure the scientific performance and the research impact studies based on the number of publications and citations of a scientist. It also is…
Scientific impact has been the center of extended debate regarding its accuracy and reliability. From hiring committees in academic institutions to governmental agencies that distribute funding, an author's scientific success as measured by…
This study introduces the Disruption Index as a superior citation-based metric. This index quantitatively assesses the degree to which a publication redirects subsequent scholarly attention away from its preceding literature, thus measuring…
This study investigates the convergence of two bibliometric approaches to the measurement of interdisciplinary research: one based on analyzing disciplinary diversity in the reference list of publications, the other based on the…
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…
We present a straightforward procedure to evaluate the scientific contribution of territories and institutions that combines the size-dependent geometric mean, Q, of the number of research documents (N) and citations (C), and a scale-free…
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…
This paper analyzes the performance of observatories based on the so-called h-index (Hirsch 2005), a new, easy-to-use parameter that quantifies scientists' research impact and relevance. Compared to other bibliometric criteria, like total…
The most frequently used indicators for the productivity and impact of scientists are the total number of publication ($N_{pub}$), total number of citations ($N_{cit}$) and the Hirsch (h) index. Since the seminal paper of Hirsch, in 2005,…
Scientific impact plays a central role in the evaluation of the output of scholars, departments, and institutions. A widely used measure of scientific impact is citations, with a growing body of literature focused on predicting the number…
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…
In the year 2005 Jorge Hirsch introduced the h index for quantifying the research output of scientists. Today, the h index is a widely accepted indicator of research performance. The h index has been criticized for its insufficient…
The Harmonic Mean between the number of papers and the citation number per paper is proposed as a simple single-value index to quantify an individual's research output. Two simple comparisons with the Hirsch h-index are performed.
We have developed a method to obtain robust quantitative bibliometric indicators for several thousand scientists. This allows us to study the dependence of bibliometric indicators (such as number of publications, number of citations, Hirsch…
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…
Quantifying the interdisciplinarity of a research is a relevant problem in the evaluative bibliometrics. The concept of interdisciplinarity is ambiguous and multidimensional. Thus, different measures of interdisciplinarity have been propose…