Related papers: $\mathbf{h_\alpha}$: An index to quantify an indiv…
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.
I propose the index $\hbar$ ("hbar"), defined as the number of papers of an individual that have citation count larger than or equal to the $\hbar$ of all coauthors of each paper, as a useful index to characterize the scientific output of a…
A fair assignment of credit for multi-authored publications is a long-standing issue in scientometrics. In the calculation of the $h$-index, for instance, all co-authors receive equal credit for a given publication, independent of a given…
In a recent paper, Hirsch (2018) proposes to attribute the credit for a co-authored paper to the {\alpha}-author--the author with the highest h-index--regardless of his or her actual contribution, effectively reducing the role of the other…
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…
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 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 h-index is a mainstream bibliometric indicator, since it is widely used in academia, research management and research policy. While its advantages have been highlighted, such as its simple calculation, it has also received widespread…
I here propose an index that links the number of papers a researcher has published with impact factors (IFs) of the journals that publish these papers. A researcher is said to have an index z if totally z of his/her papers are published in…
An accurate and fair assessment of the efficiency and impact of scientific work is, despite a lot of recent research effort, still an open problem. The measurement of quality and success of individual scientists and research groups can be…
Classifying researchers according to the quality of their published work rather than the quantity is a curtail issue. We attempt to introduce a new formula of the percentage range to be used for evaluating qualitatively the researchers'…
A researcher collaborating with many groups will normally have more papers (and thus higher citations and $h$-index) than a researcher spending all his/her time working alone or in a small group. While analyzing an author's research merit,…
When a group of individuals creates something, credit is usually divided among them. Oddly, that does not apply to scientific papers. The most commonly used performance measure for individual researchers is the h-index, which does not…
Citation numbers and other quantities derived from bibliographic databases are becoming standard tools for the assessment of productivity and impact of research activities. Though widely used, still their statistical properties have not…
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…
In order to advance academic research, it is important to assess and evaluate the academic influence of researchers and the findings they produce. Citation metrics are universally used methods to evaluate researchers. Amongst the several…
The number h of papers with at least h citations has been proposed to evaluate individual's scientific research production. This index is robust in several ways but yet strongly dependent on the research field. We propose a complementary…
A new citation index $h_{PI}$ for principal investigators (PIs) is defined in analogy to Hirsch's index $h$, but based on renormalized citations of a PI's papers. To this end, the authors of a paper are divided into two groups: PIs and…
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…
The Hirsch index or h-index is widely used to quantify the impact of an individual's scientific research output, determining the highest number h of a scientist's papers that received at least h citations. Several variants of the index have…