Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) norm”an engineering model for higher education management (HEM) policy administration in india

274 Chapter 13 “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm”: An Engineering Model for Higher Education Management (HEM) & Policy Administration in India Ranjit Biswas Jamia Hamdard University, India ABSTRACT This chapter introduces a new theory called by “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” which provides an almost complete solution for Higher Education Management (HEM) & Policy Administration in any vast country like India, China, France, Germany, Australia, Brazil, Indonesia, Pakistan, Malaysia, USA, UK, Canada, Gulf countries and others in the world The “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” is an engineering model for solving HEM problems, basically seven major problems which are about: (i) How To Continuously Monitor The Real Time Progress of Research Work of the Ph.D Scholars in the Universities/Institutions in any country by a Common Rule of the ‘Ministry of HRD’ (ii) A New Improved Method for Recruitment of Teachers in Universities (iii) A New Method for Promotion Policy of Teachers In Universities (iv) How to select the ‘Most Suitable Candidate’ for the various prestigious awards/honors in a country (v) How to restrict the publications of bad quality research papers in fake/ bad journals? (vi) How to select the true experts for every visiting team of NAAC of UGC? and (vii) How to select the ‘Most Suitable Candidates’ to fill-up the reserved quota It is claimed that if this new theory be implemented by the ‘Ministry of HRD (MHRD)’ in all its universities/institutions, then a huge amount of quality-assurance can be achieved in pursuance of Excellence in Higher Education Management & Policy Administration in that Country INTRODUCTION This chapter introduces a new theory called by “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” which is an engineering model for Higher Education Management (HEM) & Policy Administration in vast countries like DOI: 10.4018/978-1-5225-0672-0.ch013 Copyright © 2017, IGI Global Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited  “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” India, China, France, Germany, Australia, Brazil, Indonesia, Pakistan, Malaysia, USA, UK, Canada, Gulf countries and others in the world India and China are the two giant countries having a large number of in-built talents in every subject area Our model is called an engineering model because of the fact that the model works dynamically on engineering & technology based elements: internet search engines, several databases of heterogeneous big data, intelligent software, computer hardware and distributed systems, mechatronics hardware, Information Technology, Electronics & Communication Engineering, Mechatronics, Fuzzy Logic (Zadeh, 1965), Soft Computing, Big Data (Biswas, 2015a, 2015b), and of course on Mathematics & Statistics of both R-Statistics and NR-Statistics (Biswas, 2016), up to the extent of Big Data Statistics (Biswas, 2016) Retaining the idea, core logic and philosophy behind its innovation, this model can be easily improved (extended) in future by the growth of various technologies, mainly of the subject’s computer engineering, information technology and electronics engineering In the giant countries like India, China and other vast countries, every year a very large number of scholars take admissions for higher education, a very large number of students become graduates and post-graduates, a large number of students enroll for Ph.D study, a large number of teachers retire in universities and institutions, a large number of fresh teachers are recruited in universities and institutions, a large number of teachers are promoted in universities and institutions, a large number of talents are awarded various prestigious awards/honors, etc and many other academic/research oriented activities which are controlled by Higher Education Management (HEM) & Policy Administration Consequently, the topic of Higher Education Management (HEM) & Policy Administration in such giant countries is itself a big subject and a major subject for their governments which cater to the overall academic/economic growth of the countries For a hypothetical example, in India (or China) there could be more than 10,000 eligible candidates applying against only ten vacant post of Lecturers in Mathematics advertised in a newspaper There are many other similar HEM functionalities and activities on every day and are of concern to the Government authorities on how to conclude daily work with correct, fair, transparent and successful solutions This is quite naturally not always the situation in small but academically advanced countries like Japan, Finland, Ireland, Poland, Bulgaria, Singapore, etc For the sake of smooth presentation of our new theory entitled “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm”, we have identified the country ‘India’ and we have developed this theory in the context of ‘India’ But the theory can be well extended and applicable to other vast countries like China, Brazil, Indonesia, Pakistan, Malaysia, USA, UK, Canada, Gulf countries and in fact to any country in this world be it a small or big, without making any changes in the core philosophy/logic of the theory but incorporating slight customized adjustments in the equivalent nomenclatures of the respective country One basic assumption in the Theory of IRE is that there is no rounding-off of any numerical results Results of all numerical computations are to be made upto decimal places only Bracket expressions are to be computed with priority, in any complex mathematical or logical expression in this theory THE MAJOR PROBLEMS OF MHRD IN INDIA IN HEM There exists a body of the MHRD which is known as University Grants Commission (UGC) in India, but may be with different nomenclatures in other countries For instance, in Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Nepal, the body name is UGC whose expanded phrase is also University Grants Commission, in UK and HK it is also UGC but it stands for the phrase University Grants Committee, etc The main role of UGC is to look after the Higher Education Management (HEM) & Policy Administration in the 275  “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” country With no loss of generality, we shall use the nomenclature UGC all through in this article, but the literature can be well customized and made compatible for any country incorporating in it the local nomenclatures and terminologies of that country suitably In the last three decades in particular, India took a very bold step by allowing for privately run universities in the style of USA, by opening many new IITs, by opening many new NITs offering them the status of university, by converting many colleges/RECs into universities/NITs This is a major step taken by India for the benefit of the people aspiring for higher studies in UG/PG programmes like B.Sc., B.Tech., M.Sc., LLB, LLM, MBA, M.Pharm, MBBS, BDS, M.Phil., M.Tech., and