How to improve the prediction based on citation impact percentiles for years shortly after the publication date?

  title={How to improve the prediction based on citation impact percentiles for years shortly after the publication date?},
  author={Lutz Bornmann and Loet Leydesdorff and Jian Wang},

Tables from this paper

Exploring the relation between referencing practices and citation impact: A large‐scale study based on Web of Science data
It is found that a higher number of references, a higher share of references to publications within Web of Science and references to more recent publications correlate with citation impact.
A data analytic approach to quantifying scientific impact
Informed peer review for publication assessments: Are improved impact measures worth the hassle?
The total impact of Italian professors in the sciences and economics over time is measured, valuing their publications first by early citation and then by a weighted combination of early citations and the impact factor of the hosting journal.
High-Ranked Social Science Journal Articles Can Be Identified from Early Citation Information
It is found that citations in the first two years after publication explain more than half of the variation in cumulative citations received over a longer period.
Predicting citation counts based on deep neural network learning techniques
Predictors of citations in written feedback on ESL writing research
Getting cited is important for scholars in the burgeoning field of written feedback on English as a second language (ESL) writing. While much depends on the quality of the paper and the reputation of


The problem of citation impact assessments for recent publication years in institutional evaluations
Determinants of research citation impact in nanoscience and nanotechnology
The impact factor of the publishing journal and the citation impact of the cited references were found to be the most effective determinants of citation counts in all four time periods.
What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior
The general tendency of the results of the empirical studies makes it clear that citing behavior is not motivated solely by the wish to acknowledge intellectual and cognitive influences of colleague scientists, since the individual studies reveal also other, in part non‐scientific, factors that play a part in the decision to cite.
Multilevel-statistical reformulation of citation-based university rankings: The Leiden ranking 2011/2012
A reformulation of the Leiden Ranking 2011/2012 by means of multilevel regression models showed that only 5% of the PPtop10% total variation is attributable to differences between universities, and it is possible to interpret the significance of differences among universities meaningfully.
Validating research performance metrics against peer rankings
A unique opportunity to do this is offered by the 2008 UK Research Assessment Exercise, in which a full spectrum of metrics can be jointly tested, field by field, against peer rankings.
The Leiden ranking 2011/2012: Data collection, indicators, and interpretation
The Leiden Ranking is compared with other global university rankings, in particular the Academic Ranking of World Universities (commonly known as the Shanghai Ranking) and the Times Higher Education World University Rankings, and the comparison focuses on the methodological choices underlying the different rankings.