Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

5
  • 3
    Could you elaborate on what the difference is? Commented Sep 28, 2015 at 8:56
  • 1
    Could you clarify the purpose of a measure that is not used as a metric, please? As far as I understand, your answer basically says a measure is the measured value - at which point the the statement "citations can be used as a measure" seems to make little sense, as the number of citations is a measure. Citations can be used for obtaining a measure (their number), but no-one doubted that fact itself, whereas the question whether that measure should be used remains unanswered. Concretely: How does the "understandable (...) use of citations as a measure" happen without using them for ... Commented Sep 28, 2015 at 18:44
  • ... a metric? How is something used as a measure, but not as a metric? If a measure has no meaning, as you write, how is it "used" on its own? Commented Sep 28, 2015 at 18:46
  • That is exactly the point I am trying to make. The question is if one can use the number of citations to judge and the answer is: since it is a measure you can use it but only if you compile it into a meaningful metric. Basically everything can be a measure, but a measure does not have a meaning. If you want to judge something you need meaning and therefore (in this case) the number of citations alone is meaningless and needs to be combined with other measures. Commented Sep 28, 2015 at 19:09
  • 2
    A metric uses usually multiple measurements and combines them — I think you misspelled "is a function that is symmetric, non-negative, positive for distinct pairs, and sub-additive". Commented Sep 30, 2015 at 13:37