other Master Programmes and Ph.D etc The today’s concern is not about the top-graded universities/institutions of India which are few only Today’s extreme concern is about most of the other universities in India, in particular the private universities, newly born/converted universities, poorly graded Govt universities, newly born NITs, etc To ensure at least a minimum amount of quality of education at Bachelor Programmes, Master Programmes and Ph.D programmes, the “Ministry of HRD (MHRD)” or UGC may have prescribed across the country yardsticks to such universities (including private Universities and private colleges/ institutions) on various quality monitoring parameters viz Teacher-student ratio, faculty qualifications, faculty strength, maximum allowable students strength in a Theory class, in a Lab/Tutorial class, lab requirements, space requirements, etc Consequently, any university/college deviating from the prescribed minimum requirements has to answer to the investigation team of the “Ministry of HRD (MHRD)” of the country Nevertheless, the real ground level scenario in such newly born poor government/private universities/NITs is pathetic The alarming consequences to India (or the concerned country) will be resulted when in future the graduates of the poor institutes will take charge and responsibilities of some office in Government or private organizations, will take decisions, will adopt self-constructed policies, will implement those policies, etc; and the extremely alarming situation will happen when they will become teachers to impart education, knowledge, ethics, morality, character elements, etc because of hidden propagation error of slow but continuous damages However, there could be 0.1% or 0.2% or more number of good graduates produced by them, whose cases are not of our concern Country’s growth, be it in economy or technology or science or literature or health/medical or politics or law & order or in any major/minor areas, depends always upon the new generation youths who will take charge of the various kind of future responsibilities of the country as well as of the world But excellent quality of graduates/post-graduates cannot be produced until and unless the UG/PG academic programmes be taught by excellent quality teachers An excellent quality of Syllabus/Schemes/Bye-laws for the UG/PG academic programmes cannot be designed in universities and institutes until and unless there are excellent quality teachers/experts/ scientists available in the universities An excellent quality of Lectures, Practicals, Assignments, Continuous Evaluation, Question Papers settings, Evaluation of Answer-scripts, Projects, Summer Training, Industrial Training, Internship, etc cannot be delivered/executed in a university/institutes until and unless there are excellent quality teachers/experts/scientists available in that university/institute An excellent quality of Professors, Scientists, Engineers, Doctors, lawyers, IAS/IFS/IPS and other admin officers, Politicians, etc., cannot be produced in the country until and unless there are excellent quality teachers available in the universities and institutes All these academic responsibilities are directly at the hands of the teachers, experts and scientists in the universities, institutions and research centres or organizations Teachers are the core architects of 276  “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” future developments of the country The real backbone of a country’s development is thus managed by the Higher Education Management (HEM) & Policy Administration of the country The content of this chapter is a proposal to the Ministry of HRD (MHRD) for a huge improvement in the system of Higher Education Management (HEM), for the enhancement of academic quality in higher education in universities/institutions controlled by UGC in India (Biswas, 2015f) corresponding to the most important seven issues in HEM identified to be most prominent in the last three decades basically There are in reality many other problems and sub-problems, issues, etc which can be well controlled if these seven major problems be solved by developing a correct, precise and well documented new theories and models which should work on the basis of actual data of universal coverage THE SEVEN IMPORTANT PROBLEMS OF MHRD (UGC) IN HEM Problem A new unique Method on: How to Continuously Monitor the Real Time Progress of Research Work of the Ph.D Scholars in the Universities/Institutions in India by a Common Rule of UGC across all the Universities in India Problem Proposing a new method to UGC (and the same to UNESCO) on: “How to restrict the publications of bad quality research papers in fake/bad journals? How to control these activities in higher education system?” Problem Proposing a Common Rule for UGC on: “A New Improved Method for Recruitment of Teachers in Universities in India.” Problem Proposing a new improved method to Govt of India on: “How to select the ‘Most Suitable Candidate(s)’ to fill-up the reserved quota in academics?” Problem Proposing a Common Rule for UGC on: “A New Improved Method for Promotion Policy of Teachers in Universities in India.” Problem Accreditation of universities/institutes in India: How to select the true experts for every visiting team of NAAC? 277  “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” Problem Proposing a new improved method to MHRD, Govt of India on: “How to select the ‘Most Suitable Candidate(s)’ for the various highly prestigious top awards/honors in India?” (viz India Science Award, Shanti Swarup Bhatnagar Prize, INSA Young Scientists Award, FNA, etc.) With no loss of generality, we introduce in this chapter the “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” making it compatible with the vast country ‘India’, but as already mentioned earlier that the theory can be well extended and applicable to other countries too, incorporating the local adjustments Before providing excellent solutions to these seven problems one by one, we introduce a number of new terminologies and new measures in the subject of ‘Higher Education Management’ (HEM) These measures play key roles in our proposed “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm”: a new model for almost a complete solution in Higher Education Management & Policy Administration in vast countries like India, China, Brazil, Indonesia, Malaysia, USA, UK, France, Germany, Australia, Canada, Gulf countries and others in the world The chapter here is organized with the following 23 Sections (each section having its own subsections): • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 278 INTRODUCTION THE MAJOR PROBLEMS OF MHRD IN INDIA IN HEM JOURNAL IMPACT FACTOR (IF) H-INDEX, G-INDEX, in-INDEX (i10-INDEX) AND OTHER BIBLIOMETRIC INDICATORS INTRODUCING THREE NEW BIBLIOMETRICS, AS CORRECTIONS OF THE EXISTING NOTION OF POPULAR BIBLIOMETRICS: H-INDEX, G-INDEX AND iN-INDEX (i10-INDEX) INTRODUCING A POWERFUL BIBLIOMETRIC ‘BIBLIOMETRIC INDEX’ (BI) OF A RESEARCHER “HEM ENGINEERING CENTRE”: A HIGH COMPUTING CENTRE IN UGC INTRODUCING NEW IMPORTANT MEASURES FOR HEM JOURNAL PUBLICATIONS INDEX (JPI) AN IMPORTANT ISSUE WITH THE IF: SOLUTION BY NORMALIZATION ‘SIMPSON AREA’ (SA) OF A RESEARCHER (FOR WHOM LRY ≥5) TWIN SUMMARY TABLES FOR EVERY RESEARCHER ON PROBLEM STATEMENT 1: HOW TO MONITOR REAL-TIME PROGRESS OF PH.D WORK OF A REGULAR PH.D SCHOLAR IN A UNIVERSITY INTRODUCING “FIVE CONDITIONS PH.D RULE OF UGC” “THEORY OF IRE WITH (α,β,γ) NORM” ON PROBLEM STATEMENT 2: HOW TO RESTRICT POOR RESEARCH PUBLICATIONS IN BAD/FAKE JOURNALS: A PROPOSAL TO UGC (and to UNESCO) ON PROBLEM STATEMENT 3: UGC MODELS FOR ‘RECRUITMENT OF TEACHERS’ IN UNIVERSITIES ON PROBLEM STATEMENT 4: THEORY OF IRE WITH “CODED RESERVATION FORMULA” (CRF) ON PROBLEM STATEMENT 5: INTERNAL PROMOTION SCHEME FOR TEACHERS IN UNIVERSITIES ON PROBLEM STATEMENT 6: ACCREDITATION OF UNIVERSITIES/INSTITUTES IN INDIA: HOW TO SELECT TRUE EXPERTS FOR EVERY VISITING TEAM OF NAAC?  “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” • • • • ON PROBLEM STATEMENT 7: HOW TO SELECT THE “MOST SUITABLE CANDIDATE(S)” FOR THE HIGHLY PRESTIGIOUS AWARDS/HONORS IN INDIA? CONCLUSION REFERENCES KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS The “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” is not and cannot be an absolutely frozen theory, except its basic philosophy and architectural logic The implementation of the theory is based upon internet search data, upon the capability of searching with well coverage big data in internet, upon new and new type of updated/improved bibliometrics being developed by the scientists every decade, etc This theory may be regarded as a new area in the subject of “Big Data Statistics” introduced in (Biswas, 2016) The Hadoop and r-Atrain in ADS (Atrain Distributed System) are the most useful models developed in last decades to deal with big data of any 4Vs (Biswas, 2015a; 2015b) The future improvement of the “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” will certainly depends upon: How does the new subject “Big Data Statistics” grow with time, What kind of new soft-computing statistical measures in R-Statistics or NR-Statistics (Biswas, 2016) be developed in future to model excellent kind of new bibliometrics of dynamic nature for the researchers in the world, etc However, the new bibliometrics ‘Hm-index’, ‘Gm-index’ and ‘im10-index’ introduced in this chapter can surely dominate the existing corresponding most popular bibliometrics H-index, G-index and iN-index (i10-index) We propose that our “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” be considered by the “Ministry of HRD (MHRD)” of the concerned country, for implementation in all the universities or higher level institutions across the country The complete theory can be easily implemented by a software-based HEM System of the MHRD (a good HEM software package for the “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” can be well developed by any good team of programmers, and hence the issue of software development is not discussed in this chapter) JOURNAL IMPACT FACTOR (IF) We begin with a brief note on the existing notion of Impact Factor (IF) of a journal, the notion which is uniquely recognized by all the academic universities/institutes across the world The notion of “Impact Factor (IF)” of a Journal was devised in 1955 by Eugene Garfield, the founder of the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) in 1960, now part of Thomson Reuters Impact Factors (IF) are calculated on ‘yearly basis’ for those journals that are indexed in Thomson Reuter’s annual Journal Citation Reports (JCR) Other related journal-level metrics include: Source normalized impact per paper (SNIP) which is a factor released in 2012 by Elsevier based on Scopus to estimate impact The PageRank algorithm is a kind of recursive impact factor that gives citations from journals with high impact greater weight than citations from low-impact journals Such a recursive impact factor resembles Google’s PageRank algorithm Before recollecting a brief about IF, we present first of all the meaning of the simple phrase ‘Core Subject’ which will be used throughout in this chapter Core Subject The subjects like Mathematics, Statistics, Botany, Zoology, Sociology, Computer Science (Computer Engineering), Electronics Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Law, etc are the core subjects in which usually bachelor degrees are awarded by universities Usually, the department names in a university exist in the name of core subjects For example, while ‘Computer Science’, ‘Mathematics’, ‘Philosophy’, ‘Zoology’ are core subjects but an area like ‘Computer Network’ or ‘Algorithm’ or ‘Geometry’ will not 279  “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” be regarded as a core subject in our discussion here They rather example of areas belonging to one or more of the respective core subjects Throughout our discussion in this article, we use the words ‘core subject’ (or ‘subject’, in short) and ‘department name’ as synonyms About JCR Journal Citation Report or JCR is issued by Thomson Reuter Journal Citation Reports (JCR) offers a systematic and objective means to critically evaluate the world’s leading journals, with quantifiable, statistical information based on citation data By compiling articles’ cited references, JCR Web helps to measure research influence and impact at the journal and category levels, and then shows the relationship between citing and cited journals The JCR is an excellent design of the database of indexed journals It offers the following important information to the researchers of the world: Sort journal data by clearly defined fields: Impact Factor, Immediacy Index, Total Cites, Total Articles, Cited Half-Life, or Journal Title Sort subject category data by clearly defined fields: Total Cites, Median Impact Factor, Aggregate Impact Factor, Aggregate Immediacy Index, Aggregated Cited Half-Life, Number of Journals in Category, Number of Articles in Category View a journal’s impact with a five-year Impact Factor trend graph Understand a journal’s citation influence and prestige with Eigenfactor Metrics — five-year metrics that consider scholarly literature as a network of journal-to-journal relationships Visualize impact factor by journal category with impact factor boxplots Rank journals in multiple categories See how journal self-citations affect impact factor Full integration with ISI Web of Knowledge lets you link from Web of Science to JCR Web; from JCR journal records to ulrichsweb.com and recent Current Contents Connect tables of contents; and to and from your library’s OPAC Indexed Journal In our work here, a journal is termed as an ‘indexed journal’ if it is indexed in Thomson Reuter’s annual Journal Citation Reports (JCR), indexed by SCI/SCIE (Science Citation Index Expanded) By the term ‘indexed journal’ henceforth in this work, we shall always mean those journals by the above definition only, i.e which are indexed by SCI/SCIE (Science Citation Index Expanded) Impact Factor (IF) Impact Factor of an indexed journal in a given year is a finite non-negative real number It is calculated