In my opinion i10-index should be one of the basis to evaluate the authors achievements not only the h-index. Especially in some specializations were the citations are usually limited.
Hi-index is the more internationally recognised and the original matrix of its kind - especially as only certain databases i.e. Google Scholar use the i10 index. The i10 index is more useful with scholars who may have a low h-index but a reasonable i10 index for the purposes of job applications, promotion etc. For established scholars who have a good h-index - the i10 index tends to be around double the h-index. For instance, on Google Scholar, I have a h-index of 35 and an i10 index of 54.
The i10 is easy to grasp than complicated and confusing h index, though both give critical information. There should also be a parameter for number of authors per publication and average impact of each author. There may be organizations, which give names of all scientists in all publications resulting in everyone having the same h-index and i10 factor, that may stand against justice for papers with justifiable working author(s) only.
Both are important in expressing the value of search, but I think Hi-index is the most important.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Citations