HackerPapers

arXiv:2110.14115astro-ph.IM

Metrics of research impact in astronomy: Predicting later impact from metrics measured 10-15 years after the PhD

John Kormendy

Early discovery. Linked by one identifiable commenter. This paper is outside the main ranking; a mention is not an endorsement.

Abstract

This paper calibrates how metrics derivable from the SAO/NASA Astrophysics Data System can be used to estimate the future impact of astronomy research careers and thereby to inform decisions on resource allocation such as job hires and tenure decisions. Three metrics are used, citations of refereed papers, citations of all publications normalized by the numbers of co-authors, and citations of all first-author papers. Each is individually calibrated as an impact predictor in the book Kormendy (2020), "Metrics of Research Impact in Astronomy" (Astron Soc Pac Conference Series Monograph 8, San Francisco). How this is done is reviewed in the first half of this paper. Then, I show that averaging results from three metrics produces more accurate predictions. Average prediction machines are constructed for different cohorts of 1990-2007 PhDs and used to postdict 2017 impact from metrics measured 10, 12, and 15 years after the PhD. The time span over which prediction is made ranges from 0 years for 2007 PhDs to 17 years for 1990 PhDs using metrics measured 10 years after the PhD. Calibration is based on perceived 2017 impact as voted by 22 experienced astronomers for 510 faculty members at 17 highly-ranked university astronomy departments world-wide. Prediction machinery reproduces voted impact estimates with an RMS uncertainty of 1/8 of the dynamic range for people in the study sample. The aim of this work is to lend some of the rigor that is normally used in scientific research to the difficult and subjective job of judging people's careers.

arXiv comments
This preprint is being criticized based on a perception that it furthers bias against women and minorities. My book on the subject documents evidence for bias and develops machinery aimed in part to redress it. Further explanation is posted at http://chandra.as.utexas.edu/withdrawn.html . Wishing to protect PNAS from controversy, I have withdrawn the PNAS paper. I therefore withdraw the preprint
Journal reference
DOI
Subjects
astro-ph.IMInstrumentation and Methods for Astrophysics astro-ph.EPEarth and Planetary Astrophysics astro-ph.SRSolar and Stellar Astrophysics cs.DLDigital Libraries

On Hacker News

Linked by 1 identifiable commenter in 1 comment across 1 thread, from Nov 2021 to Nov 2021.

Comments linking this paper, per year.

Discussed in comments1 thread

    • More detail on the Kormendy controversy: 1. Archive copy of withdrawn paper: https://web.archive.org/web/20211028230225/https:/arxiv.org/... 2. Coverage at Retraction Watch: https://retractionwatch.com/2021/11/03/astronomer-apologizes... "The book required 5 years of intense…

      civilizedView on HNParent context

Submitted to Hacker News

Connected through shared HN threads, not inferred similarity or a recommendation.