The Game of Cipher Beads
📝 Original Info
- Title: The Game of Cipher Beads
- ArXiv ID: 0905.3330
- Date: 2011-05-31
- Authors: S. S. Kutateladze (S. S. KUTATELADZE) – Sobolev Institute of Mathematics, Novosibirsk, Russia. 이메일: ss kut@member.ams.org
📝 Abstract
Comparison between the various impact factors of a few Russian journals demonstrates the deficiencies of the popular citation indices.💡 Deep Analysis
📄 Full Content
arXiv:0905.3330v3 [cs.DL] 29 Jul 2009
THE GAME OF CIPHER BEADS
S. S. KUTATELADZE
Abstract. Comparison between the various impact factors of a few Russian
journals demonstrates the deficiencies of the popular citation indices.
Since recently there has been much ado invoked in science by incessant attempts
at replacing expertise with numerical manipulations. Of especial relevance to the
Russian mathematical community are the following indices:
• MCQ, the Mathematical Citation Quotient of the American Mathematical
Society which utilizes the database of Mathematical Reviews (abbreviated
to MR);
• IF or ISI, the classical impact factor of the Institute for Scientific Infor-
mation (which is a part of the Thomson Reuters Corporation);
• RISC, the
Russian Index of Scientific Citation1
which rests upon the
database of the Scientific Electronic Library;
• MNRU, the impact factor of the All-Russia Mathematical Portal Math-
Net.Ru which uses its own database.2
These indices are calculated for each journal one by one. Let QN,k be the number
of citations in year N of the articles published in the journal in year N −k. By PN
we denote the number of the articles published by the journal in year N. Note in
passing that N is the number of a year in the Gregorian calendar, and so N is at
least six since N is greater than thousand. In this notation MCQN, the MCQ of
the journal in year N, is calculated as follows:
MCQN =
QN,1 + QN,2 + . . . + QN,5
PN−1 + PN−2 + · · · + PN−5
.
Denote the impact factor in year N by IFN. By definition
IFN = QN,1 + QN,2
PN−1 + PN−2
.
Thus, MCQ and IF are defined by the same scheme covering the different time spans
of the relevant databases.3 The first takes the citations of the previous five years;
whereas the second, of the last two years. The RISC and MNRU impact factors are
calculated by the classical two-year formula for IF suggested by Eugene Garfield,4
the founder of the Institute for Scientific Information. It is worth observing that
all four indices use different although intersecting databases.
Date: May 20, 2009.
1Cp. [1]
2Cp. [2].
3Cp. [3].
4Cp. [4].
1
2
S. S. KUTATELADZE
Let us assume that all articles in some journal are of the same high quality and
has the same number of citations. Assume further that the number of articles in
any volume is the same every year. In other words, suppose that QN,k and PN are
independent of N and k. In this model case, the MCQ and IF of the journal must
coincide with one another as well as with the remaining two indices. Fluctuations
are inevitable in practical situations, but the trend to coincidence should prevail for
sufficiently full databases. However, we observe nothing like this for the real indices.
The discrepancies in their actual values for a particular journal seem improbable
for random fluctuations.
For instance, IF is twice as much as MCQ for a few
outstanding mathematical journals.
By way of illustration let us compare the current impact factors of the two pairs
of prestigious journals on algebra and logic:
IF
MCQ
J. Algebra
0.630
0.64
J. Pure Appl.Algebra
0.666
0.59
J. Symb. Logic
0.609
0.31
J. Pure Appl. Logic
0.613
0.30
Using MCQ it is possible to conclude that the two logical journals are twice as
“feeble” as their algebraic counterparts. In fact, the practical coincidence of the IF
and MCQ of the two algebraic journals demonstrates most likely that the articles
of these journals primarily attract the scientists that publish their papers in the
journals covered by MR. At the same time, more than a half of the citations of the
two logical journals appears in the sources that are not scanned by MR. Therefore,
the scope of influence of the logical pair on the flux of scientific information is
substantially broader than that of the other pair. Moreover, the narrow audience
is hardly a merit of any scientific journal.
The differences in databases greatly effect the calculation of the indices of Rus-
sian periodicals.5 Let us take a look at the current values of the above-mentioned
indices for a few authoritative journals of the Russian Academy of Sciences. The
first four of them publish papers in all areas of mathematics, and the fifth is inter-
disciplinary.
IF
MCQ
RISC MNRU Founded in
Sb. Math.
0.359
0.44
0.113
0.399
1866
Russ. Math. Surv.
0.309
0.35
0.103
0.382
1936
Sib. Math. J.
0.208
0.18
0.108
0.269
1960
Math. Notes
0.251
0.18
0.030
0.244
1967
Theoret. Math. Phys.
0.622
0.12
0.107
0.601
1969
The obvious conclusion is in order that, taken per annum, all indices under con-
sideration primarily characterize the respective databases, slightly reflecting a minor
part of few phenomena of the real functioning of science.
The dynamics of citation indices may be more informative. For instance, look at
the impact factors IF and MCQ of the Russian Journal of Mathematical Physics:
5Cp. [5].
THE GAME OF CIPHER BEADS
3
IF
MCQ
2003
0.291
0.23
2004
0.348
0.19
2005
0.394
0.26
2006
0.493
0.34
2007
1.012
0.35
Viktor Maslov,
Editor-in-Chief of this journal, indicates that a f
Reference
This content is AI-processed based on open access ArXiv data.