A novel synthetic index of two counts and mathematical model for researcher evaluation

The purpose of this paper is to present a novel synthetic index of two counts and mathematical model for researcher evaluation.,A synthetic index L for researcher evaluation considering both the total number of other citations (C) and nonacademic impact (I) and a synthetic evaluation model are proposed in this paper. C and I are verified impact indexes. According to investigation by Delphi method, researchers are divided into five different classes of “below average,” “average,” “good,” “excellent” and “stellar.” The threshold values for counts C of grey class “stellar” are determined by deep investigation. The possibility functions of the two counts C and I on four grey classes of “below average,” “average,” “good” and “excellent” are built.,The novel synthetic index of two counts and mathematical model for researcher evaluation provide a better way to conduct researcher assessment.,The synthetic index L presented in this paper can be used to evaluate a researcher. It's more reasonable than the current research assessment indexes such as the number of publications and the numbers of so-called high-quality journal publications and the amount of granted funds and so on. The synthetic index L reflects the actual value created by a researcher. No artificial maneuver can change them significantly.,A synthetic index L for researcher evaluation considering both the total number of other citations (C) and nonacademic impact (I) and a synthetic evaluation model are proposed in this paper.

[1]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  A review of theory and practice in scientometrics , 2015, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[2]  David Stuart,et al.  Beyond Bibliometrics: Harnessing Multidimensional Indicators of Scholarly Impact , 2015, Online information review (Print).

[3]  Jeffrey Forrest,et al.  Grey Data Analysis - Methods, Models and Applications , 2017, Computational Risk Management.

[4]  Anthony F. J. van Raan.  Comparison of the Hirsch-index with standard bibliometric indicators and with peer judgment for 147 chemistry research groups , 2013, Scientometrics.

[5]  J. E. Hirsch,et al.  An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output , 2005, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA.

[6]  Sifeng Liu,et al.  Grey Control Systems , 2010 .

[7]  E GARFIELD,et al.  Citation indexes for science; a new dimension in documentation through association of ideas. , 2006, Science.

[8]  K. Kao,et al.  Dielectric-fibre surface waveguides for optical frequencies , 1966 .

[9]  C. Chow,et al.  Are Articles in “Top” Management Journals Necessarily of Higher Quality? , 2007 .

[10]  Sifeng Liu,et al.  Do not try to evaluate research results in a hurry , 2019, Grey Syst. Theory Appl..

[11]  L. A. Zadeh,et al.  Fuzzy logic and approximate reasoning , 1975, Synthese.

[12]  Paul Otlet.  Traité de documentation : le livre sur le livre, théorie et pratique , 1934 .

[13]  Gabrielle Samuel,et al.  Exploring evaluator perceptions of the characterization of impact under the REF2014 , 2015 .

[14]  Sifeng Liu,et al.  Grey cluster evaluation models based on mixed triangular whitenization weight functions , 2015, Grey Syst. Theory Appl..

[15]  Rodrigo Costas,et al.  The h-index: Advantages, limitations and its relation with other bibliometric indicators at the micro level , 2007, J. Informetrics.

[16]  V. V. Nalimov,et al.  Measurement of Science. Study of the Development of Science as an Information Process , 1971 .