Abstract:The objective assessment of the prestige of an academic institution is a difficult and hotly debated task. In the last few years, different types of University Rankings have been proposed to quantify the excellence of different research institutions in the world. Albeit met with criticism in some cases, the relevance of university rankings is being increasingly acknowledged: indeed, rankings are having a major impact on the design of research policies, both at the institutional and governmental level. Yet, the debate on what rankings are {\em exactly} measuring is enduring. Here, we address the issue by measuring a quantitive and reliable proxy of the academic reputation of a given institution and by evaluating its correlation with different university rankings. Specifically, we study citation patterns among universities in five different Web of Science Subject Categories and use the \pr~algorithm on the five resulting citation networks. The rationale behind our work is that scientific citations are driven by the reputation of the reference so that the PageRank algorithm is expected to yield a rank which reflects the reputation of an academic institution in a specific field. Our results allow to quantifying the prestige of a set of institutions in a certain research field based only on hard bibliometric data. Given the volume of the data analysed, our findings are statistically robust and less prone to bias, at odds with ad--hoc surveys often employed by ranking bodies in order to attain similar results. Because our findings are found to correlate extremely well with the ARWU Subject rankings, the approach we propose in our paper may open the door to new, Academic Ranking methodologies that go beyond current methods by reconciling the qualitative evaluation of Academic Prestige with its quantitative measurements via publication impact.

The New Excellence Indicator in the World Report of the SCImago Institutions Rankings 2011

What proportion of excellent papers makes an institution one of the best worldwide? Specifying thresholds for the interpretation of the results of the SCImago Institutions Ranking and the Leiden Ranking

International Performance of Chinese Institutes in Different Disciplines——A Bibliometric View

Statistical Significance and Effect Sizes of Differences among Research Universities at the Level of Nations and Worldwide based on the Leiden Rankings

Excellence networks in science: A Web-based application based on Bayesian multilevel logistic regression (BMLR) for the identification of institutions collaborating successfully

Percentile ranks and the integrated impact indicator (I3)

A comparison of university performance scores and ranks by MNCS and FSS

Testing Differences Statistically with the Leiden Ranking

Statistical tests and research assessments: A comment on Schneider (2012).

The Leiden Ranking 2011/2012: Data collection, indicators, and interpretation

Global assessment of university research comprehensiveness

A Longitudinal Analysis of University Rankings

Comparison of SCImago journal rank indicator with journal impact factor

How well does I3 perform for impact measurement compared to other bibliometric indicators? The convergent validity of several (field-normalized) indicators

Measuring the academic reputation through citation networks via PageRank

Comparison of a citation-based indicator and peer review for absolute and specific measures of research-group excellence

Absolute and specific measures of research group excellence

Collaboration network of knowledge creation and dissemination on Management research: ranking the leading institutions

Which cities' paper output and citation impact are above expectation in information science? Some improvements of our previous mapping approaches

2011-2012 multi-indicator analysis of world-class universities and academic institutions

The validation of (advanced) bibliometric indicators through peer assessments: A comparative study using data from InCites and F1000