every year for every indexed journal For a journal its IF varies from year to year; in some year it may rise up, for another year it may fall down But it cannot be a negative number, and is always a finite number A good journal can retain good IF every year by retaining its quality “Impact Factor” is defined as below: 280  “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” The “Impact Factor (IF)” of an indexed journal in a given year = the average number of citations (in this journal or in any other indexed journal) received per paper which are published in that journal during the n number of preceding years (where n ≥ 2, but a good value of n is or more) Thus, IF of a journal for the year Y can be calculated in the year (Y+1) or afterwards, not in the year Y or before the year Y For example, if we choose n = and if an indexed Journal has an Impact Factor (IF) of 1.3 in the year 2014, it means that its all the papers published in 2012 and 2013 has received 1.3 citations each on average in 2014 in indexed journals including itself How to calculate IF of an ‘Indexed Journal’ in a given year? If the journal is not an indexed journal, there is no question of computing its IF So we consider here only the indexed journals, not the other journals (i.e neither sub-indexed journals or non-indexed journals, the new terminologies which are introduced later in this work) We explain below the method of computing IF of an indexed journal by an example (with hypothetical data, for the sake of understanding only) Consider a journal “JOURNAL OF XYZ” The ‘2014 Impact Factor (IF)’ of this journal “JOURNAL OF XYZ” with n = would be calculated as follows: • • Let A = the number of times “the articles which were published in the JOURNAL OF XYZ during 2012 and 2013” were cited by all indexed journals during 2014 Let B = the total number of “citable items” published by that journal JOURNAL OF XYZ in 2012 and 2013 Those which are not cited will not be counted (“Citable items” means research papers or articles, or notes; but not editorials publications or Letters-to-the-Editor, etc There is no guarantee that a ‘citable item’ will be or have been cited in subsequent years) Then, the ‘2014 IF’ of the journal ‘JOURNAL OF XYZ’ with two years (n = 2) consideration is equal to = A/B Clearly, IF of any journal in any year is a non-negative real number It may be noted that “2014 Impact Factor” of a Journal ‘JOURNAL OF XYZ’ are to be calculated in the year 2015, NOT in the year 2014; because it cannot be calculated until all of the 2014 publications of JOURNAL OF XYZ and of other indexed journals have been investigated and then processed by the indexing agency JCR Thus impact factor for the nth year can be calculated on (n+1)th year only or later, not earlier H-INDEX, G-INDEX, iN-INDEX AND OTHER BIBLIOMETRIC INDICATORS The H-index is a bibliometric proposed by Jorge Hirsch in 2005 (Hirsch, 2005; Egghe, 2006a, 2006b, 2006c; Jin, 2005, 2006, 2007) A researcher has H-index equal to h if h of his N number of published papers have at least h number of citations each, and the other (N−h) papers have no more than (h-1) number of citations each Thus the H-index is always a non-negative integer The H-index reflects both the number of publications and the number of citations per publication The index is designed to improve upon simple measures such as the total number of citations or publications The index works properly only for comparing researchers working in the same field; citation conventions differ widely among different core subjects The h-index “gives an estimate of the importance, significance, and broad impact of a scientist’s cumulative research contributions” But the H-index has a lot of demerits too 281  “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” The G-index was suggested by Leo Egghe in 2006 Given a set of publications of a researcher ranked in decreasing order of the number of citations that they received, the G-index is the largest number such that the top g publications have received together at least g2 citations i.e most cited g papers have been cited g or more times on the average It is doubtful to the world academicians whether G-index is a better metric than H-index or whether H-index is a better metric than G-index But it is fact that both are good and have their independent in-built significance The iN-index is the number of articles with N or more citations, where N is a natural number For N = 10, the i10-index is simply the number of articles with 10 or more citations, the idea being that ten citations means it got looked at Similarly, the i100-index is the number of articles with 100 or more citations, the i500-index is the number of articles with 500 or more citations, etc for different values of N There are several other bibliometrics which are m-index, c-index, s-index, e-index, RG score, etc defined on the basis of citations, but they are of very particular nature and of limited significance Research is going on to find out a kind of absolutely best index metric applicable to all the researchers of all the subjects How to Calculate H-Index of a Researcher Mr.X? Let f is the function that corresponds to the number of citations for each publication Consider a researcher Mr X We compute the H-index of the researcher X as follow: First we order the values of f in descending order Then, we look for the last position in which f value is greater than or equal to the position This position h is accepted as the H-index of Mr.X For example, suppose that the researcher X has publications P1, P2, P3, P4, P5 and P6 with 21, 17, 8, 5, and citations respectively Then, f(P1) = 21, f(P2) = 17, f(P3) = 8, f(P4) = 5, f(P5) = and f(P6) = Clearly the H-index of Mr.X is equal to One major demerit of H-index can now be explained by an example Suppose that another researcher Y has also publications P1, P2, P3, P4, P5 and P6 with 3100, 2700, 1800, 1500, and citations respectively The data shows an excellence of the researcher Y having huge impact out of his top four publications, unlike the researcher X But the H-index of Mr Y is also equal to 5, the H-index of Mr.X!, i.e the H-index of both the researchers X and Y are appearing equal Thus one cannot compare the researchers X and Y by the values of their respective H-index only INTRODUCING THREE NEW BIBLIOMETRICS, AS CORRECTIONS OF THE EXISTING NOTION OF POPULAR BIBLIOMETRICS: H-INDEX, G-INDEX AND iN-INDEX (i10-INDEX) The H-index is a good indicator, but it has a lot of weakness too For an instance, consider the publication P1 of the researcher Mr X and the publication P2 of the researcher Mr Y Suppose that P1 is a single-authored paper and P2 is a multiple authored paper (five authors: Mr Y and four co-authors) Also suppose that P1 and P2 both are cited 1000 times so far by various researchers around the world Although both P1 and P2 has 1000 citations, but much more credit goes to Mr X compared to Mr Y This is a very important and significant issue to justice to the method of estimation of index This logic is missing in the existing notion of H-index, G-index, i10-index