BloJJ

Adventures of a multidimensional freak

This is Juan Julián Merelo Guervós English-language blog. He teaches computer science at the University of Granada, in southern Spain. Come back here to read about politics, technology, with a new twist

Latest comments

  • Natasha en Riddles in Kafka on the shore
  • Cb en Riddles in Kafka on the shore
  • Dan Brown Freak en Spanish mostly pissed off at Dan Brown's Digital Fortress
  • Jack en Riddles in Kafka on the shore
  • Anónimo en About conference poster design and defense
  • Hendo en Riddles in Kafka on the shore
  • TML en Riddles in Kafka on the shore
  • Anonymous en Riddles in Kafka on the shore
  • RonS en Riddles in Kafka on the shore
  • miss en Riddles in Kafka on the shore
  • Blogs Out There

    Nelson Minar's Blog
    Jeremy Zawodny's Blog
    Kottke
    Complexes, Carlos Gershenson's blog
    IlliGAL, Genetic Algorithms blog
    Blogging in the wind, Víctor R. Ruiz's blog


    Atalaya, my Spanish language blog
    Geneura@Wordpress, our research group's blog.
    My home page

    Old stories


    Creative Commons License
    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
    Blogalia

    Stats
    Inicio > Historias > The Real H

    The Real H

    How do you compute the real H? One of the ways is the most straighforward, the one I use when I post about it and what programs like Publish or Perish return. But there are several problems here: first one is that Google overshoots a bit the number of publications by including published Master Thesis, technical reports and even the popular press. No big deal, because a reference is a reference, but the second is a bit harder: excluding self-cites. Citeseer does it, as does Scopus, but Google does not.
    The problem is that it's quite laborious to exclude self-cites, since the paper title is unique, but the author might not (A. Pérez, anyone?). In any case, if I try to exclude these self-cites, what would my real H be? I would have to painstakingly go reference by reference, and exclude a few. And while I'm at it, there are a few papers called "Indexed bibliography of this and that" which are also included and would have to be taken off. And all that is not worth the while any more. But I should try and modify this, to take that into account... gone to the TO DO list. Any other suggestion, you're welcome.
    Etiquetas: , , ,

    2009-11-12 10:38 | 3 Comment(s) | Filed in Just_A_Scientist

    Referencias (TrackBacks)

    URL de trackback de esta historia http://blojj.blogalia.com//trackbacks/65085

    Comentarios

    1
    De: Carlos Fecha: 2009-12-16 20:39

    But why should you exclude self-citations? I actually find "self-citation" is not always well-defined (a citation to "Simon and Garfunkel" from "Garfunkel, Springsteen and Bisbal" should be considered self-citation?)

    I guess the problem with citations is bias, and it can be argued this bias is stronger when it comes to cite oneself. Then again, it can be counter-argued that the contents of a published paper (including citations) passed the filters of the reviewers, and hence are in order. And you can only get many self-citations if you manage to publish many papers which is not an easy deal (well, unless you are CS&F EiC ;-)).



    2
    De: Carlos Gershenson Fecha: 2009-12-17 17:02

    Hola JJ,

    I'm not sure whether this one does the trick:
    http://tenurometer.indiana.edu/



    3
    De: JJ Fecha: 2009-12-18 12:02

    @Carlos the problem with self-citations is that you can put as many as you want in your own papers, as soon as you're publishing papers. At least an external citation carries some kind of acknowledgemente from outside.
    @The other Carlos: thanks for the link.



    Nombre
    Correo-e
    URL
    Dirección IP: 54.92.170.117 (aedfdbd980)
    Comentario

    © 2002 - 2008 jmerelo
    Powered by Blogalia