You should have all three, at least the ones that pertain to you. The ORCID, while relatively new, is independent of any particular publisher or database. Because it can be associated with any scholarly output (not just papers in a particular group of journals), ORCID has arguably become the most important. The ResearcherID is for Thomson Reuters authors, while Scopus Author ID is for items indexed in Scopus, but both organizations work with ORCID. If you publish with Thomson Reuters or are indexed in Scopus, you are encouraged to link your IDs there with an ORCID.

I agree with Witwer. This is an area where no universally recognized standard register has been accepted yet.

@Jose, we are still far away from a single unified system! Maybe the development of such system is in progress, but, as my predecessors have noted, we are going to use many of ID's ! It would be nice if unique standard for those purpose was adopted.

But in practice, Which of these four systems have been given you some benefit of visibility?

For example, I consider that ResearchGate offers more visibility.

ORCID can provide a better description of bibliographic data, especially when items are transferred from SCOPUS. But duplication of information is generated if the data is transferred from the two databases: SCOPUS ID and ResearchID.

ResearchID seems better organized and offers information about citation metrics included the H Index.

Google Scholar & Cited Get more information that provides visibility appointments.

@Jose, I do agree on ResearchGate visibility, comparing to other systems!

I reckon you might have to (painstakingly) make sure you're up to date with several, not just one. Currently, every so often, I check through researchgate, ORCID (v useful to have, as many diff types of journals ask for your ORCID ID), google scholar, and my university's own internal system (Sympletic elements) just to make sure it all adds up. Oh yeah, then I would add all (or if you have many, maybe just your "top 5") publications to my LinkedIn profile as well. Either way it's a lot of hassle (see link talking about pros- and many cons- of diff websites for this). Good luck!

http://nlphist.hypotheses.org/107

ORCID is going to the game changer in this. They are not for profit and works with all information providers. There are issues to be cleared along the way of course but they are already working with a number of major and small publishers who request the authors of manuscripts to have an ORCID ID. These can then be captured in the metadata and be indexed accordingly. That's just one area though.

They are also working with university libraries, funding agencies etc to have the same requirement.

Dear @Friends, ORCID has announced today some changes and new features.

New: The ORCID Inbox

To help you manage how and when you receive notifications from ORCID, we have developed an ORCID Inbox system, orcid.org/inbox. You can choose which messages are delivered to your Inbox and how frequently you receive alerts. For more information and to reset the default weekly alert frequency, please see "About the ORCID Inbox"

New: Permission requests for ORCID record auto-updates ...

http://support.orcid.org/knowledgebase/articles/665437

ResearchID, ORCID, Scopus Author ID.. all of them are advantage for publication each one of them have specialty

Please see https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0136-3941 for my publication

It depends upon which geographical region of the world you are in.

id

Dear José Alberto Ramírez de León ,

All are more or less useful in terms of increasing visibility. ORCID ID is by far the most relevant:

-More and more journals require an ORCID ID during the submission procedure of your manuscript

-It is extremely useful because of all sorts of (automatic) links towards other services like Scopus, see for a bit more info on these links for example:

Method Information and tips related to search engines like Google S...

Best regards.

There is also an ORCID field in the profile on Researchgate. Yes, dear Rob Keller , ORCID is unique and most relevant.

Dear Ljubomir Jacić ,

Today I came thanks to the following question: https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is-Elsevier-phasing-out-EVISE across an interesting paper by Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva :

Article ORCID: Issues and concerns about its use for academic purpos...

bringing up some interesting (and critical) issues when it comes to ORCID. Concerns about privacy, freedom of choice and quality issues are addressed. I think worthwhile to have a close look at.

Best regards.

Dear Jacic: in my opinion , it is the one that can help researchers to do better understanding to their area of interest, make better hygiene, better food, lower price of good food, more effective drug...This and others that help humanity for better life and easier living.Thank you for the nice question. Cheers.

Dear Rob Keller , thanks for sharing this Opinion Paper ORCID: Issues and concerns about its use for academic purposes and research integrity .

I have saved it for later reading.

Dear Medhat Elsahookie , the author of this research question is José Alberto Ramírez de León , not me. I do not see any relation between ORCID and your answer!!!

Dear Jacic: I regret for this mistake, it is probably my poor vision, although with bifocals, I am still have difficulties. My answer in its way, is my feeling about which one is more beneficial, and I know it was beyond the terms of the question, but still an answer to reality in opinion. Thank and Cheers.

Dear de Leon:Thank you for this nice and new question. I would like to say if the word: advantageous means visibility, I would like to say that Academia and RG could be included in the question. Thanks all.

All these have.

How to my number research id

Hello León, all these are important, but in order form me:

1) ORCID,

2) Google Scholar

3) ResearchID

4) Scopus

and others...

For me, all three, ResearchID, ORCID and Author ID are famous and very good. I advice researchers to create account in all.

Regards

Research libraries are usually already working to educate scholars about ORCID, but they may be able to increase their impact by partnering with the university press or library publishing initiative at their own institution. They can play an influential role in educating other local stakeholders about how institutional support and integration of ORCID iDs and other PIDs can reduce the burden on scholars. They can also ask RIM vendors to support metadata harvesting from more sources that include humanities and social science content...

https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2021/12/06/guest-post-scholarly-book-publishing-workflows-and-implications-for-rim-systems/?informz=1

Hi Dr José Alberto Ramírez de León . ORCID is the most used one all over the world. ORCID provides a persistent digital identifier that distinguishes you from other researchers and supports automated linkages between you and your research activities. ... Once registered in ORCID, you can import the papers from ResearcherID (Web of Science) and Scopus: Login to your ORCID record. See the link: https://canberra.libguides.com/c.php?g=599294&p=4149320

Kindly see also the following useful RG link : Article Use of author identifier services (ORCID, ResearcherID) and ...

Also see kindly the following useful link: https://libguides.libraries.wsu.edu/citationsearching/author_ids

Very important and interesting issue. I think all of them.

Scopus and ORCID

ORCID and Scopus

All of them are necessary

All of them are important for the researchers.

Все три удобные и важные, но СКОРС составляет исключение.

Apart from the three you mentioned also get on to PUBLONS and the list of publications and reviews can be sent as softcopy to employees.