R-Score: Reputation-based Scoring of Research Groups
This addresses the need for funding agencies to efficiently compare research groups, but it is incremental as it offers an alternative metric rather than a fundamental shift in evaluation methods.
The paper tackles the problem of ranking research groups for funding by introducing R-Score, a new metric that quantifies publication output without using citation counts, and an experiment with 25 CS graduate programs in Brazil shows it provides useful early insights into publication patterns.
To manage the problem of having a higher demand for resources than availability of funds, research funding agencies usually rank the major research groups in their area of knowledge. This ranking relies on a careful analysis of the research groups in terms of their size, number of PhDs graduated, research results and their impact, among other variables. While research results are not the only variable to consider, they are frequently given special attention because of the notoriety they confer to the researchers and the programs they are affiliated with. In here we introduce a new metric for quantifying publication output, called R-Score for reputation-based score, which can be used in support to the ranking of research groups or programs. The novelty is that the metric depends solely on the listings of the publications of the members of a group, with no dependency on citation counts. R-Score has some interesting properties: (a) it does not require access to the contents of published material, (b) it can be curated to produce highly accurate results, and (c) it can be naturally used to compare publication output of research groups (e.g., graduate programs) inside a same country, geographical area, or across the world. An experiment comparing the publication output of 25 CS graduate programs from Brazil suggests that R-Score can be quite useful for providing early insights into the publication patterns of the various research groups one wants to compare.