Journal Quality Evaluation via Winner Paper Ratio
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Conventional methods for evaluating academic journals in science and engineering rely heavily on citation data, which limits their objectivity and requires exclusive access to Thomson Reuters' data, making it difficult to accurately assess journal quality and researcher performance.
Innovation Solution
A system and method that evaluates journals based on publication data from prize-winning researchers and academy members, using a database to calculate a 'N-factor' that represents the ratio of papers published by notable researchers, allowing for objective evaluation independent of citation information.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Measurement precision
If conventional citation-based indexes (Impact Factor, h-index) are used to evaluate journals, then journal quality can be measured with established metrics, but the evaluation becomes dependent on Thomson Reuters data and citation relationships, reducing objectivity and independence
Solution Approach 1:
The patent introduces an intermediary evaluation metric called the 'N-factor' that mediates between journal publications and researcher achievements. Instead of directly using citation data, the system uses the N-factor as an intermediate indicator based on the publication records of Nobel laureates and academy members, thereby achieving independent journal evaluation without relying on Thomson Reuters citation databases.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent replaces the mechanical citation-based evaluation system with an alternative information processing system. Instead of measuring journal impact through citation counts (mechanical system), the invention substitutes this with a database-driven approach that tracks and analyzes publications by distinguished researchers, using information retrieval and statistical analysis rather than citation mechanics.
2Reliability
If citation number data from Thomson Reuters is used for journal evaluation, then established evaluation metrics can be calculated, but exclusive access to this data source is required, limiting accessibility and fairness
Solution Approach 1:
The patent creates a copy or alternative representation of journal evaluation data that does not depend on the original Thomson Reuters citation database. By constructing a separate database containing publication information of Nobel laureates and academy members, the system produces a copied evaluation metric (N-factor) that mirrors the functionality of citation-based indexes while being accessible through different, more open data sources.
3Measurement precision
If traditional impact factor metrics are used, then journal influence can be measured, but the evaluation may not accurately reflect true research quality in basic sciences
Solution Approach 1:
The patent changes the fundamental parameter used for journal evaluation from citation count to a different metric entirely - the N-factor based on Nobel laureate and academy member publications. This parameter change transforms the evaluation from measuring quantitative citation impact to measuring qualitative association with distinguished researchers, thereby improving accuracy for basic science evaluation while maintaining computational simplicity.
Data Source
AI summary
A system and a method for objectively evaluating qualitative levels of academic journals in the field of science and engineering are disclosed. The system for evaluating journals includes: a winner or member's paper database which includes information of papers published by a researcher who is awarded a prize or elected to a member of the academy in the field of science and engineering; a journal database which includes information of papers published in journals to be evaluated; a winner or member's paper ratio evaluation section which calculates a winner or member's paper ratio for the journals by using the information of papers of the journal database and the information of papers of the winner or member's paper database; and a journal evaluation section which evaluates a degree of contribution of the journals in awarding the prize or electing to the member of the academy from the winner or member's paper ratio calculated by the winner or member's paper ratio evaluation section.