A New Scientific Indexing Model: U-Index
Ugur Saglam, Fatih Canata
TL;DR
The paper tackles the limitations of the $h$-index in separating quantity from quality and in failing to account for coauthorship patterns. It introduces the u-index, defined as the maximum $u$ such that there are $u$ papers ordered by citation count with each having $C/IF \,>=\, CIF$, where $CIF = (average(C))/(average(IF))$, and it leverages the triple $(C,IF,N)$ to enable cross-field comparability. The authors argue the u-index generalizes the $h$-index and offers a semi-semantic counting rule intended to reduce manipulation tied to publication venues and authorship. They discuss the index's dynamic behavior, including increases with new publications, decreases with citations, and eventual saturation as careers decline, and illustrate abnormal behaviors via case tables. Overall, the work proposes a practical, data-accessible alternative for assessing individual performance across disciplines and career stages.
Abstract
H-index has become more popular nowadays and is used for some scientific performance criteria in the world widely. This indexing method does not correctly measure any performance or carrier specifications because of the parameters that are used to form the measurement basis. H-index is located based on citation(C) and paper(N) parameters that involve no logical criterion on the counting process and so measurement on this basis can only give quantity results not any quality information. Therefore, we need a new indexing instrument to find out also the scientific quality unique to an individual author even if that takes into account the effect of multiple coauthorships. Ipso facto, we create a new bibliometric indicator or academic performance indicator called the u-index.