{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.014492753623188406, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.623287671232877, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Institutional recognition Scale-independent indicators and research evaluation

This paper demonstrates that some conventional indicators used in research evaluation may fail to account for the non-linearity between size of institution and performance. This can result in an overor under-estimation of the research performance of both large and small institutions and nations. This paper shows that a power law relationship exists between recognition or impact and (a) publishing size of scientific communities within an OECD science system and (b) publishing size of a research community across OECD science systems or institutions in a science system. Also, a power law relationship exists between the amount of various types of collaboration and the publishing size of institutions. A new class of scale-independent indicators is developed to overcome the inequity produced by some nonlinear characteristics commonly measured when evaluating research performance.