Generalized h-index for Disclosing Latent Facts in Citation Networks

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 journal or conference has long attracted significant interest, due to the benefits from obtaining an unbiased and fair criterion. Although it appears to be simple, defining a quality metric is not an easy task. To overcome the disadvantages of the present metrics used for ranking scientists and journals, J.E. Hirsch proposed a pioneering metric, the now famous h-index. In this article, we demonstrate several inefficiencies of this index and develop a pair of generalizations and effective variants of it to deal with scientist ranking and with publication forum ranking. The new citation indices are able to disclose trendsetters in scientific research, as well as researchers that constantly shape their field with their influential work, no matter how old they are. We exhibit the effectiveness and the benefits of the new indices to unfold the full potential of the h-index, with extensive experimental results obtained from DBLP, a widely known on-line digital library.Comment: 19 pages, 17 tables, 27 figure

Zipf's law and log-normal distributions in measures of scientific output across fields and institutions: 40 years of Slovenia's research as an example

Slovenia's Current Research Information System (SICRIS) currently hosts 86,443 publications with citation data from 8,359 researchers working on the whole plethora of social and natural sciences from 1970 till present. Using these data, we show that the citation distributions derived from individual publications have Zipfian properties in that they can be fitted by a power law $P(x) \sim x^{-\alpha}$, with $\alpha$ between 2.4 and 3.1 depending on the institution and field of research. Distributions of indexes that quantify the success of researchers rather than individual publications, on the other hand, cannot be associated with a power law. We find that for Egghe's g-index and Hirsch's h-index the log-normal form $P(x) \sim \exp[-a\ln x -b(\ln x)^2]$ applies best, with $a$ and $b$ depending moderately on the underlying set of researchers. In special cases, particularly for institutions with a strongly hierarchical constitution and research fields with high self-citation rates, exponential distributions can be observed as well. Both indexes yield distributions with equivalent statistical properties, which is a strong indicator for their consistency and logical connectedness. At the same time, differences in the assessment of citation histories of individual researchers strengthen their importance for properly evaluating the quality and impact of scientific output.Comment: 8 pages, 3 figures; accepted for publication in Journal of Informetrics [supplementary material available at http://www.matjazperc.com/sicris/stats.html

Applying weighted PageRank to author citation networks

This paper aims to identify whether different weighted PageRank algorithms can be applied to author citation networks to measure the popularity and prestige of a scholar from a citation perspective. Information Retrieval (IR) was selected as a test field and data from 1956-2008 were collected from Web of Science (WOS). Weighted PageRank with citation and publication as weighted vectors were calculated on author citation networks. The results indicate that both popularity rank and prestige rank were highly correlated with the weighted PageRank. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was conducted to detect relationships among these different measures. For capturing prize winners within the IR field, prestige rank outperformed all the other measures.Comment: 19 pages, 4 figures, 5 table

On the time dependence of the hh-index

The time dependence of the $h$-index is analyzed by considering the average behaviour of $h$ as a function of the academic age $A_A$ for about 1400 Italian physicists, with career lengths spanning from 3 to 46 years. The individual $h$-index is strongly correlated with the square root of the total citations $N_C$: $h \approx 0.53 \sqrt{N_C}$. For academic ages ranging from 12 to 24 years, the distribution of the time scaled index $h/\sqrt{A_A}$ is approximately time-independent and it is well described by the Gompertz function. The time scaled index $h/\sqrt{A_A}$ has an average approximately equal to 3.8 and a standard deviation approximately equal to 1.6. Finally, the time scaled index $h/\sqrt{A_A}$ appears to be strongly correlated with the contemporary $h$-index $h_c$

Development G-Index and H-Index : Dgh-Index

Of the most  important  indicators such as the h-index ,a method of measuring the productivity and impact of an academic's work, is often used as a component or metric in the ranking of higher education institutions and their staff then proposed the g index as a modification of the h index. So the g-index, have been Trying to develop and improve the disadvantage  in h-index. and  although the g-index can provide a more comprehensive measure of scientific contribution, but value g-index  is integer where  two authors or more than may be get the same g-index value although different  number  of citations and papers, making it difficult to differentiate performance  between authors so in paper we suggest improvement index to resolve this problem is called dgh-index  that gives new features to g-index  and h-index  that  give us real number not an integer

The w-index: A significant improvement of the h-index

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 papers have at least 10w citations each and the other papers have fewer than 10(w+1) citations, his/her w-index is w. It is a significant improvement of the h-index.Comment: 7 pages, 3 tables, small changes from v