Sign in
Microsoft.com
 
Microsoft
 
 
 

locked
Ranking of Journals and Conferences RRS feed

 > 

  • Question

  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

    In the ranking list of journals and conferences, the number of citations should be devided by the publications number of that journal (or conference), then we can get the impact factor (IF) of that journal/conference, and the rank should be based on this IF.

    For example, one journal A has a total citations 60000, and it published 20000 papers; another journal B has a citations 50000, but it published only 3000 papers, so the 50000 citations are obtained by its 3000 papers. We can see that journal B is much better than journal A (although journal A's citations are more than journal B).

    Wednesday, December 29, 2010 3:14 PM

Answers

  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

    we had considered many factors in ranking of journals and conferences,  including factors related to IF.  we will look into how to make our ranking algorithm more transparant to our users.

     

    thanks

    • Marked as answer by Caroline QI Friday, February 25, 2011 7:04 AM
    Wednesday, December 29, 2010 3:17 PM

All replies

  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

    we had considered many factors in ranking of journals and conferences,  including factors related to IF.  we will look into how to make our ranking algorithm more transparant to our users.

     

    thanks

    • Marked as answer by Caroline QI Friday, February 25, 2011 7:04 AM
    Wednesday, December 29, 2010 3:17 PM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote
    Obviously the journals and conferences should Not be ranked by their numbers of total citations, like the present time.
    Tuesday, January 4, 2011 4:02 PM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

    There are indices that can be used like the ISI impactor factor or the h-index. It could be dead useful to provide such information for researchers. In our institution, we have a membership to the ISI index but I find its ranking of conferences is a bit weak and inaccurate.

    Tracking who cited whom in which year means you have to do some serious work; perhaps you ought to have a paid member service for those interested in finding out about conferences contributing most to the state of the art.

    A.

    Saturday, June 4, 2011 1:07 PM