It is interesting to apprise you all that my RG score slightly raised this weak - it is now 14.07 and the reputation break up shows 10.90% on publication area. The score due to publication is decreased.(When Rg score was 13.97 the publication factor was 10.98%) I do not understand why?
I will participate and interact with colleagues and forget the RG score as suggested by you sir. Thank you for your response- motivated, Vow!
Prof Sheth, your profile is tremendous and looks great!
May be few observations that would yield you at very good heights are that you can be more interactive and recommend others work/answers apart from sharing your own publications.
It is interesting to apprise you all that my RG score slightly raised this weak - it is now 14.07 and the reputation break up shows 10.90% on publication area. The score due to publication is decreased.(When Rg score was 13.97 the publication factor was 10.98%) I do not understand why?
I will participate and interact with colleagues and forget the RG score as suggested by you sir. Thank you for your response- motivated, Vow!
The RG Score is a metric that measures scientific reputation based on how all of your work is received by your peers. We believe that fellow researchers are the best judges of each other's work and that all your research, published or not, deserves credit. With this in mind, your RG Score is based on how both your published research and contributions to ResearchGate are received by your peers.
IT IS NOT THE NUMBER OF PUBLICATIONS BUT THE JOURNALS IN WHICH THEY ARE PUBLISHED HAVE MORE WEIGHTAGE APART FROM THE CITATION.
SIMILARLY IF YOU INTERACT AND ASK QUESTIONS,RG SCORE WILL INCREASE OWING TO YOUR RECIPROCATION BUT ACCORDINGLY THE WEIGHTAGE GIVEN BY PAPERS TOWARDS TOTAL SCORE GOES ON DECREASING.
RG score as my colleagues mentioned is depending on many factors such as citation, questions and answers, publications, contributions, followers, etc..
It is unclear how RG score is calcukated. Many researchers asked about it and there are many answers there, But no answer seems to be 100% correct.
I saw scores for some researchers who have big contibutions to RG is MUCH LESS than others who do not have that much contribution.
RG score is calculated every week, and it may increases, decreases, or doesn't change. I think in order to increase your RG score, your contributions (number of read) in the current week should be greater than your average contributions in previous weeks.
I do not have the slightest idea. every week I interact in an ascending way, I have reached 500 recommendations of only 10 that I had when I started interacting. The first two weeks my average rose like foam, after 5 weeks it has gone down considerably.
Hello everybody, I do not want to distract attention out of this interesting question but I also wonder why Hirsch index in RG is (much) different by Hirsch index in other collections, for instance in Thomson Reuters. The same question for citations, what RG presents is much different by what Google scholar indicates. Is this indexing or counting exclusively a matter of collection? The calculation procedure for hirsch is very clear but the result is much different in different collections. In this case which index to consider if requested in professional needs? Maybe that one which is more convenient if we may choose? But this has not any sense… Better not focus on any such reputation and scorings.
Dear Dr. Sharma, indeed this scoring should be a way of measuring scientific reputation. Unfortunately, it is not quite as you stated. I had this observation to RG admin when I finally accepted to join RG at the end of Oct 2017. I aware that scoring can be easily made-up if have some "friends", colleagues or other persons to provide recommendations blindly or by mutual interest, as I already noticed around. I got the answer that they work to improve this but also that they present a member in varius lights/criteria just to allow others get a more correct/real view. Nevertheless I think we should not rely on such scoring too much, neither believe totally that it reflects the scientific reputation. Regards.
I think RG score is a false metric that measures scientific reputations. I have seen many person having more than 100 RG score with very low research profile. Many research gate members have earned high RG score only on the basis of questions and answers. So RG score should not be a tool for measuring scientific reputation. h index is much better option