First, congratulations to you and to all colleagues for the new evaluation.
We've heard a lot about the RG platform's intention to adopt a new evaluation today and it seems to have appeared publicly on the RG platform. It is based on researches exclusively for each researcher and evaluated by the platform community exclusively also in accordance with the stated context of them:
First, congratulations to you and to all colleagues for the new evaluation.
We've heard a lot about the RG platform's intention to adopt a new evaluation today and it seems to have appeared publicly on the RG platform. It is based on researches exclusively for each researcher and evaluated by the platform community exclusively also in accordance with the stated context of them:
In addition to @Shaden M H Mubarak, Total Research Interest (TRI) is the researcher's contributions in terms of their research items added on RG. It is measured by the following;
Total number of citations
Publications
Reads by RG members
Full text reads
Other reads
These are weighted and show how you're faring in terms of percentage compared to other researchers on RG
I think Total Research Interest is a metric that takes into consideration all the researches one downloads when suggested, all the full-text they request, all the projects they follow, all publications they recommend and all the questions they recommend or answer plus the researchers own research interest.
As stated by RG site in the window of the explanations
provided that:
Multiple reads and recommendations by a researcher in a single week A researcher interacting multiple times with the same research within a short period of time doesn't represent an increase in interest, but leaves the score more open to abuse.
I think this is what I asked about the caveats to decrease the score .