<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/physics_0508025/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/physics_0508025/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output — mentioned by yungchin</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3797175</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:physics_0508025:3797175</guid><pubDate>Wed, 04 Apr 2012 12:20:02 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;It&amp;#x27;s still surprising that arxiv is that high up. You&amp;#x27;d think most people would cite the definitive publications, not the preprints at arxiv? Anyway, given that in some fields _everything_ that&amp;#x27;s written goes to arxiv, arxiv will [by definition][1] have a very high h-index. The thing is, the h-index was conceived to compare individuals, not journals. [1]: http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0508025&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/physics_0508025/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>physics.soc-ph</category></item></channel></rss>
