Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

\(C^3\)-index: a PageRank based multi-faceted metric for authors’ performance measurement

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Ranking scientific authors is an important but challenging task, mostly due to the dynamic nature of the evolving scientific publications. The basic indicators of an author’s productivity and impact are still the number of publications and the citation count (leading to the popular metrics such as h-index, g-index etc.). H-index and its popular variants are mostly effective in ranking highly-cited authors, thus fail to resolve ties while ranking medium-cited and low-cited authors who are majority in number. Therefore, these metrics are inefficient to predict the ability of promising young researchers at the beginning of their career. In this paper, we propose \(C^3\)-index that combines the effect of citations and collaborations of an author in a systematic way using a weighted multi-layered network to rank authors. We conduct our experiments on a massive publication dataset of Computer Science and show that—(1) \(C^3\)-index is consistent over time, which is one of the fundamental characteristics of a ranking metric, (2) \(C^3\)-index is as efficient as h-index and its variants to rank highly-cited authors, (3) \(C^3\)-index can act as a conflict resolution metric to break ties in the ranking of medium-cited and low-cited authors, (4) \(C^3\)-index can also be used to predict future achievers at the early stage of their career.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. http://www.webometrics.info/en/node/58.

  2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_authorship.

  3. A supergraph of author-author coauthorship graph that takes into account social relationship between authors other than coauthorship: friends in the social media, Committee members of the same conference, editors of the same journal, members having same affiliation, etc. However, this feature is not frequently used due to the lack of suitable dataset.

References

  • Abramo, G., DAngelo, C. A., & Solazzi, M. (2011). Are researchers that collaborate more at the international level top performers? An investigation on the Italian university system. Journal of Informetrics, 5(1), 204–213. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2010.11.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barabási, A. L., Jeong, H., Néda, Z., Ravasz, E., Schubert, A., & Vicsek, T. (2002). Evolution of the social network of scientific collaborations. Physica A: Statistical mechanics and its applications, 311(3), 590–614.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Boccaletti, S., Bianconi, G., Criado, R., del Genio, C., Gmez-Gardees, J., Romance, M., et al. (2014). The structure and dynamics of multilayer networks. Physics Reports, 544(1), 1–122. doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2014.07.001.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Bollen, J., Rodriquez, A. M., & Van de Sompel, H. (2006). Journal status. Scientometrics, 69(3), 669–687. doi:10.1007/s11192-006-0176-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H. D. (2009). The state of h index research. EMBO Reports, 10(1), 2–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byrnes, J. P. (2007). Publishing trends of psychology faculty during their pretenure years. Psychological Science, 18(4), 283–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cacioppo, J.T. (2008) Metrics of Science. Association for Psychological Science, 21(1). http://www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/publications/observer/2008/january-08/metrics-of-science.html.

  • Cacioppo, J. T. (2016). Social neuroscience. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carley, S., Porter, A. L., & Youtie, J. (2013). Toward a more precise definition of self-citation. Scientometrics, 94(2), 777–780. doi:10.1007/s11192-012-0745-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chakraborty, T., Ganguly, N., & Mukherjee, A. (2014a). Automatic classification of scientific groups as productive: An approach based on motif analysis. In International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM) (pp. 130–137). doi:10.1109/ASONAM.2014.6921572.

  • Chakraborty, T., Ganguly, N., & Mukherjee, A. (2015a). An author is known by the context she keeps: Significance of network motifs in scientific collaborations. Social Network Analysis and Mining, 5(1), 16:1–16:21. doi:10.1007/s13278-015-0255-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chakraborty, T., Kumar, S., Goyal, P., Ganguly, N., & Mukherjee, A. (2015b). On the categorization of scientific citation profiles in computer science. Communications of the ACM, 58(9), 82–90. doi:10.1145/2701412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chakraborty, T., Sikdar, S., Ganguly, N., & Mukherjee, A. (2014b). Citation interactions among computer science fields: A quantitative route to the rise and fall of scientific research. Social Network Analysis and Mining, 4(1), 187. doi:10.1007/s13278-014-0187-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chakraborty, T., Sikdar, S., Tammana, V., Ganguly, N., & Mukherjee, A. (2013) Computer science fields as ground-truth communities: Their impact, rise and fall. In ASONAM (pp. 426–433). Niagara Falls, Canada

