Abstract:Of the existing theoretical formulas for the h-index, those recently suggested by Burrell (J Informetr 7:774–783, 2013b) and by Bertoli-Barsotti and Lando (J Informetr 9(4):762–776, 2015) have proved very effective in estimating the actual value of the h-index Hirsch (Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102:16569–16572, 2005), at least at the level of the individual scientist. These approaches lead (or may lead) to two slightly different formulas, being based, respectively, on a “standard” and a “shifted” version of the geometric distribution. In this paper, we review the genesis of these two formulas—which we shall call the “basic” and “improved” Lambert-W formula for the h-index—and compare their effectiveness with that of a number of instances taken from the well-known Glänzel–Schubert class of models for the h-index (based, instead, on a Paretian model) by means of an empirical study. All the formulas considered in the comparison are “ready-to-use”, i.e., functions of simple citation indicators such as: the total number of publications; the total number of citations; the total number of cited paper; the number of citations of the most cited paper. The empirical study is based on citation data obtained from two different sets of journals belonging to two different scientific fields: more specifically, 231 journals from the area of “Statistics and Mathematical Methods” and 100 journals from the area of “Economics, Econometrics and Finance”, totaling almost 100,000 and 20,000 publications, respectively. The citation data refer to different publication/citation time windows, different types of “citable” documents, and alternative approaches to the analysis of the citation process (“prospective” and “retrospective”). We conclude that, especially in its improved version, the Lambert-W formula for the h-index provides a quite robust and effective ready-to-use rule that should be preferred to other known formulas if one’s goal is (simply) to derive a reliable estimate of the h-index.

Do Hirsch-type Indices Behave the Same in Assessing Single Publications? an Empirical Study of 29 Bibliometric Indicators.

How Effective Use Hirsch Index to Assess A Journal? A Study of Evaluation the Hirsch Index of Chinese Medical Journal

Exploring the limitations of the h-index and h-type indexes in measuring the research performance of authors

The H’-Index, Effectively Improving the H-Index Based on the Citation Distribution

Comparative Study on H-index Correlative Factors of Journal Papers Published by University Library

Top Cited Articles in Adsorption Research Using Y-Index

Quantitative analysis of automatic performance evaluation systems based on the h-index

Which h-index? An exploration within the Web of Science

The Citation-Based Indicator and Combined Impact Indicator-New Options for Measuring Impact

A CSSCI-based Positive Study on the H-index of Scholars in Humanities and Social Sciences

A Preliminary Study of the Relationship Between the H-Index and Excess Citations / Étude Préliminaire De La Relation Entre L’indice De Hirsch (Indice-H) Et Les Citations Excédentaires

A theoretical model of the relationship between the h-index and other simple citation indicators

Some Generalized Integrals Applied in Scientometrics and Related Evaluation

A review on h-index and its alternative indices

Investigating the Universal Distributions of Normalized Indicators and Developing Field-Independent Index.

The inconsistency of the h-index

The i100-index, i1000-index and i10,000-index: expansion and fortification of the Google Scholar h-index for finer-scale citation descriptions and researcher classification

h-index and its alternative: A Review

The strike rate index: a new index for journal quality based on journal size and the h-index of citations

The New Research on Application of Bibliometrics in Individual's Evaluation——Apply for the Measure of H-index

A NEW SCIENTOMETRIC INDICATOR—Review on h Index and Its Applications