Abstract:Nowadays identifying the personal representative works is becoming increasingly important and necessary for scientists in many cases, such as faculty hiring and promotion applications. There are already a few methods based on different criteria for selecting the representative works of a scientist, like citation count. In addition, we can observe that some researchers always produce many similar quality scientific papers and some researchers have several highly cited papers compared with his or her other papers. In this context, we propose to use the maximum gap in a histogram of a scientist’s sorted papers’ citation counts to classify his or her papers into two groups, i.e. representative papers and regular papers. Based on the maximum gap, we then design an indicator Dr\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$D_{r}$$\end{document} to quantify the impact difference between scientist’s representative works and regular works. We apply this selection method and Dr\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$D_{r}$$\end{document} index into the data of American Physical Society (APS) journals. The results indicate that the selection method can better identify the representative works of Nobel laureates in Physics compared with using the most cited paper. We also find that the number of representative works selected by our method is related to Dr\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$D_{r}$$\end{document}. A larger number of selected papers would appear when the value of Dr\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$D_{r}$$\end{document} index is relatively smaller. Meanwhile, we also observe that Dr\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$D_{r}$$\end{document} is weakly correlated with the h index and total citation.

Evaluating scientists by citation and disruption of their representative works

From Consolidation to Disruption: A Novel Way to Measure the Impact of Scientists and Identify Laureates.

The Role of Positive and Negative Citations in Scientific Evaluation

The representative works of scientists

Untangle the Characteristics of Disruptive and Consolidating Citations of Nobel‐winning Papers

Quantifying the influence of scientists and their publications: Distinguish prestige from popularity

Author Evaluation Based on H-index and Citation Response

Could Bibliometrics Reveal Top Science and Technology Achievements and Researchers? The Case for Evaluatology-based Science and Technology Evaluation

Statistical Model of Scientific Research Evaluation

Quality versus quantity in scientific impact

A Mathematical Framework for Citation Disruption

Bibliometric comparison of Nobel Prize laureates: a few suggestions

Quantifying Success in Science: An Overview

Methods for measuring the citations and productivity of scientists across time and discipline

Fractional counting of citations in research evaluation: An option for cross- and interdisciplinary assessments

An Evaluation Method for Vital Researchers within the Bipartite Scientific Collaboration Network

New measures for evaluating creativity in scientific publications

The Assessment of Science: The Relative Merits of Post-Publication Review, the Impact Factor, and the Number of Citations

Learning to Predict Citation-Based Impact Measures

Mitigating Consequences of Prestige in Citations of Publications

Model-based evaluation of scientific impact indicators