and any other existing indices 282  “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” We introduce below a new and modified version of H-index called by Hm-index, which removes the inner and in-built weakness of the metric H-index caused due to number of co-authors The notation Hm here stands for ‘H modified’ The Hm-index is constructed considering the philosophy that one paper if authored by a single researcher instead of multiple researchers should cater to full h-index to the author, and if it is multiple authored then the h value is to be shared equally among all the authors But one further level of improvement of the newly introduced Hm-index can be made considering the amount or weight of individual contribution of each author in a multi-authored publication, and proportionately sharing the value of h accordingly Truly speaking, as on today, it is an impossible task Introducing ‘Hm-Index’ of a Researcher Suppose that at a certain day the researcher X has H-index equal to h Consider his top h number of publications (on the basis of number of citations) which are P1, P2, P3, …, Ph Suppose that the publication Pi has ni number of authors (self and (ni – 1) number of co-authors) where ni ≥1 for each i = 1, 2, 3, …,h Then the Hm-index of the researcher X is defined by Hm-index = h2/n, where n = h ∑n i =1 i As a particular case, if all the publications of a researcher are single-authored then n = h ∑n i =1 i = h, and in that case Hm-index reduces to H-index value h The Hm-index is an improved version of H-index as it gives due weightage to the single authored publications, or multiple authored publications according to the number of authors in the publications In fact, Hm-index is a major correction of the existing popular concept of H-index Introducing ‘Gm-Index’ of a Researcher In a similar way, one can define Gm-index Suppose that the researcher X has G-index equal to g Consider his top g number of publications (on the basis of number of citations) which are P1, P2, P3, …, Pg Suppose that the publication Pi has ni number of authors (self and (ni – 1) number of co-authors), where ni ≥1 for each i = 1, 2, 3, …, h Then the Gm-index of the researcher X is defined by Gm-index = g2/n, where n = g ∑n i =1 i As a particular case, if all the publications of a researcher are single-authored then n = g ∑n i =1 i = g, and in that case Gm-index reduces to G-index value g In fact Gm-index too is a major correction of the existing popular concept of G-index 283  “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” The values of CC are most significant in CRF in the sense that the selection is made on the basis of CC values of the candidates in case of admission quota or scholarship quota The final merit list is to be prepared with the candidate with highest value of CC as the top-most candidate, and the list of names will be in the descending order of magnitude of the values of CC For Recruitment in Universities/Institutes In case of selection to the post of Assistant Professor (all levels), Associate Professor, Professor, Sr Professor, the Selection Score (SS) of a reserved Candidate is given by SS = (IRE + x + y + z) + CC instead of the formula SS = (IRE + x + y + z) which is used for unreserved candidates as already mentioned earlier by a weightage table The IRE to be used here is the IRE of Type-1 The (α,β,γ) Norm wherever applicable will be considered of Type-1 only However, for selection of Dean, Director, Principal, Vice Chancellor, etc under reserved category, the IRE and the (α,β,γ) Norm both must be mandatorily of Type-2, not of Type-1 This formula is applicable only for selection of reserved candidates under the respective reservation quota, not applicable for the general candidates Non-Linear CRF Model Instead We have considered here a weighted-linear formula for CC If all Wi are chosen to be equal, then CC becomes a simple linear function However, if required to explore whether a non-linear function of several variables model CC = f (STC, DC, FPC, BNC, TC, OC) can produce more appropriate results, we offer it as an open problem to the university teachers of Statistics, Mathematics, Computer Science, etc as a future Project for execution Since the Govt of India now has taken a major step to bring all data/information of all the citizens in a database to issue UIDAI Aadhaar Card, a link with this database is expected to contribute a lot of real time inputs to compute the CC of any reserved candidate on the basis of all the component parameters of as on date The Director of HEM ENGINEERING CENTRE in UGC will have this responsibility ON PROBLEM STATEMENT 5: INTERNAL PROMOTION SCHEME FOR TEACHERS IN UNIVERSITIES In earlier section, two models for recruitment of teachers are proposed For internal promotion too, the same two models: (i) Recruitment Model-1 and (ii) Recruitment Model-2 are to be used wherever applicable Undoubtedly the minimum requirements for any teacher to be called a ‘good teacher’ are the following: Good teaching capability, lectures must be rich in every respect (delivery, clear voice, voice must be audible from the students sitting at last benches, good materials and lecture notes, consistency, good handwriting, good Chalk & Talk, use of LCD projectors if required, good control over the 333  “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” students, maintenance of attendance norms appropriately, interaction with students in the class, etc to list a few only out of many), Capability to make paper setting appropriately, Capability to evaluate answer scripts appropriately, Display of Attendance, Sessional Marks, Internal Assessment Marks, Continuous evaluation and/ or assessment marks, etc on regular basis whenever appropriate But all these are the “minimum requirements” only A university teacher will not be recognized by mere fulfilling the above minimum norms If these minimum norms cannot be fulfilled by a teacher, he must have chosen a wrong path for his career Truly speaking it is not just the question of unplanned career chosen by the poor quality teachers themselves, it does also cater to a loss to the students/learners who are listening the topic first time from their teachers for gaining knowledge Universally, a university teacher is recognized as a ‘good teacher’ or ‘excellent teacher’ by his contribution towards teaching delivery and research potential on the subject While a teacher has already grown up with the help of the subject, the subject too deserves to grow further with the help of this teacher And this is possible only by doing good quality research in the subject It has been justified that the quality or talent of a teacher in research work can be well measured by his personal score of IRE (Index of Research Excellence) and BI The “Internal promotion scheme” is applicable only to the internal candidates However, in “Internal promotion scheme” too, the CRF will be applicable for reserved candidates There will be no advertisement in newspapers for the internal promotion scheme Besides that, the internal promotion scheme is applicable to the candidates