Abstract:Quantifying and comparing the scientific output of researchers has become critical for governments, funding agencies and universities. Comparison by reputation and direct assessment of contributions to the field is no longer possible, as the number of scientists increases and traditional definitions about scientific fields become blurred. The h-index is often used for comparing scientists, but has several well-documented shortcomings. In this paper, we introduce a new index for measuring and comparing the publication records of scientists: the pagerank-index (symbolised as π). The index uses a version of pagerank algorithm and the citation networks of papers in its computation, and is fundamentally different from the existing variants of h-index because it considers not only the number of citations but also the actual impact of each citation. We adapt two approaches to demonstrate the utility of the new index. Firstly, we use a simulation model of a community of authors, whereby we create various 'groups' of authors which are different from each other in inherent publication habits, to show that the pagerank-index is fairer than the existing indices in three distinct scenarios: (i) when authors try to 'massage' their index by publishing papers in low-quality outlets primarily to self-cite other papers (ii) when authors collaborate in large groups in order to obtain more authorships (iii) when authors spend most of their time in producing genuine but low quality publications that would massage their index. Secondly, we undertake two real world case studies: (i) the evolving author community of quantum game theory, as defined by Google Scholar (ii) a snapshot of the high energy physics (HEP) theory research community in arXiv. In both case studies, we find that the list of top authors vary very significantly when h-index and pagerank-index are used for comparison. We show that in both cases, authors who have collaborated in large groups and/or published less impactful papers tend to be comparatively favoured by the h-index, whereas the pagerank-index highlights authors who have made a relatively small number of definitive contributions, or written papers which served to highlight the link between diverse disciplines, or typically worked in smaller groups. Thus, we argue that the pagerank-index is an inherently fairer and more nuanced metric to quantify the publication records of scientists compared to existing measures.

An empirical and theoretical critique of the Euclidean index

The inconsistency of the h-index

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

The x-index: A new citation-distance-based index to measure academic influence

A review on h-index and its alternative indices

Analyzing research performance: proposition of a new complementary index

The Pagerank-Index: Going beyond Citation Counts in Quantifying Scientific Impact of Researchers

Metrics to evaluate research performance in academic institutions: A critique of ERA 2010 as applied in forestry and the indirect H2 index as a possible alternative

Statistical Model of Scientific Research Evaluation

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

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

Turning the tables in citation analysis one more time: Principles for comparing sets of documents

Turning the tables on citation analysis one more time: Principles for comparing sets of documents

How are new citation-based journal indicators adding to the bibliometric toolbox?

h-index and its alternative: A Review

Author Evaluation Based on H-index and Citation Response

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

The influence of self-citation corrections on Egghe's g index

Revisiting Relative Indicators and Provisional Truths.

$Φ$ index: A standardized scale-independent citation indicator

CITEX: A new citation index to measure the relative importance of authors and papers in scientific publications