Abstract
Condensing the work of any academic scientist into a one-dimensional measure of scientific quality is a difficult problem. Here, we employ Bayesian statistics to analyze several different measures of quality. Specifically, we determine each measure's ability to discriminate between scientific authors. Using scaling arguments, we demonstrate that the best of these measures require approximately 50 papers to draw conclusions regarding long term scientific performance with usefully small statistical uncertainties. Further, the approach described here permits the value-free (i.e., statistical) comparison of scientists working in distinct areas of science.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