holding the position of Assistant Professor or Assistant Professor – or Assistant Professor -2 only, but not to the candidates holding Assistant Professor – or higher positions The IRE of Type-1 is to be used in calculating SS There will be a proper Selection Board (corresponding to every department) with at least three External Experts for each board appointed by the concerned university, which will seat in June/July every year to consider the cases Rare fulfillment of eligibility criteria does not guarantee internal promotion Even applying several years for internal promotion does not guarantee internal promotion There will be no scope of internal promotion to the post of Associate Professor or higher positions Selection procedure is same as mentioned earlier for selection by open advertisement Self-Assessment Quality Vector (SQV) of a Teacher in the Year Y For a researcher X in a given year Y, there are two types of Self-assessment Quality Vector (SQV) given by: Type-1: SQVY(X) = { CJPI(X), AJPI(X), SA, IRE(X), BI} and Type-2: SQVY(X) = { Normalized CJPI(X), Normalized AJPI(X), SA/a(S), IRE(X), BI} where IRE of Type-1 is used in SQVY(X) of Type-1 and IRE of Type-2 is used in SQVY(X) of Type-2 In short, SQVY(X) may be denoted by SQV(X) if there is no confusion 334  “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” Declaration of SQV in the University Website: UGC Prescribed Mandatory Criteria Every teacher (Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, Professor) or a Scientist in a given year Y will be recognized by his own Self-Assessment Quality Vector (SQV) in the year Y Every teacher (Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, Professor) or a Scientist must declare his SQV in January of every year which must mandatorily be reflected in the employer’s website for information to the other people, Govt Organizations/Offices, Universities, Institutes of India who may need the expert service of this teacher, in particular of Professors/Scientists In fact, providing expert service falls under the official duties/responsibilities of a Professor/Scientist A teacher if promoted to the level of ‘Professor’ by UGC norms is answerable to UGC about his contribution every year to the nation in terms of providing expert service Director of HEM Engineering Centre will maintain databases about the contribution of all the Professors in terms of SQV (Type-1 and Type-2 both) It is very shocking to observe that many of the excellent Professors of India have been fluently declining to adjudicate Ph.D thesis of other universities of India without thinking of the fact that “who will this duty?” As a consequence, in many cases the poor quality evaluators (may be, by some norms they are promoted to Professors) have been evaluating Ph.D thesis UGC must monitor with precise quantification model to record every year which Professors of India are contributing appropriately for the nation and by how much amount? A Professor may be employed in one university, but he is a Professor for the nation!, he is a Professor for the world!, which he cannot ignore! ON PROBLEM STATEMENT 6: ACCREDITATION OF UNIVERSITIES/INSTITUTES IN INDIA – HOW TO SELECT TRUE EXPERTS FOR EVERY VISITING TEAM OF NAAC? The accreditation of Universities/Institutes by the Govt Body is a very important job In India, there are councils like AICTE, MCI, INC, PCI, etc for monitoring different fields like Engineering education, Medical education, nursing education, Pharmacy education, etc being imparted by universities to the students of UG/PG programmes The accreditation body NAAC of UGC visits the universities to grade them according to their quality and performance Every visiting team of NAAC consists of several experts of different fields But it is shocking that the actual experts available in the country are not invited to this important job in most of the cases In most of the cases the teams consist of those so-called experts who are not true experts but having strong political links and holding top chairs in universities/institutes However, top universities or IITs or IIMs, etc Are exceptional and our concern are not for those universities/institutes In many cases the appointments of Vice-chancellors, Pro Vice-chancellors, Directors in many other universities/institutes are political appointments of those people who are of medium quality The excellent Professors or Experts not usually like to show interest to become Vice-chancellors, Pro Vice-chancellors, Directors in many other universities/institutes if they feel that these posts are political Instead, they prefer to work as Professors/Experts for teaching & research But they will surely like to contribute in NAAC committee in India if they are invited for the job This is a very real situation and fact for the last several decades in India Consequently, the final outputs of NAAC committee (visiting teams across the country) seem to be satisfactory just but by a fractional amount only, and this fact is remaining unnoticed for several decades Probably, none becomes interested to review or grade the qual- 335  “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” ity of performance of NAAC The only solution to this serious problem in HEM is possible by applying the “Theory of IRE” for heterogeneous environment (Type-2) We propose the following method to shortlist the real Experts for NAAC (instead of doing the existing practice of giving blind preference by present designations like: Vice-chancellors, Pro Vice-chancellors, Directors, etc, many of which may have been political selections!): Step 1: Take the database of all the Professors (including Vice-chancellors, Pro Vice-chancellors, Directors, etc) in the country Step 2: Exclude those who are not “(α,β,γ) Normed Type-2 Expert” with respect to suitably pre-chosen and pre-imposed value of (α,β,γ) by the UGC In this way make the initial list of Experts To make the final list of Experts, follow the next steps Step 3: To become ‘Chairman’ of a NAAC visiting team, he must fulfill the following condition as a minimum requirement: “im100-index > 10 AND im1000-index > 1” Step 4: To become a ‘Member’ of a NAAC visiting team, he must fulfill the following condition as a minimum requirement: im100-index > 10 Step 5: Follow the Weightage Table (NAAC) as mentioned below, to make the final panel of Experts Weightage Table (NAAC) The following Weightage Table is to be used (table 9): In the above Weightage Table, the Selection Score (SS) of a Candidate is given by SS = IRE + a Final selection will be on the basis of SS score The SS score of all the Experts will be published by the Govt of India on UGC website in descending order of magnitude, for which the Director, HEM Engineering Centre in UGC will have the important responsibility Table BI Index of Research Excellence (IRE of Type-2) Prior NAAC experience as a Member or Chairman of visiting team in terms of frequency a = 0, 1, 2, 3, SS score Member BI IRE with (SA)9 or (SA)11 a SS Chairman BI IRE with (SA)11 a SS Sr No Position in NAAC visiting team * India is having a large pool of true Experts