English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Citation numbers and other quantities derived from bibliographic databasesare becoming standard tools for the assessment of productivity and impact ofresearch activities. Though widely used, still their statistical propertieshave not been well established so far. This is especially true in the case ofbibliometric indicators aimed at the evaluation of individual scholars, becauselarge-scale data sets are typically difficult to be retrieved. Here, we takeadvantage of a recently introduced large bibliographic data set, Google ScholarCitations, which collects the entire publication record of individual scholars.We analyze the scientific profile of more than 30,000 researchers, and studythe relation between the h-index, the number of publications and the number ofcitations of individual scientists. While the number of publications of ascientist has a rather weak relation with his/her h-index, we find that theh-index of a scientist is strongly correlated with the number of citations thatshe/he has received so that the number of citations can be effectively be usedas a proxy of the h-index. Allowing for the h-index to depend on both thenumber of citations and the number of publications, we find only a minorimprovement.

Analysis of bibliometric indicators for individual scholars in a large data set