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

A researcher collaborating with many groups will normally have more papers(and thus higher citations and $h$-index) than a researcher spending allhis/her time working alone or in a small group. While analyzing an author'sresearch merit, it is therefore not enough to consider only the collectiveimpact of the published papers, it is also necessary to quantify his/her sharein the impact. For this quantification, here I propose the $I$-index which isdefined as an author's percentage share in the total citations that his/herpapers have attracted. It is argued that this $I$-index does not directlydepend on the most of the subjective issues like an author's influence,affiliation, seniority or career break. A simple application of the CentralLimit Theorem shows that, the scheme of equidistribution of credit among thecoauthors of a paper will give us the most probable value of the $I$-index(with an associated small standard deviation which decreases with increasing$h$-index). I show that the total citations ($N_c$), the $h$-index and the$I$-index are three independent parameters (within their bounds), and togetherthey give a comprehensive idea of an author's overall research performance.

Analyzing research performance: proposition of a new complementary index