  • Chen, P., Xie, H., Maslov, S., & Redner, S. (2007). Finding scientific gems with Google’s PageRank algorithm. Journal of Informetrics, 1(1), 8–15. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2006.06.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costas, R., & Bordons, M. (2007). The h-index: Advantages, limitations and its relation with other bibliometric indicators at the micro level. Journal of Informetrics, 1(3), 193–203. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2007.02.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cui, J., Wang, F., & Zhai, J. (2010). Citation Networks as a multi-layer graph: Link prediction and importance ranking. Stanford Student Project. http://snap.stanford.edu/class/cs224w-2010/proj2010/05_ProjectReport.pdf

  • De Domenico, M., Sole-Ribalta, A., Omodei, E., Gomez, S., Arenas, A. (2015). Ranking in interconnected multilayer networks reveals versatile nodes. Nature Communications, 6. doi:10.1038/ncomms7868

  • Deng, H., Han, J., Lyu, M.R., & King, I. (2012). Modeling and exploiting heterogeneous bibliographic networks for expertise ranking. In Proceedings of the 12th ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries, JCDL ’12 (pp. 71–80). ACM, New York. doi:10.1145/2232817.2232833.

  • Ding, Y. (2011). Applying weighted pagerank to author citation networks. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(2), 236–245. doi:10.1002/asi.21452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ding, Y., & Cronin, B. (2011). Popular and/or prestigious? Measures of scholarly esteem. Information Processing and Management, 47(1), 80–96. doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2010.01.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ding, Y., Yan, E., Frazho, A., & Caverlee, J. (2009). PageRank for ranking authors in co-citation networks. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(11), 2229–2243. doi:10.1002/asi.21171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Egghe, L. (2006). Theory and practise of the g-index. Scientometrics, 69(1), 131–152. doi:10.1007/s11192-006-0144-7.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Falagas, M. E., Kouranos, V. D., Arencibia-Jorge, R., & Karageorgopoulos, D. E. (2008). Comparison of SCImago journal rank indicator with journal impact factor. The FASEB Journal, 22(8), 2623–2628.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiala, D., Rousselot, F., & Ježek, K. (2008). PageRank for bibliographic networks. Scientometrics, 76(1), 135–158. doi:10.1007/s11192-007-1908-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiala, D., Subelj, L., Zitnik, S., & Bajec, M. (2015). Do PageRank-based author rankings outperform simple citation counts? Journal of Informetrics, 9(2), 334–348. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2015.02.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halu, A., Mondragn, R. J., Panzarasa, P., & Bianconi, G. (2013). Multiplex PageRank. PLoS One, 8(10), 1–10. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0078293. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0078293.

  • Hirsch, J.E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. In Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(46), 16569–16572. doi:10.1073/pnas.0507655102. http://www.pnas.org/content/102/46/16569.abstract.

  • Hirsch, J. E. (2010). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output that takes into account the effect of multiple coauthorship. Scientometrics, 85(3), 741–754. doi:10.1007/s11192-010-0193-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jin, B., Liang, L., Rousseau, R., & Egghe, L. (2007). The R- and AR-indices: Complementing the h-index. Chinese Science Bulletin, 52(6), 855–863. doi:10.1007/s11434-007-0145-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kosmulski, M. (2006). A new Hirsch-type index saves time and works equally well as the original h-index. ISSI Newsletter (pp. 4–6).

  • Liu, J., Lei, K.H., Liu, J.Y., Wang, C., & Han, J. (2013). Ranking-based name matching for author disambiguation in bibliographic data. In Proceedings of the 2013 KDD Cup 2013 Workshop, KDD Cup ’13 (pp. 8:1–8:8). ACM, Chicago. doi:10.1145/2517288.2517296.

  • Liu, X., Bollen, J., Nelson, M. L., & Van de Sompel, H. (2005). Co-authorship networks in the digital library research community. Information Processing and Management, 41(6), 1462–1480. doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2005.03.012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Long, J. S. (1992). Measures of sex differences in scientific productivity. Social Forces, 71(1), 159–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ma, N., Guan, J., & Zhao, Y. (2008). Bringing PageRank to the citation analysis. Information Processing and Management, 44(2), 800–810. doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2007.06.006. Evaluating exploratory search systems digital libraries in the context of users broader activities.

  • Maslov, S., & Redner, S. (2008). Promise and pitfalls of extending Google’s PageRank algorithm to citation networks. The Journal of Neuroscience, 28(44), 11103–11105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melin, G. (2000). Pragmatism and self-organization: Research collaboration on the individual level. Research Policy, 29(1), 31–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murthy, D., & Lewis, J. P. (2015). Social media, collaboration, and scientific organizations. American Behavioral Scientist, 59(1), 149–171. doi:10.1177/0002764214540504. http://abs.sagepub.com/content/59/1/149.abstract.

