Generalized Hirsch h-index for disclosing latent facts in citation networks

What is the value of a scientist and its impact upon the scientific thinking? How can we measure the prestige of a journal or a conference? The evaluation of the scientific work of a scientist and the estimation of the quality of a journal or conference has long attracted significant interest, due to the benefits by obtaining an unbiased and fair criterion. Although it appears to be simple, defining a quality metric is not an easy task. To overcome the disadvantages of the present metrics used for ranking scientists and journals, J. E. Hirsch proposed a pioneering metric, the now famous h-index. In this article we demonstrate several inefficiencies of this index and develop a pair of generalizations and effective variants of it to deal with scientist ranking and publication forum ranking. The new citation indices are able to disclose trendsetters in scientific research, as well as researchers that constantly shape their field with their influential work, no matter how old they are. We exhibit the effectiveness and the benefits of the new indices to unfold the full potential of the h-index, with extensive experimental results obtained from the DBLP, a widely known on-line digital library.     

Factors to evaluate a patent in addition to citations

The emergence of patent citations as a tool for patent estimation has been subjected to equally vocal champions and critics. In additional to patent citation, this article aims to contribute other factors, including court decisions, claim language, extension cases, patent family and portfolio, which should be deliberated during patent evaluation. It introduces the subject-matter by discussing the specialties and peculiarities of these proposed factors. Furthermore, comparisons between the patent citations and these factors are presented by illustrating several well-known patents. The results of the comparisons reveal that an adverse conclusion might be drawn if a patent is estimated only based on citations. The conclusion supports Meyer’s study that “the general nature of a common framework for both scientific and patent citations would severely limit its usefulness.” Therefore, those factors discussed in the article would be a great asset in patent evaluation. However, it only illustrates their impact on patent estimation using a couple well-known patents. Future research would be needed to investigate these factors in a more detailed manner.     

Metric analysis of the information visibility and diffusion about the European Higher Education Area on Spanish University websites

The purpose of the study proposed in this paper is to evaluate the Spanish public university websites dedicated to the European Higher Education Area (EHEA). To do so, the quality of these resources has been analysed in the light of data provided by a series of indicators grouped in seven criteria, most of which were used to determine what information is made available and in what way. The criteria used in our analysis are: visibility, authority, updatedness, accesibility, correctness and completeness, quality assessment and navigability. All in all, the results allow us to carry out an overall diagnosis of the situation and also provide us with information about the situation at each university, thus revealing their main strengths, namely authority and navegability, and also their chief shortcomings: updatedness, accessibility and quality assessment. In this way it is possible to detect the best practices in each of the aspects evaluated so that they can serve as an example and guide for universities with greater deficiencies and thus help them to improve their EHEA websites.     

Do individual factors matter? A survey of scientists’ patenting in Portuguese public research organisations

This paper addresses scientists’ behaviour regarding the patenting of knowledge produced in universities and other public sector research organisations (PSROs). Recent years have witnessed a rapid growth in patenting and licensing activities by PSROs. We argue that the whole process depends to a certain extent on scientists’ willingness to disclose their inventions. Given this assumption, we conduct research into individual behaviour in order to understand scientists’ views concerning the patenting of their research results. Data from a questionnaire survey of Portuguese researchers from nine PSROs in life sciences and biotechnology is presented and analysed and complemented with in-depth interviews. The results reveal that overall the scientists surveyed show a low propensity to become involved in patenting and licensing activities, despite the fact that the majority had no “ethical” objections to the disclosure of their inventions and the commercial exploitation of these. Perceptions about the impacts of these activities on certain fundamental aspects of knowledge production and dissemination are however divergent. This may account for the low participation levels. Furthermore, most scientists perceived the personal benefits deriving from this type of activity to be low. Similarly, the majority also believed that there are many difficulties associated with the patenting process and that they receive limited support from their organisations, which lack the proper competences and structures to assist with patenting and licensing.