Haiyan well thank you very much. A permutation oh. I don't wonder is how you adjust for the focus. Is it forward. This divided finally over but it's dividing the number of citations of the paper by number co-workers and then calculating the h-index based on the number of citations you get so it's an individual 18. X so it's kind of a single off of equivalence 18 X so it's not like looking at the total number of citations and then dividing that one. Another quarters is looking at the number of citations for its paper so if you had a combination of single of the papers and multiple of the papers and you have a lot of citations for that symbol of the paper. You'll keep all of those citations if you have a lot of citations to oh. BTW has 20 authors there you need to have many more places for it to be included in an Internet. Thank you well thank you for your presentation in my case. I have a web of science and the scopus h-index which is about one quarter of what my google scholar. Agent X is and I site both because of the so-called credibility of web of science and scopus but when I look at the actual citations that all of those sources have I see why the age index is so low. They miss more than half of my publications. So it's a great miscarriage of justice really for those of us who work in the human sciences. We were talking out in the hall about the incredible care. Which all of you and your colleagues are dedicating to bibliometrics for those of us. Involved in you know this micro level peer assessment. It really is the case that we need to return our attention to the process of peer review. The so-called you know subjective process of extra payment and we have youngsters in the room so I won't talk about what we all know that how flawed that process really is but that's what I would like to see happen next. They're the same kind of rigor that you're you're all dedicating to to be an attitude of Leo metrics or the dispassionate analysis or was it productivity needs to happen at the level of a peer assessment you correctly distinguish between this idealized peer assessment.

I'd like to know if you've ever seen idealize peer assessment because in 30 some odd years of being an academic I had seen nothing approaching you know really thorough and care which is actually myself but he argues that in terms of transparency of doing it. Together they're an expert or not and all sorts of things like it actually stands as a reason for the money well being from. North America. Let me let me just say that I. I think he's miss informant he worked at American universities for a while. Which is these years but he he argued that when you set up committees try to make sure that you've got people in your expert in the precise transparent which is not the case in the UK referendums of sorts of hidden secrets going on mountain as a session. Individuals working university was making decisions. That's where this fight afterwards yeah. I mean ref itself panel members were told by the ref committee that when they finish their work they had to destroy it when their notes because the ref committee. Mafeking worried about being taken to court lined into academics attempting to show that that people have not been correctly insulation total. Pacino's not only the audience so some professions so it's not a criticism so misunderstood really but I always see that. The google scholar is compared with two scruples and tomato size overthrow would experience not be database. Now that's we have to keep that in mind game collection. It does not provide any metadata like a database where you can search for institutional data my country so if you compare here the coverage by. Fiat is based on individualism and the sample. It's not that we can search for filter so people are not assigning to anywhere they are some there are some derivatives. Tigers kalam later if they try to do that work I went by now but I'm at minus services. I don't want to speak about it. Forget it it's so hot it's a pool.

Because and he did the problems with the bed emerges so on one hand. I see if i look at my personal data in school are in the movie stroller. I find a lot of noise non-academic staff that decided I would like to get rid of that but it still is dropping my my my statistics so patches of websites that assaulted they have never been intended to or reforms and commission reports. I don't they are Saturday about the way our academic work or my university sprint sources. It's all in the system and scintillating of course it social sciences. Actually it's affecting my social science so we have to take it as a pinch of salt trade so it's more rigor its focus on that. Besides they have there would be selective. Germans and proceedings and books and we all know it. It's the university is a closed universe. And is it those videos you know that and we know all about the limitations. We know about the device in the capital. I'm going to green arrow you have the limitation. I are the limitation don't luxury Texas bodily aureus does but the public dozens and okay yeah I confess but the truth you can know it but if you you you look at the google scholar even if you have expert in chemical through Bobby talking about the public doesn't know my deputy Fife sensor research is the life sciences had no idea he kept saying like oh but your faculties are the Performing because you know enough it will just get cited enough. You need to double look at the medical faculty. They're doing much better. So it's educating the public that's correct. I need google. It still excellent digital to the soul and cannot be measured that'll be falsified everything everything but if you have to but the statistics has to be taken and. I think we really talked about that in the quarry. But i think it's like a google school or i would say as many eighty-five ninety percent accuracy for my record it's more than that but depending on individual and but it has nineteen ninety-five percent coverage the map of science.

CalPERS has ninety nine percent accuracy for my records but it has twenty or thirty percent coverage as a social science academic. I prefer the lack of accuracy over a mega corporation as a life-size academic you know if I can the fact that web of science has for the social sciences or scopus twenty to thirty percent coverage is damnable. It is absolutely an inaccurate source of information about sizing citation rates for social sciences. So to say that we should first criticize google scholar because it has false. It's okay has false hits but web of science in scopus mrs. true hits substantially that is the bigger concern. It misses a substantial three bits and it is absolutely the case. That while experts understand the strengths and limitations of each sort when you say the general public you mean department chair games and university presidents as well as as review committees fruit before for for grant publications so web of science and and scopus actually do a grave injustice to social scientists and in my opinion should not be used for the social sciences and humanities but I think we need for me we need that's why I laughter three prisoners because the perfectly complementary I come at it as a social science academic a cabinet and ammeter of an imitation wants to democratize citation analysis we decide to metrics experts to tell us about the limitations of these analysis. Tell us about any records so we need world but there will be always the attention to save one of the advantages of the agent. X is that it is more robust than other indicators to the poor quality of data in Google Scholar because it only looks at the top of the commissions in person. Google scholar get right. It misses out on all the rubbish down. Bottom which mistakes general things which other sons of citations so h-index with google scholar think is a good conversation. Yeah this is it won't become obvious. XP individual editor if you talk about who is holding proceeded from so people had the fastball.

