Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userThe $h$-index and multi-author $h_m$-index for individual researchers in condensed matter physics
74
0
0.0
(
0
)
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
The characteristics of the $h$-index in the field of condensed matter physics are studied using high-quality data from ResearcherID. The results are examined in terms of theoretical descriptions of the $h$-index overall dependence on a researchers total number of published papers, and total number of citations. In particular, the models by Hirsch, Egghe and Rousseau, as well as by Glanzel and Schubert are examined. Special emphasis is placed on the deviations from such statistical descriptions, and it is argued that the deviation of a particular researchers $h$ value from the Egghe-Rouseau models prediction can be used as a supplementary measure of impact. A corresponding analysis with similar results is performed using the multi-author $h_m$-index.
rate research
Read More
We revisit our recent study [Predicting results of the Research Excellence Framework using departmental h-index, Scientometrics, 2014, 1-16; arXiv:1411.1996] in which we attempted to predict outcomes of the UKs Research Excellence Framework (REF~2014) using the so-called departmental $h$-index. Here we report that our predictions failed to anticipate with any accuracy either overall REF outcomes or movements of individual institutions in the rankings relative to their positions in the previous Research Assessment Exercise (RAE~2008).
Citation distributions are lognormal. We use 30 lognormally distributed synthetic series of numbers that simulate real series of citations to investigate the consistency of the h index. Using the lognormal cumulative distribution function, the equation that defines the h index can be formulated; this equation shows that h has a complex dependence on the number of papers (N). We also investigate the correlation between h and the number of papers exceeding various citation thresholds, from 5 to 500 citations. The best correlation is for the 100 threshold but numerous data points deviate from the general trend. The size-independent indicator h/N shows no correlation with the probability of publishing a paper exceeding any of the citation thresholds. In contrast with the h index, the total number of citations shows a high correlation with the number of papers exceeding the thresholds of 10 and 50 citations; the mean number of citations correlates with the probability of publishing a paper that exceeds any level of citations. Thus, in synthetic series, the number of citations and the mean number of citations are much better indicators of research performance than h and h/N. We discuss that in real citation distributions there are other difficulties.
We investigate the strength and the direction of information transfer in the U.S. stock market between the composite stock price index of stock market and prices of individual stocks using the transfer entropy. Through the directionality of the information transfer, we find that individual stocks are influenced by the index of the market.
Interdisciplinary research is fundamental when it comes to tackling complex problems in our highly interlinked world, and is on the rise globally. Yet, it is unclear why--in an increasingly competitive academic environment--one should pursue an interdisciplinary career given its recent negative press. Several studies have indeed shown that interdisciplinary research often achieves lower impact compared to more specialized work, and is less likely to attract funding. We seek to reconcile such evidence by analyzing a dataset of 44,419 research grants awarded between 2006 and 2018 from the seven national research councils in the UK. We compared the research performance of researchers with an interdisciplinary funding track record with those who have a specialized profile. We found that the former dominates the network of academic collaborations, both in terms of centrality and knowledge brokerage; but such a competitive advantage does not immediately translate into impact. Indeed, by means of a matched pair experimental design, we found that researchers who transcend between disciplines on average achieve lower impacts in their publications than the subject specialists in the short run, but eventually outperform them in funding performance, both in terms of volume and value. Our results suggest that launching an interdisciplinary career may require more time and persistence to overcome extra challenges, but can pave the way for a more successful endeavour.
Author impact evaluation and prediction play a key role in determining rewards, funding, and promotion. In this paper, we first introduce the background of author impact evaluation and prediction. Then, we review recent developments of author impact evaluation, including data collection, data pre-processing, data analysis, feature selection, algorithm design, and algorithm evaluation. Thirdly, we provide an in-depth literature review on author impact predictive models and common evaluation metrics. Finally, we look into the representative research issues, including author impact inflation, unified evaluation standards, academic success gene, identification of the origins of hot streaks, and higher-order academic networks analysis. This paper should help the researchers obtain a broader understanding in author impact evaluation and prediction, and provides future research directions.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
