IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v91y2012i1d10.1007_s11192-011-0594-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An impact-citations-exergy (iCX) trajectory analysis of leading research institutions in India

Author

Listed:
  • P. Nishy

    (CSIR National Institute of Science Communication and Information Resources)

  • Yatish Panwar

    (CSIR National Institute of Science Communication and Information Resources)

  • Suresh Prasad

    (CSIR National Institute of Science Communication and Information Resources)

  • G. K. Mandal

    (CSIR National Institute of Science Communication and Information Resources)

  • Gangan Prathap

    (CSIR National Institute of Science Communication and Information Resources)

Abstract

A thermodynamic analogy allows bibliometric research assessment of information production processes to be based on a scalar indicator which is an energy-like term called exergy. Derived from standard indicators like impact, citations and number of papers, the exergy indicator X is a multiplicative product of quality and quantity of a scientist’s or group’s performance using available bibliometric information. Thus, given the bibliometric sequences of leading research agencies and institutions, research performance can be displayed as trajectories on a two-dimensional map as time progresses. In this paper, we track the performance of several of the leading players contributing to academic scientific research in India.

Suggested Citation

  • P. Nishy & Yatish Panwar & Suresh Prasad & G. K. Mandal & Gangan Prathap, 2012. "An impact-citations-exergy (iCX) trajectory analysis of leading research institutions in India," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(1), pages 245-251, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:91:y:2012:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-011-0594-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-011-0594-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-011-0594-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-011-0594-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Loet Leydesdorff & Lutz Bornmann & Rüdiger Mutz & Tobias Opthof, 2011. "Turning the tables on citation analysis one more time: Principles for comparing sets of documents," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 62(7), pages 1370-1381, July.
    2. Gangan Prathap, 2011. "The Energy–Exergy–Entropy (or EEE) sequences in bibliometric assessment," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(3), pages 515-524, June.
    3. Gangan Prathap, 2011. "Quasity, when quantity has a quality all of its own—toward a theory of performance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(2), pages 555-562, August.
    4. Richard Van Noorden, 2010. "Cities: Building the best cities for science," Nature, Nature, vol. 467(7318), pages 906-908, October.
    5. Gangan Prathap, 2010. "Is there a place for a mock h-index?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(1), pages 153-165, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jyoti Paswan & Vivek Kumar Singh, 2020. "Gender and research publishing analyzed through the lenses of discipline, institution types, impact and international collaboration: a case study from India," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(1), pages 497-515, April.
    2. Aparna Basu & Sumit Kumar Banshal & Khushboo Singhal & Vivek Kumar Singh, 2016. "Response to the Letter to the Editor by Gangan Prathap on the article: Designing a composite index for research performance evaluation at the national or regional level: ranking Central Universities i," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(3), pages 1689-1691, September.
    3. Hamdi A. Al-Jamimi & Galal M. BinMakhashen & Lutz Bornmann, 2022. "Use of bibliometrics for research evaluation in emerging markets economies: a review and discussion of bibliometric indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(10), pages 5879-5930, October.
    4. Vivek Kumar Singh & Ashraf Uddin & David Pinto, 2015. "Computer science research: the top 100 institutions in India and in the world," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(2), pages 529-553, August.
    5. Gangan Prathap, 2013. "Second order indicators for evaluating international scientific collaboration," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(2), pages 563-570, May.
    6. Rogheyeh Eskrootchi & Nadia Sanee, 2018. "Comparison of medical research performance by thermodynamic and citation analysis methods," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(3), pages 2159-2168, December.
    7. Aparna Basu & Sumit Kumar Banshal & Khushboo Singhal & Vivek Kumar Singh, 2016. "Designing a Composite Index for research performance evaluation at the national or regional level: ranking Central Universities in India," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(3), pages 1171-1193, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gangan Prathap, 2014. "Single parameter indices and bibliometric outliers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(3), pages 1781-1787, December.
    2. Gangan Prathap, 2012. "The quality-quantity-quasity and energy-exergy-entropy exegesis of expected value calculation of citation performance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(1), pages 269-275, April.
    3. Gangan Prathap, 2012. "A comment to the papers by Opthof and Leydesdorff, Scientometrics, 88, 1011–1016, 2011 and Waltman et al., Scientometrics, 88, 1017–1022, 2011," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(2), pages 737-743, February.
    4. Gangan Prathap, 2018. "Eugene Garfield: from the metrics of science to the science of metrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(2), pages 637-650, February.
    5. Deming Lin & Tianhui Gong & Wenbin Liu & Martin Meyer, 2020. "An entropy-based measure for the evolution of h index research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2283-2298, December.
    6. Domingo Docampo & Jean-Jacques Bessoule, 2019. "A new approach to the analysis and evaluation of the research output of countries and institutions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(2), pages 1207-1225, May.
    7. Fiorenzo Franceschini & Domenico Maisano, 2011. "On the analogy between the evolution of thermodynamic and bibliometric systems: a breakthrough or just a bubble?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(1), pages 315-327, October.
    8. Gangan Prathap, 2012. "Evaluating journal performance metrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(2), pages 403-408, August.
    9. Gangan Prathap, 2011. "Letter to the Editor: Comments on the paper of Franceschini and Maisano: Proposals for evaluating the regularity of a scientist’s research output," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(3), pages 1005-1010, September.
    10. Gangan Prathap, 2012. "Energy indicators and percentile ranking normalization," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(3), pages 997-1003, June.
    11. Gangan Prathap, 2014. "A three-dimensional bibliometric evaluation of research in polymer solar cells," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 889-898, October.
    12. R. Basurto-Flores & L. Guzmán-Vargas & S. Velasco & A. Medina & A. Calvo Hernandez, 2018. "On entropy research analysis: cross-disciplinary knowledge transfer," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(1), pages 123-139, October.
    13. Loet Leydesdorff & Tobias Opthof, 2012. "A rejoinder on energy versus impact indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(2), pages 745-748, February.
    14. Juan A Crespo & Ignacio Ortuño-Ortín & Javier Ruiz-Castillo, 2012. "The Citation Merit of Scientific Publications," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(11), pages 1-9, November.
    15. Marek Gagolewski & Barbara Żogała-Siudem & Grzegorz Siudem & Anna Cena, 2022. "Fairness in the three-dimensional model for citation impact," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(10), pages 6055-6059, October.
    16. Bornmann, Lutz & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2012. "Which are the best performing regions in information science in terms of highly cited papers? Some improvements of our previous mapping approaches," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 336-345.
    17. Chris W. Belter, 2013. "A bibliometric analysis of NOAA’s Office of Ocean Exploration and Research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(2), pages 629-644, May.
    18. Schreiber, Michael, 2013. "A case study of the arbitrariness of the h-index and the highly-cited-publications indicator," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 379-387.
    19. Ludo Waltman & Michael Schreiber, 2013. "On the calculation of percentile-based bibliometric indicators," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(2), pages 372-379, February.
    20. Pedro Albarrán & Antonio Perianes-Rodríguez & Javier Ruiz-Castillo, 2015. "Differences in citation impact across countries," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(3), pages 512-525, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:91:y:2012:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-011-0594-4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.