Since the teeth we would like to compare research performance say i take it in sample from com stands on foot be also an example from the social sciences. But the first thing she has become their research performance of the country and research in inorganic and analytical chemistry for instance of the country without of other countries. You cannot do that. This book is correct or possible. The problem is of course if it comes of course we have to make a distinction because they are all city. I real divided millimeters. The work on whose combustible at the national level cannot be done without understand that you cannot assign individual items and would not say articles because it books it is everything if I'm even presentation powerpoint presentation if they are cited times a negative is cool. You cannot assign them to do. It would affiliation to institution two countries just too old. That's really a point that that is yeah. That is the one thing you have to keep in mind. If you use google scholar you have to go back you have to do all is sample as you have done based on individuals and then you can say okay. These individuals can be associated with the field is an institution with the country and so on and then we can make in then you can say yeah. I can conduct even a large scale analyzed but the bottom to use the complete system for great on my fields by countries by whatever is not possible and that's it the formulas produce cooler. You have to stress the duck. It's not the criticism but it's it's at each other but i think that is a major issue between the nutrition swirl. It's not an issue for the it's ninety ninety seventy eighty people. Academics are only interested in themselves maybe you order to their callings but I and the problem is since you say Google Scholar is not a database. You have day on the author you have day of the year probation not always correct watch incorrect. You have data on the journal that's it you don't know the contributor on your connection and if I if I may just take you from one point and I I do accept the cookie but also what to put another point of view me as well and the rubbish this lots of noise but then again if you feel sorry for that she said and any scientists my individual academics to me that we thought has had an impact.

I don't care that is not an academic. I'm not going to evaluate as slightly as an academic education but if many people have found that they useful communication and lack of it. I think it's a valid way. Yes you're right but the fashion arises of course it's not it's not tenable it might be. It might also be a rebel down because it's not a little early so if the trust is good operative to ever get original and in scientific research that is normal but an atomic and SS publication recommended and then we have also something is a lot. Technical problem is the essential province. For instance is hoping this book. You mentioned one and that chapters are in considered individually in the divided publications. It's tuned if it comes to admit it no sir then the most represent different orders you can consider them by individual englsih and they are inside that separately and this is one of the main air was already in google it. You'll also that the census figures in the book citation in this post is that. I haven't edited Bob Jones it is a moot and Jewish more here comes in form and most citation put individual chapters written by other scientists are assigned to me and to Hank and to fully and this is a mistake. That's a false positive and false. Meditations this is fun fun then. If you give this book we have be a problem that we have different editions and translations when can be booked a second to help improve essentially which condition be considered a new product. I'm not sure. And then we have also problem with some 11 fields in the social sciences and humanities but below the borderline between is search and cousin types of different applications goes.

This is the same journal sometimes. So it's very difficult to distinguish the different service and researched so that's generally professional cannot be solved by using databases and this is a more sophisticated pressure. But again looking at your picture will try at all. Yeah and he saw the problems are more importance. Research evaluation respective but most people don't seem to be able to make that decision could you not worry. Tell the gender bias correction but the HLA index seems to do yesterday my friends to do correctly. That the age l.a index corrects the gender bias appears in the with the other innocence. Could you elaborate and allison is because his humanities are more signal to two women then to you. I mean the even for the h-index work and there was no significant difference between female and male academics but because the female academics we wanted to have one male one female of each individual sub-discipline but obviously some service events didn't have being elected mas and some sub-disciplines they've had male academics and because the sub disciplines that they had me like that I certificate the humanities sciences so by correcting for co-authors that small long significant difference maybe even less significance but overall we didn't find. Yeah something must be here and conducted the study. It wasn't a German study. Of course we can accomplish it because of course we be. Based on individual scientists also gender study and it was part interesting to see ya and also have to see how to do to deal and how to interpret indicators when he found that women are less productive but this equals efficiency and then we looked at. Yeah they are more active. France in the lifestyle they are less active in engineering. And that means actually if you normalize via citation impact by the feet standard than females and mates as the same standard so he has to be very careful. How many would you please and so because of us also for instance in amenities and some of the PFLAG amenities will be long so they are represented today and needs as units are princeton other.

And if you have to ask you put it in the first place so if people make this can be very misleading if it is not already interpreted so this. August my bond people are saying about when you are doing be permitted on the day for 30 years already more people more but we are so critical is people make it. You have to. Yeah that's why. I invest for these issues around the scopus who this person databases is there any effort being made to look at things like scope of work or complexity of work and maybe using manuscript length as a proxy for those things as you adjust for co off the ships. I think in economics this being a felon a journal. Communications face of the number of page equivalents of the leading journal so they look at the number of pages regular article is it is very messy a very it was a recent study this is sudden. I could take it very well done which was commented on silent special. It's a very large kind of surveys of something. Like eight hundred thousand papers and what they're looking at was one of those limits in the length that helps at fine is just again significant effect. Which was the shoot for the title more side no citations ago. I'm sure when it seems true for the length of the article swell myself my colleagues who was there historians you know argue with me all the time that while they may write one book every four or five years their total page output. As you're far exceeds mine also peacefully single author boobies well of course yes. Oh.