Instruct: Identify the main and secondary category of Arxiv papers based on the titles and abstracts
Query: Revisiting the scaling of citations for research assessment   Over the past decade, national research evaluation exercises, traditionally
conducted using the peer review method, have begun opening to bibliometric
indicators. The citations received by a publication are assumed as proxy for
its quality, but they require standardization prior to use in comparative
evaluation of organizations or individual scientists: the citation data must be
standardized, due to the varying citation behavior across research fields. The
objective of this paper is to compare the effectiveness of the different
methods of normalizing citations, in order to provide useful indications to
research assessment practitioners. Simulating a typical national research
assessment exercise, he analysis is conducted for all subject categories in the
hard sciences and is based on the Thomson Reuters Science Citation
Index-Expanded. Comparisons show that the citations average is the most
effective scaling parameter, when the average is based only on the publications
actually cited.

25
The categories of this paper are: patt-sol
35
The categories of this paper are: mtrl-th
32
The categories of this paper are: atom-ph
36
The categories of this paper are: cmp-lg
31
The categories of this paper are: ao-sci
7
The categories of this paper are: hep-th
4
The categories of this paper are: cond-mat
16
The categories of this paper are: stat
20
The categories of this paper are: acc-phys
24
The categories of this paper are: dg-ga
14
The categories of this paper are: math-ph
13
The categories of this paper are: quant-ph
27
The categories of this paper are: comp-gas
18
The categories of this paper are: econ
23
The categories of this paper are: solv-int
19
The categories of this paper are: eess