/ Home
Research Index
H-Index:
The h-index is a metric used to measure both the productivity and impact of a researcher’s publications.
Definition
A researcher has an h-index of h if:
- They have h papers, and
- Each of those papers has been cited at least h times.
Simple Example
If your h-index = 2, it means:
- You have at least 2 publications
- Each of those publications has received 2 or more citations
Additional papers with fewer than 2 citations do not increase the h-index.
Why h-index is Used
- Balances quantity (number of papers) and quality (citations)
-
Prevents inflation from:
- One highly cited paper with many uncited ones
- Many low-impact papers
What h-index Does Not Capture
- Citation quality or influence of citing papers
- Very recent publications (they need time to accumulate citations)
- Field-specific citation norms (some fields cite far more than others)
Typical Interpretation (Contextual)
- h-index 1–5: Early-stage researcher or niche domain
- h-index 10–20: Established researcher
- h-index 30+: Highly influential researcher (These ranges vary significantly by discipline.)
In short, the h-index indicates sustained research impact, not just isolated success.
10 Index
The i10-index is a simple citation metric used by Google Scholar to indicate how many of a researcher’s publications have received at least 10 citations.
Definition
Your i10-index equals the number of papers with 10 or more citations.
Example
- If you have 3 papers cited 10+ times each, your i10-index = 3
- If none of your papers has reached 10 citations, your i10-index = 0
Key Characteristics
- Very simple metric — no weighting or balancing
- Binary threshold (either a paper has 10 citations or it does not)
- Used only by Google Scholar (not Web of Science or Scopus)
Strengths
- Easy to understand and interpret
- Quickly shows how many publications have crossed a meaningful citation milestone
Limitations
-
Does not reflect:
- Total citation count
- Citation distribution across papers
- Impact beyond the 10-citation threshold
-
Less informative for:
- Early-career researchers
- Niche or applied research fields
Comparison with h-index
- h-index balances productivity and impact
- i10-index counts only “10+ cited” papers
- i10-index tends to remain zero for a long time, then increase in steps
In Short
The i10-index measures depth of citation traction, while the h-index measures sustained research impact across multiple publications.
Google Scholar vs Web Science vs Scopus
Below is a clear, side-by-side comparison of Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus, focusing on coverage, credibility, and practical usage.
High-Level Overview
| Dimension | Google Scholar | Web of Science | Scopus |
|---|---|---|---|
| Provider | Clarivate | Elsevier | |
| Access | Free | Paid (institutional) | Paid (institutional) |
| Primary Use | Broad discovery | Research evaluation | Research analytics |
| Citation Metrics | h-index, i10-index | h-index, JIF | h-index, CiteScore |
Coverage & Sources
| Aspect | Google Scholar | Web of Science | Scopus |
|---|---|---|---|
| Journals | Very broad | Highly selective | Selective but broader than WoS |
| Conferences | Yes (wide) | Limited | Yes (strong in STEM) |
| Preprints | Yes | Rare | Limited |
| Theses / Books | Yes | No | Limited |
| Industry / Blogs | Sometimes | No | No |
Key takeaway: Google Scholar prioritizes completeness, while WoS and Scopus prioritize curation and quality control.
Citation Accuracy & Quality
| Aspect | Google Scholar | Web of Science | Scopus |
|---|---|---|---|
| Citation Noise | High | Very low | Low |
| Duplicate Citations | Common | Rare | Rare |
| Self-citations | Included | Filterable | Filterable |
| Manual Cleanup | Often needed | Minimal | Minimal |
Metrics & Indicators
| Metric | Google Scholar | Web of Science | Scopus |
|---|---|---|---|
| h-index | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| i10-index | Yes (exclusive) | No | No |
| Journal Impact Factor | No | Yes | No |
| CiteScore | No | No | Yes |
| Field-Weighted Impact | No | Limited | Yes |
Strengths
Google Scholar
- Free and universally accessible
- Best for early-stage researchers
- Captures non-traditional impact (preprints, code, reports)
Web of Science
- Gold standard for academic evaluation
- Trusted by funding agencies and universities
- Clean, curated citation data
Scopus
- Strong balance of coverage + analytics
- Excellent for STEM and applied research
- Advanced author and affiliation insights
Weaknesses
Google Scholar
- Inflated citation counts
- Vulnerable to spam or low-quality sources
- Not trusted for formal evaluation
Web of Science
- Narrow coverage
- Underrepresents conferences and industry work
- Expensive access
Scopus
- Still selective
- Slightly lower prestige than WoS in some disciplines
- Paid access required
When to Use What
| Scenario | Best Choice |
|---|---|
| Personal visibility tracking | Google Scholar |
| Grant / tenure evaluation | Web of Science |
| Institutional benchmarking | Scopus |
| Early research or applied work | Google Scholar |
| Formal citation audits | Web of Science |
| Industry-academia crossover | Scopus |
Practical Recommendation (Based on Your Profile)
Given your applied and GenAI-oriented work, Google Scholar best captures your real-world and recent impact, while Scopus becomes relevant as you publish more in indexed conferences and journals. Web of Science matters primarily for formal academic evaluation.
Bottom Line
- Google Scholar = visibility & breadth
- Web of Science = rigor & prestige
- Scopus = analytics & balance
Each serves a distinct purpose; none fully replaces the others.