in every fields But UGC must identify them for which the Director of HEM Engineering Centre of UGC has the responsibility However, Step-3,4 may be diluted by UGC for those fields only, in which Experts be not available in the country But no action of dilution should be taken at the cost of Experts if available sufficiently as per above norms 336  “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” ON PROBLEM STATEMENT 7: HOW TO SELECT THE “MOST SUITABLE CANDIDATE(S)” FOR THE HIGHLY PRESTIGIOUS AWARDS/HONORS IN INDIA? India is a vast country India is having a large number of scientists in various fields like: Science, Engineering & Technology, Medical Science, Management, Literature, Social Science, etc About Various Awards/Honors for Researchers in India Every year India selects by the best possible method the most suitable candidate(s) for the following prestigious awards/honor (all awards not listed here): A(1) for INSA Young Scientists Award A(2) for Shanti Swarup Bhatnagar Prize A(3) for India Science Award A(4) for FNA, FASc, FNASc, FNAAS, FTWAS, FNAE, FNAAS, FAMS, NASI-ICMR, FZSI, FHSI, FBRS, FIAP, etc A(5) for many other award/honor not listed here The INSA Young Scientists Award, considered to be the highest recognition of promise, creativity and excellence in a young scientist, is made annually to those distinguished for these attributes as evidenced by their research work carried out in India The award of an Academy medal to a Young Scientist shall be made in recognition of notable contributions to any branch of science or technology, recognized by the Academy, on the basis of work carried out in India The Shanti Swarup Bhatnagar Prize for Science and Technology (SSB) is a science award in India given annually by the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) for notable and outstanding research, applied or fundamental, in biology, chemistry, science, engineering, mathematics, medicine and Physics The purpose of the prize is to recognize outstanding Indian work (according to the view of CSIR awarding committee) in science and technology It is the most coveted award in multidisciplinary science in India The prize is awarded on the basis of contributions made through work done in India only during the five years preceding the year of the prize The prize is divided into seven disciplines, namely: • • • • • • • Biological Sciences Chemical Sciences Earth, Atmosphere, Ocean and Planetary Sciences Engineering Sciences Mathematical Sciences Medical Sciences Physical Sciences Further, each discipline can have multiple winners (maximum individuals) India Science Award is the highest and the most prestigious national recognition by the Government of India for outstanding contribution to science The primary and essential criterion for the award is demonstrated and widely accepted excellence in science The award covers all areas of research in 337  “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” science including engineering, medicine and agriculture India Science Award is given annually in recognition of distinguished achievements in science, including medicine, engineering and agriculture The recipient is a scientist, of no age limit, who had made a groundbreaking scientific research that is widely demonstrated and accepted, and the work done primarily in India Originality and innovatory outputs are more important than mere quantity Contribution to scientific development of the country has a huge impression Besides these, Indian Science Congress has to choose the most appropriate person every year for more than 40 awards viz Asutosh Mookerjee Memorial Award, C.V Raman Birth Centenary Award, Srinivasa Ramanujan Birth Centenary Award, M.N Saha Birth Centenary Award, P.C Mahalanobis Birth Centenary Award, S.N Bose Birth Centenary Award, S K Mitra Birth Centenary Award, J C Bose Memorial Award, P C Ray Memorial Award, etc to list a few only Existing Methods of Selection for Award/Honor The existing methods of selecting the best candidate(s) for the above mentioned prestigious awards/ honors are very obsolete methods The methods followed by the Govt of India provide satisfaction to the winners only, but cannot provide satisfaction to those who are ‘not winners’ Every year Govt of India does its best with highest possible honesty by its best possible judgement for selecting the best candidate(s) for each of the above awards/honors, but the methods followed by Govt of India for various awards are technically poor, mathematically poor, statistically poor, and consequently from the distance many people by mistake feel that the selections are not fair, are not transparent Because of grievance, they make some comment like ‘unfair’, ‘bias’, ‘political’, etc etc although it is not true But the reality at many of the common people, be it due to wrong intuition or else, cannot be ignored They want more transparent judgment and the so-called fairer selection (Ball, 2005) This is possible, if and only, if an excellent quantitative evaluation is done by an excellent new mathematical model so that a comparative mathematical/statistical analysis (publishing the results for all candidates very transparently) India can upload in the website every year, to provide utmost satisfaction to all the competitors (nominated candidates) so that all the candidates can understand their merit-ranks and can accept the final results with heart and smile with respectful academic and honest spirit Although it is fact that scientists/researchers never work for any award or for any return, nevertheless they are the people saving our earth, working very hard for the welfare of earth and universe which the world must encourage and recognize The Proposed IRE Method For each of the above mentioned awards/honors, the IRE of type-2 is to be used in calculating the SS score, as the candidates are nominated from various working subjects and fields across the country Corresponding to every candidate, the concerned authority must collect signed copies of his “BI Computing Table” and “JPI Computing Table” as on the date (period) specified by the authority Minimum Eligibility Criteria: As a first step to be followed to filter out the candidates who are not sufficiently strong this time for the award/honor, the following are minimum eligibility criteria to be satisfied by each nominated candidate: 338  “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” Every candidate for any award/honor from A(1), A(2), A(3), A(4), A(5) as listed earlier or any other award must be a “(α,β,γ) Normed Type-2 Expert” with respect to suitably pre-choosen and pre-imposed value of (α,β,γ) by the Govt which could be different for different category of the awards/honors im10-index > 10 for award A(1) im100-index > 10 for award A(2) “im100-index > 10 AND im1000-index > 1” for award A(3) For award A(4), A(5) and others, the im norm and/or any other norm is to be decided by the concerned authority according to the nature of the award/honor Consider a hypothetical case Suppose that two teachers Mr X of Physics of one university of Pune and Mr Y of Geology