Hi, Please see this link: https://www.researchgate.net/post/How_I_can_find_a_list_of_very_famous_professors_in_my_topic_with_H_index
There are several sources of citation counts, e.g., web of science, google scholar.. They do not agree. However, errors are always negative, so the largest citation count for an article is likely closest to correct.. If you have been publishing for many years, the Web of Science cited reference search will find the articles that were so badly cited that the computers could not assign them to a particular article. Human intervention often helps. In the end, follow Nebi Caka's instruction.
Hi; see the example
rank of publication: 1 2 3 4 5
number of citation: 5 4 3 2 1
H index = 3.
The H index (initially proposed by Jorge E. Hirsch) of a researcher is defined as the number of articles (research papers) published by the researcher, whose citations are greater than or equal to that number.
When we say that the H index of a particular author is five, it means that he/she has at least five articles published, each with at least five citations. For example: article 1 - 11 citations; article 2 - 10 citations; article 3 - 9 citations; article 4 - 8 citations; article 5 - 5 citations; article 6 - 3 citations; article 7 – 2 citations.
Consider also the g-index, Rank order the publications by descending order of number of citations. Label them 1, 2, 3... Start at the top, and compute the total number T of citations. Compare with the square of the label number L. Eventually L^2 will be greater than T. The last label for which L^2 < T is the g-index. It is sort of like the H-index, except citations to top-ranked papers matter, which they do not for the H-index..
Sid Redner (now at the Santa Fe Research Institute) has another alternative, in which you take the total number of citations to papers included as being above the h-index line, and divide by the square of the h-index. The resulting number generally ranges between 0.8 and 1.2 or so (I am at the 0.8 end). Redner hypothesizes that the larger 1.2 value is better.
There are rather few people after Hirsch who give any interpretation, e.g., for physics, as to what the number means. Hirsch proposed iirc that 35-40 was supposed to be a top-ranked physicist.
Dear Abdalsamad:
I don't think that is how the h-index is calculated. J. E. Hirsch, who proposed this index in a paper published in 2005, defined it like this:
"A scientist has index h if h of his or her Np papers have at least h citations each and the other (Np – h) papers have ≤h citations each."
See: http://www.pnas.org/content/102/46/16569.full.pdf">JE
So the rank of the publications is not a factor, just the number of times each of a set of publications has been cited. It's simple: if a researcher has three papers that have each been cited three times, that person has an h-index of three.
For a detailed discussion, see the Wikipedia article, which provides several links that will enable you to dig deeper into this topic:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H-index
Best regards,
David
Suppose my papers, listed in order of number of cites, are
#1 - 160
#2 - 154
#3 - 125
#4 - 3
#5 - 1
I have an h-index of 3, because my #3 paper has more than 3 cites, and my #4 paper has fewer than four cites. Rank is thus determinative.
IT appears to me that Carr and Keramatfar, above, are in agreement with each other, just saying the same thing very differently.
Thank you, George, for pointing this out. I believe I was misinterpreting Abdalsamad's "shorthand" regarding ranking, taking it to mean the position of the journal in a ranking system. My apologies to Abdalsamad.
I designed a pdf instruction file and Excel datasheet that everyone could calculate her H-index by himself , Hope to be useful for you.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273489762_Simple_Method_to_Calculate_your_H-index_by_Yourself
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273489463_Excel_Datasheet_for_calculating_your_H-index?ev=prf_pub
Data Simple Method to Calculate your H-index by Yourself
Data Excel Datasheet for calculating your H-index
An interesting alternative question would be a systematic study of alternative indices, e.g., the g-index, not to mention a modified h-index with adjustment for the number of co-authors.
Hi, Please see this link: https://www.researchgate.net/post/How_I_can_find_a_list_of_very_famous_professors_in_my_topic_with_H_index
The h-index is an author-level metric that attempts to measure both the productivity and citation impact of the publications of a scientist or scholar.
you can see this link:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H-index
1) seeing my citations per paper and making a list of the number of citations in descending mode. (ex1. 20, 6, 6, 6, 2, 1) (ex2. 14, 4, 2, 1)
2) enumerating them in a list growing + 1 and comparing (equivalent to) the enumeration and number of citation...
H-index=numeration, when enumeration is smaller or equal to the number of citation.
(enumeration (n+1) equivalent to number of citation)
ex1.
1 equivalent to 20
2 equivalent to 6
3 equivalent to 6
4 equivalent to 6 (H-index=4)
5 equivalent to 2
6 equivalent to 1
ex2.
1equivalent to 14
2 equivalent to 4 (H-index=2)
3 equivalent to 2
4 equivalent to 1
Dear Dr. Geoffrey Chima Nwakwuo
Here is a usefull links :http://www.dit.ie/library/ditlibrarycentralservices/researchsmarts/understandbibliometrics/https://www.library.auckland.ac.nz/subject-guides/med/pdfs/H-index%20and%20impact%20factors.pdf
- H-index and impact factors.pdf
- https://guides.library.unisa.edu.au/c.php?g=169983&p=1119055
h index is a simple and standard method described by Jorge Hirsch: http://www.pnas.org/content/102/46/16569So, Scopus determines h the same way any other source does: take the collection of papers of interest (it does NOT have to be an individual author's papers - any collection of papers has an h index). Rank them in descending order by the count of citations. Find the highest numerical rank where the citation count exceeds the rank. That's h .The intricacy of h-index, however, is that its precise value depends on several non-quality factors, including: 1. the dataset you are using (WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar all feature h-index) which will affect both the source items you can include and the citing item population that will be considered If you are comparing h-indexes, it is best to compare within a single resource. 2. the subject matter of the work - as with any non-normalized citation metric, the expected high/low value will be dependent on subject area. Medicine, biomedicine, physics, chemistry - all pretty high; engineering, agriculture, linguistics...lower; history, art, literary criticism - comparatively low. It is best to compare within similar subjects. There are some adaptations/enhancements to h that attempt to account for some aspects of this by including normalizations based on citation levels in the h-core. 3. Age of the corpus - Older things more likely to be cited- and more likely to have achieved near-final citation records. h-index can only increase over time, even if the body of work being considered does not add new items. Again- see some of the h index adaptations. 4. the effect of highly cited papers - There are two edge-cases that would give you an h-index of 10: 10 papers with exactly 10 citations each - and nothing else. (Total citation count for the body of work: 100); or 10 papers with 1000 citations each - and nothing else (Total citation count for the body of work: 10,000). Are these really equivalent academic records? And, you guessed it, there are a pack of h index adjustments that address this kind of thing too. http://www.pnas.org/content/102/46/16569.The index is based on a list of publications ranked in descending order by the number of citations these publications received. The value of h is equal to the number of papers (N) in the list that have N or more citations.With best Wishes
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Microbiology
- Scientific Research