I find it useful. i10 index can be quite developped even if h index might be modest. It shows that you have an important publication activity that can attract interest, without a few publications being more populars than others.

Do you have any comments on this?

i10-Index has been created by Google Scholar as an alternate author level metric to h-index. It is a whole number indicating the number of publications of a particular scientist with at least 10 citations. This simple index is used only by Google Scholar as a measure to gauge the productivity of a scholar.

Among all the metrics provided to gauge a scholar's work, I find it useful as well. Although the "10" threshold might be debatable, the i10-index assesses potentially the number of influencial papers a scholar have authored, in my humble opinion.

It is a quite useful metric but actually, since it is only available in Google Scholar, it is a bit overshadowed.

The i10 index can be calculated from ISI and SCOPUS and will be lower with them.than with scholar as it is just a matter of total number of citations

Not all papers we write have an large international interest. Many papers that we publish deal with local or regional case studies, which are followed by a limited numebr of teams and colleagues. This kind of paper is still very interesting, and might have great local impact. But the scientific community dealing with the same topic might be so reduced that your paper can never reach summits of citations.

Does this means that your paper has no value and does not deserve being ranked somewhere?

I do not think so.

Thus the i10 index helps putting forward papers about some local or regional studies.

Dear George Thomas

thank you for your reply about the origin of the i10 index.

From your own point of view, do you think that this index is interesting, compared to other ones, and why?