Instruct: Identify the main and secondary category of Arxiv papers based on the titles and abstracts
Query: Field-normalized Impact Factors: A Comparison of Rescaling versus
  Fractionally Counted IFs   Two methods for comparing impact factors and citation rates across fields of
science are tested against each other using citations to the 3,705 journals in
the Science Citation Index 2010 (CD-Rom version of SCI) and the 13 field
categories used for the Science and Engineering Indicators of the US National
Science Board. We compare (i) normalization by counting citations in proportion
to the length of the reference list (1/N of references) with (ii) rescaling by
dividing citation scores by the arithmetic mean of the citation rate of the
cluster. Rescaling is analytical and therefore independent of the quality of
the attribution to the sets, whereas fractional counting provides an empirical
strategy for normalization among sets (by evaluating the between-group
variance). By the fairness test of Radicchi & Castellano (2012a), rescaling
outperforms fractional counting of citations for reasons that we consider.

0
The categories of this paper are: hep-ph
5
The categories of this paper are: gr-qc
37
The categories of this paper are: supr-con
20
The categories of this paper are: acc-phys
23
The categories of this paper are: solv-int
4
The categories of this paper are: cond-mat
34
The categories of this paper are: chem-ph
10
The categories of this paper are: q-bio
28
The categories of this paper are: alg-geom
15
The categories of this paper are: nucl-ex
16
The categories of this paper are: stat
36
The categories of this paper are: cmp-lg
26
The categories of this paper are: bayes-an
21
The categories of this paper are: adap-org
17
The categories of this paper are: q-fin
30
The categories of this paper are: q-alg