  • Nykl, M., Jeek, K., Fiala, D., & Dostal, M. (2014). PageRank variants in the evaluation of citation networks. Journal of Informetrics, 8(3), 683–692. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2014.06.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ortega, J. L. (2014). Influence of co-authorship networks in the research impact: Ego network analyses from microsoft academic search. Journal of Informetrics, 8(3), 728–737. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2014.07.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinski, G., & Narin, F. (1976). Citation influence for journal aggregates of scientific publications: Theory, with application to the literature of physics. Information Processing and Management, 12(5), 297–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan, D., Chakraborty, T., Pandit, S., & Nandi, S. (2016). On the discovery of success trajectories of authors. In Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW) (pp. 91–92). doi:10.1145/2872518.2889375.

  • Pradhan, D., Paul, P.S., Maheswari, U., Nandi, S., & Chakraborty, T. (2016). \(\text{C}^{3}\)-index: Revisiting author’s performance measure. In Proceedings of the 8th ACM Conference on Web Science, WebSci 2016. Hannover, Germany, May 22–25, 2016 (pp. 318–319).

  • Radicchi, F., Fortunato, S., Markines, B., & Vespignani, A. (2009). Diffusion of scientific credits and the ranking of scientists. Physical Review E, 80(5), 056–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Redner, S. (2010). On the meaning of the h-index. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, 2010(03), L03,005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Senanayake, U., Piraveenan, M., & Zomaya, A. (2014). Ranking scientists from the field of quantum game theory using p-index. In Foundations of Computational Intelligence (FOCI), 2014 IEEE Symposium on (pp. 9–16). doi:10.1109/FOCI.2014.7007801

  • Senanayake, U., Piraveenan, M., & Zomaya, A. (2014). The p-index: Ranking scientists using network dynamics. Procedia Computer Science, 29, 465–477. doi:10.1016/j.procs.2014.05.042.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Senanayake, U., Piraveenan, M., & Zomaya, A. (2015). The PageRank-index: Going beyond citation counts in quantifying scientific impact of researchers. PLoS One, 10(8), 1–34. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0134794. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0134794.

  • Tahamtan, I., Safipour Afshar, A., & Ahamdzadeh, K. (2016). Factors affecting number of citations: A comprehensive review of the literature. Scientometrics, 107(3), 1195–1225. doi:10.1007/s11192-016-1889-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trueba, F. J., & Guerrero, H. (2004). A robust formula to credit authors for their publications. Scientometrics, 60(2), 181–204. doi:10.1023/B:SCIE.0000027792.09362.3f.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tscharntke, T., Hochberg, M. E., Rand, T. A., Resh, V. H., & Krauss, J. (2007). Author sequence and credit for contributions in multiauthored publications. PLOS Biology, 5(1), 1–2. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0050018. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1769438/.

  • Waltman, L., Costas, R., & van Eck, N. J. (2012). Some limitations of the H index: A commentary on Ruscio and colleagues’ analysis of bibliometric indices. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 10(3), 172–175. doi:10.1080/15366367.2012.716260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waltman, L., & van Eck, N. J. (2012). The Inconsistency of the H-index. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(2), 406–415. doi:10.1002/asi.21678.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu, J., Ding, Y., Song, M., & Chambers, T. (2016). Author credit-assignment schemas: A comparison and analysis. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(8), 1973–1989. doi:10.1002/asi.23495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yan, E., & Ding, Y. (2009). Applying centrality measures to impact analysis: A coauthorship network analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(10), 2107–2118. doi:10.1002/asi.21128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yan, E., Ding, Y., & Sugimoto, C. R. (2011). P-Rank: An indicator measuring prestige in heterogeneous scholarly networks. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(3), 467–477. doi:10.1002/asi.21461.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, D., Orshanskiy, S.A., Zha, H., & Giles, C.L. (2007). Co-ranking authors and documents in a heterogeneous network. In Seventh IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM 2007). IEEE, Omaha, Nebraska (pp. 739–744).

  • Życzkowski, K. (2010). Citation graph, weighted impact factors and performance indices. Scientometrics, 85(1), 301–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science and Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Durgapur, India

    Dinesh Pradhan, Partha Sarathi Paul, Umesh Maheswari & Subrata Nandi

  2. Department of Computer Science, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA

    Tanmoy Chakraborty

Authors
  1. Dinesh Pradhan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Partha Sarathi Paul
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Umesh Maheswari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Subrata Nandi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Tanmoy Chakraborty
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tanmoy Chakraborty.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pradhan, D., Paul, P.S., Maheswari, U. et al. \(C^3\)-index: a PageRank based multi-faceted metric for authors’ performance measurement. Scientometrics 110, 253–273 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2168-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2168-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation