The School of CS&AI -SRU, SR University congratulates Professor Dr. D. Naga Raju, PhD for publishing an excellent research article. We wish him more publications in the future. #Research #Publication #Congratulations 🎉 Deepak Garg Indrajeet Gupta Dr.Sheshikala Martha
CS&AI -SRU’s Post
More Relevant Posts
-
PhD | Biomaterials | Metallurgy | Materials Engineering | Corrosion | Magnesium | Materials Testing | Healthcare
Great perspective.!! As a researcher, I sometimes find myself fascinated by citations and the number of articles, but the real question is: What tangible products or services have come from the research? That's what truly matters. Focusing on genuine scientific contributions, rather than getting caught up in commercialized, often hollow ranking systems like these, is key to advancing meaningful progress in academia. Real value lies in the impact of research, not in superficial numbers.
The "Top 2% World Ranking of Scientists" by Stanford and Elsevier is nothing more than a calculated attempt to deceive Indian academia into an unnecessary numbers game, pushing scholars into a meaningless race for so-called recognition in the top 2%. This ranking is a lacking any credibility or value. It serves only to perpetuate a business model that profits from exploiting academic institutions and individuals. We must collectively reject this, refuse to endorse it, and ensure that it is neither mentioned nor supported in any serious academic discourse. Our focus should be on real scientific contributions and meaningful progress, not on arbitrary and commercialized rankings. Note: I am listed in this silly top-2 % list from many years
-
-
I think the top 2 percent scientists list is a great initiative to fight scam and unethical practices in coauthorship. This list gives more weights to first, second, second last and last authors. Hence, academics who have a high h index just because they have lots of papers in collaboration and not leading the papers do not get high ranking or listed. This also eases the pressure to publish massive number of papers without really contributing in them.
The "Top 2% World Ranking of Scientists" by Stanford and Elsevier is nothing more than a calculated attempt to deceive Indian academia into an unnecessary numbers game, pushing scholars into a meaningless race for so-called recognition in the top 2%. This ranking is a lacking any credibility or value. It serves only to perpetuate a business model that profits from exploiting academic institutions and individuals. We must collectively reject this, refuse to endorse it, and ensure that it is neither mentioned nor supported in any serious academic discourse. Our focus should be on real scientific contributions and meaningful progress, not on arbitrary and commercialized rankings. Note: I am listed in this silly top-2 % list from many years
-
-
The real focus should be meaningful research with high impact on society.
The "Top 2% World Ranking of Scientists" by Stanford and Elsevier is nothing more than a calculated attempt to deceive Indian academia into an unnecessary numbers game, pushing scholars into a meaningless race for so-called recognition in the top 2%. This ranking is a lacking any credibility or value. It serves only to perpetuate a business model that profits from exploiting academic institutions and individuals. We must collectively reject this, refuse to endorse it, and ensure that it is neither mentioned nor supported in any serious academic discourse. Our focus should be on real scientific contributions and meaningful progress, not on arbitrary and commercialized rankings. Note: I am listed in this silly top-2 % list from many years
-
-
I wouldn’t call this list entirely bogus, but like any ranking, it should be interpreted with caution—take it with a grain of salt if you will. In this list, you’ll find both truly prominent researchers and those who appear "prominent" based on metrics. Without a thorough investigation, it can be difficult to distinguish between those conducting meaningful, in-depth research and those who are engaged in 'citation gaming.' It’s not just about 'citation gaming,' but also those who publish as much as possible in any journal, without regard to quality. We’re also seeing new journals emerging that charge exorbitant publication fees—funds that could be put to far better use, especially in developing countries! I fully recognize the problem we’re facing: we may be trapped in a rat race—publish more to gain more recognition! To be honest, I am included in this list. But how impactful is my work? How about the quality of my research? I encourage you to judge for yourself—take a look at my publication list and form your own opinion. I want to make my stance clear: I do not advocate publishing as much as possible. What I support is 'publishing reasonably.' It’s far more meaningful to publish two high-quality journal papers a year, backed by deep and substantial research, than to publish 20 papers in 'any journal' just to increase the publication count.
The "Top 2% World Ranking of Scientists" by Stanford and Elsevier is nothing more than a calculated attempt to deceive Indian academia into an unnecessary numbers game, pushing scholars into a meaningless race for so-called recognition in the top 2%. This ranking is a lacking any credibility or value. It serves only to perpetuate a business model that profits from exploiting academic institutions and individuals. We must collectively reject this, refuse to endorse it, and ensure that it is neither mentioned nor supported in any serious academic discourse. Our focus should be on real scientific contributions and meaningful progress, not on arbitrary and commercialized rankings. Note: I am listed in this silly top-2 % list from many years
-
-
Engineering Microbiome for Therapeutics, Wellness and Diagnostics. Make in India for the World.
Top 2% ranking, or relevant output? Do people have no shame? 1) Ask yourself: What is your exact scientific contribution, and how did it advance the field? 2) (In most cases) Ask whether the industry has demonstrated real interest—i.e., a genuine metric of "skin in the game"—by supporting or commercializing your scientific or engineering output. Friends, most faculty have hijacked academia and justify their existence by producing a flood of useless publications. It’s no surprise we face an employment crisis, with most PhD graduates remaining unemployed or underemployed outside of academia. Get out of this game before time runs out. Focus on creating value by developing deep-tech products and impactful ideas. No one cares about your irrelevant publications—what matters is your meaningful output and how you can be an asset to their organization. (That is, assuming the organization itself isn’t a Ponzi scheme, but that’s a topic for another day.)
The "Top 2% World Ranking of Scientists" by Stanford and Elsevier is nothing more than a calculated attempt to deceive Indian academia into an unnecessary numbers game, pushing scholars into a meaningless race for so-called recognition in the top 2%. This ranking is a lacking any credibility or value. It serves only to perpetuate a business model that profits from exploiting academic institutions and individuals. We must collectively reject this, refuse to endorse it, and ensure that it is neither mentioned nor supported in any serious academic discourse. Our focus should be on real scientific contributions and meaningful progress, not on arbitrary and commercialized rankings. Note: I am listed in this silly top-2 % list from many years
-
-
I fully agree with you, Prof. The pursuit of being included in such lists has become a common trend among researchers, though not all subscribe to it. Essentially, it's a business arrangement between universities and publishing agencies. In India, it is gaining significant popularity, unlike in the UK or USA where it hasn't yet taken off in the same way. Private universities in India are already exploiting this by hiring faculty based on their inclusion in the top 2%. However, many Nobel laureates and renowned scientists, who have made substantial contributions to society and the scientific community, are not part of these lists. Being in the top 2% doesn't define the value of one’s work—it’s the meaningful, impactful contributions that matter. Unfortunately, these databases are distorting the essence of science, research, and technology, and misleading the younger generation. In short, this pseudo-superiority tactic is being used to attract students globally in an unhealthy way, and it needs to stop.
The "Top 2% World Ranking of Scientists" by Stanford and Elsevier is nothing more than a calculated attempt to deceive Indian academia into an unnecessary numbers game, pushing scholars into a meaningless race for so-called recognition in the top 2%. This ranking is a lacking any credibility or value. It serves only to perpetuate a business model that profits from exploiting academic institutions and individuals. We must collectively reject this, refuse to endorse it, and ensure that it is neither mentioned nor supported in any serious academic discourse. Our focus should be on real scientific contributions and meaningful progress, not on arbitrary and commercialized rankings. Note: I am listed in this silly top-2 % list from many years
-
-
Physician| Clinical Researcher| Basic Science Research| Clinical Research| Mentor Medical Graduates & Medical Students for Research writing
I always tell my mentees that out of many conferences/meetings I have attended, I have never listened a speaker (some of them were very successful scientist) mentioned that I have x number of citations or I am listed in top 2%. Quality over Quantity, period! #researchbeyondnumbers #mentorship
The "Top 2% World Ranking of Scientists" by Stanford and Elsevier is nothing more than a calculated attempt to deceive Indian academia into an unnecessary numbers game, pushing scholars into a meaningless race for so-called recognition in the top 2%. This ranking is a lacking any credibility or value. It serves only to perpetuate a business model that profits from exploiting academic institutions and individuals. We must collectively reject this, refuse to endorse it, and ensure that it is neither mentioned nor supported in any serious academic discourse. Our focus should be on real scientific contributions and meaningful progress, not on arbitrary and commercialized rankings. Note: I am listed in this silly top-2 % list from many years
-
-
So, when our #students asks us why #INDIANS don’t get #NOBLEPRIZE, then this is also my response, #western countries always put #INDIA and its approach at bay. So, as Prof. Vivek Polshettiwar said, we should focus on #productive and #fruitful research to collaborate the #scientific community, rather than #seeking these paid promotions. These are our personal opinion, no #offence. #westernpropoganda #indians #research
The "Top 2% World Ranking of Scientists" by Stanford and Elsevier is nothing more than a calculated attempt to deceive Indian academia into an unnecessary numbers game, pushing scholars into a meaningless race for so-called recognition in the top 2%. This ranking is a lacking any credibility or value. It serves only to perpetuate a business model that profits from exploiting academic institutions and individuals. We must collectively reject this, refuse to endorse it, and ensure that it is neither mentioned nor supported in any serious academic discourse. Our focus should be on real scientific contributions and meaningful progress, not on arbitrary and commercialized rankings. Note: I am listed in this silly top-2 % list from many years
-
-
The "Top 2% World Ranking of Scientists" by Stanford and Elsevier is nothing more than a calculated attempt to deceive Indian academia into an unnecessary numbers game, pushing scholars into a meaningless race for so-called recognition in the top 2%. This ranking is a lacking any credibility or value. It serves only to perpetuate a business model that profits from exploiting academic institutions and individuals. We must collectively reject this, refuse to endorse it, and ensure that it is neither mentioned nor supported in any serious academic discourse. Our focus should be on real scientific contributions and meaningful progress, not on arbitrary and commercialized rankings. Note: I am listed in this silly top-2 % list from many years
-
-
Protein Engineering & Biochemistry | Ph.D. from Masaryk University | Lecturer & Researcher at Universitas Jenderal Achmad Yani | Member of PBBMI, PERMI, AFOB | Skilled in Enzymology, molecular biology and bioinformatics
The desire to be known and accepted appears to have a remarkable impact on acts of academic misconduct. Academic integrity is critical for us to protect and enforce, especially when we face a tide of pragmatism that turns degrees, positions, personal branding, and celebrities into emblems and symbols of social stratification. Although citations and h-index are markers of scholarly work's influence and production, they do not have to be the final criterion for determining the genuine impact of groundbreaking discoveries.
The "Top 2% World Ranking of Scientists" by Stanford and Elsevier is nothing more than a calculated attempt to deceive Indian academia into an unnecessary numbers game, pushing scholars into a meaningless race for so-called recognition in the top 2%. This ranking is a lacking any credibility or value. It serves only to perpetuate a business model that profits from exploiting academic institutions and individuals. We must collectively reject this, refuse to endorse it, and ensure that it is neither mentioned nor supported in any serious academic discourse. Our focus should be on real scientific contributions and meaningful progress, not on arbitrary and commercialized rankings. Note: I am listed in this silly top-2 % list from many years
-
Associate Professor in Physics and Dean Grants & Consultancy
2moGreat work