Related papers: $\Phi$ index: A standardized scale-independent and…
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…
Usage of field-normalized citation scores is a bibliometric standard. Different methods for field-normalization are in use, but also the choice of field-classification system determines the resulting field-normalized citation scores. Using…
The h index is a widely recognized metric for assessing the research impact of scholars, defined as the maximum value h such that the scholar has published h papers each cited at least h times. While it has proven useful measuring…
The index of success of the researchers is now mostly measured using the Hirsch index ($h$). Our recent precise demonstration, that statistically $h \sim \sqrt {N_c} \sim \sqrt {N_p}$, where $N_p$ and $N_c$ denote respectively the total…
This short paper introduces the u-index, a simple and objective metric to evaluate the impact and relevance of academic research output, as a possible alternative to widespread metrics such as the h-index or the i10-index. The proposed…
The deluge of new papers has significantly blocked the development of academics, which is mainly caused by author-level and publication-level evaluation metrics that only focus on quantity. Those metrics have resulted in several severe…
The data of F1000 provide us with the unique opportunity to investigate the relationship between peers' ratings and bibliometric metrics on a broad and comprehensive data set with high-quality ratings. F1000 is a post-publication peer…
Citation count is a popular index for assessing scientific papers. However, it depends on not only the quality of a paper but also various factors, such as conventionality, team size, and gender. Here, we examine the extent to which the…
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…
This study examines the correlational relationships between local journal authorship, local and external citation counts, full-text downloads, link-resolver clicks, and four global journal impact factor indices within an all-disciplines…
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,…
The ISI subject categories classify journals included in the Science Citation Index (SCI). The aggregated journal-journal citation matrix contained in the Journal Citation Reports can be aggregated on the basis of these categories. This…
The Center for Science and Technology Studies at Leiden University advocates the use of specific normalizations for assessing research performance with reference to a world average. The Journal Citation Score (JCS) and Field Citation Score…
Defining and measuring internationality as a function of influence diffusion of scientific journals is an open problem. There exists no metric to rank journals based on the extent or scale of internationality. Measuring internationality is…
Van Raan et al. (2010; arXiv:1003.2113) have proposed a new indicator (MNCS) for field normalization. Since field normalization is also used in the Leiden Rankings of universities, we elaborate our critique of journal normalization in…
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 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…
Citation count of a paper is a commonly used proxy for evaluating the significance of a paper in the scientific community. Yet citation measures are widely criticized for failing to accurately reflect the true impact of a paper. Thus, we…
Articles in high-impact journals are, on average, more frequently cited. But are they cited more often because those articles are somehow more "citable"? Or are they cited more often simply because they are published in a high-impact…
Most scientometricians reject the use of the journal impact factor for assessing individual articles and their authors. The well-known San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment also strongly objects against this way of using the…