Bibliometric measures of individual scientific achievement are of particular interest if they can be used to predict future achievement. Here we report results of an empirical study of the predictive power of the h index compared with other indicators. Our findings indicate that the h index is better than other indicators considered (total citation count, citations per paper, and total paper count) in predicting future scientific achievement. We discuss reasons for the superiority of the h index.

Does the H index have predictive power

http://eprints.rclis.org/13282/1/hIndexReviewAlonsoCabrerizoHerrera-Viedma.pdf

h-Index: A review focused in its variants, computation and standardization for different scientific fields

The rapid development of digital libraries and the proliferation of scholarly big data have created an unprecedented opportunity to explore scientific production and reward at scale. Fueled by the data exploration and computational advances in digital libraries, the science of science is an emerging multidisciplinary field that aims to quantify patterns for scientific relationships and dependencies, and how scientific progress emerges from the scholarly big data. In this tutorial, we will provide an overview of the science of science, including major topics on scientific careers, scientific collaborations and scientific ideas. We will also discuss its historical context, the state-of-art models and exciting discoveries, and promising future directions for participants interested in mining scholarly big data.

The Science of Science

https://kar.kent.ac.uk/46884/1/1501.05462.pdf0.pdf

A review of theory and practice in scientometrics

Background: The impact of scientific publications has traditionally been expressed in terms of citation counts. However, scientific activity has moved online over the past decade. To better capture scientific impact in the digital era, a variety of new impact measures has been proposed on the basis of social network analysis and usage log data. Here we investigate how these new measures relate to each other, and how accurately and completely they express scientific impact. Methodology: We performed a principal component analysis of the rankings produced by 39 existing and proposed measures of scholarly impact that were calculated on the basis of both citation and usage log data. Conclusions: Our results indicate that the notion of scientific impact is a multi-dimensional construct that can not be adequately measured by any single indicator, although some measures are more suitable than others. The commonly used citation Impact Factor is not positioned at the core of this construct, but at its periphery, and should thus be used with caution.

/pdf/a-principal-component-analysis-of-39-scientific-impact-4vg6a5fab7.pdf

A principal component analysis of 39 scientific impact measures.

Based on the foundation laid by the h -index we introduce and study the R - and AR -indices. These new indices eliminate some of the disadvantages of the h -index, especially when they are used in combination with the h -index. The R -index measures the h -core’s citation intensity, while AR goes one step further and takes the age of publications into account. This allows for an index that can actually increase and decrease over time. We propose the pair ( h , AR ) as a meaningful indicator for research evaluation. We further prove a relation characterizing the h -index in the power law model

/pdf/the-r-and-ar-indices-complementing-the-h-index-3lkk6ba663.pdf

Liang Liming

Papers

The R- and AR-indices: Complementing the h-index

Investigation and numerical reconstruction of a full-scale electric bicycle fire experiment in high-rise residential building