of another university of Cochin have the individual indices as below (where for both of them the LRY is less than years): Normalized CJPI(X) = 40, Normalized AJPI(X) = 5.25, BI(X) = 40; Normalized CJPI(Y) = 35, Normalized AJPI(Y) = 6, BI(Y) = 40 Clearly, IRE (of Type-2) for both Mr X and Mr Y are equal But Mr X is a “(30, 6, 40)-Normed Expert” whereas Mr Y is not This example shows an important role of “(α,β,γ) Norm of Type-2” to filter out less talented candidates, i.e to shortlist suitable candidates for an award/honor Weightage Table The following Weightage Table (table 10) is to be used (besides the other existing eligibility criteria): In the above Weightage Table, the Selection Score (SS) of a Candidate is given by SS = IRE + a Final selection will be on the basis of SS score The SS score of all the candidates will be published by the Govt of India on UGC website in descending order of magnitude, for which the Director, HEM Engineering Centre in UGC will have the important responsibility This will provide complete satisfaction to those in particular who are not selected for the award CONCLUSION The “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” is a new theory developed exclusively for Higher Education Management (HEM) & Policy Administration in any country, in particular in vast countries like India, China, France, Germany, Australia, Brazil, Indonesia, Pakistan, Malaysia, USA, UK, Canada, Gulf countries and others in the world For the sake of smooth presentation of the “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm”, we have identified the country ‘India’ and we have developed this theory in the context of India But the theory can be well extended and applicable to any country in this world be it a small or big, without making any changes in the core philosophy/logic of the theory, but incorporating slight customized 339  “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” Table 10 Sr No Award/Honor BI Index of Research Excellence (IRE of Type-2) Average of the Members’ scores on the basis of originality, innovativeness, application potential, etc by reviewing the papers, documents only = A (every member awards marks out of 100) INSA Young Scientists Award BI IRE with (SA)5 a = 30% of A SS Shanti Swarup Bhatnagar Prize BI IRE with (SA)5 a = 20% of A SS FNA, FNASc, etc BI IRE with (SA)9 or (SA)11 a = 20% of A SS India Science Award BI IRE with (SA)11 Not required SS Other Awards BI IRE with a suitable SA, according to the award/ honor a = a suitably decided part of A SS SS score * Negative Issues, if any, are to be identified or reported by the Selection Board and/or concerned (or any other) organization (For Example: unacceptable body language in his office, unacceptable comment or statement made by the candidate to open public crowds, poor feedback report from the working place, Police case, CBI/IB case, etc.) And the case of a candidate for selection will be summarily ignored and cancelled adjustments in the equivalent nomenclatures of the respective country It is called an engineering model because of the fact that the model works dynamically on:: internet search engines, several databases of heterogeneous big data, intelligent software, computer hardware and distributed systems, mechatronics hardware, Information Technology, Electronics & Communication Engineering, Mechatronics, Fuzzy Logic, Soft Computing, Big Data (Biswas, 2015a, 2015b), and of course on Mathematics & Statistics of both R-Statistics and NR-Statistics (Biswas, 2016), up to the extent of Big Data Statistics (Biswas, 2016) The existing notion of three popular bibliometrics: h-index, g-index and in-index (i10-index) has a major weakness to justify their role for which they are defined, and consequently their definitions are corrected by introducing three new bibliometrics: Hm-index, Gm-index and im-10 index which are used in the architecture of “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” here One rich potential of the theory is the consideration of Type-1 and Type-2 in the important metrics/indices Where Type-1 is applicable to homogeneous environment only, the Type-2 is applicable to heterogeneous environment only The model “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” can be improved in future by the growth of various technologies time to time One basic assumption in the Theory of IRE is that there is no rounding-off of any numerical results Results of all numerical computations are to be made up to decimal places only Bracket expressions are to be computed with priority, in any complex mathematical or logical expression in this theory The theory provides unique solutions to seven important problems of MHRD (UGC) in HEM which are identified as below: 340  “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” Problem How to Continuously Monitor the Real Time Progress of Research Work of the Ph.D Scholars in the Universities/Institutions in India by a Common Rule of UGC across all the Universities in India Problem How to restrict the publications of bad quality research papers in fake/bad journals? How to control these activities in higher education system? Problem Proposing a New Improved Method for Recruitment of Teachers in Universities in India Problem How to select the ‘Most Suitable Candidate(s)’ to fill-up the reserved quota in academics? Problem A New Improved Method for Promotion Policy of Teachers In Universities in India Problem Accreditation of universities/institutes in India: How to select the true experts for every visiting team of NAAC? Problem Proposing a new improved method to MHRD, Govt of India on: “How to select the ‘Most Suitable Candidate(s)’ for the various highly prestigious top awards/honors in India?” (viz India Science Award, Shanti Swarup Bhatnagar Prize, INSA Young Scientists Award, FNA, etc.) Although there are several other problems, subproblems, issues etc in HEM, it is our claim that these other issues will get automatically controlled if these seven major problems are solved It is observed that in the present academic world, many of the universities (in particular, many private universities or newly born/converted universities/NITs or poorly rated Gov universities) have been starving owing to acute shortage of quality supervisors to guide Ph.D scholars These universities might have recruited a number of Ph.D degree holder teachers but many of them are neither doctorate from good universities nor they have any prior experience of working in any good universities These teachers are asked now to guide the admitted Ph.D scholars in their working universities, which they without learning any element of method of guidance even from their own supervisors Because in many cases these new supervisors also did their Ph.D under the supervisors who were holding poor quality Ph.D.’s not having a proper or sufficient knowledge/confidence about the Ph.D guidance and even about the ideal university system The problem become acute when these Ph.D teachers on guiding a number of Ph.D 341  “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” scholars earn a lot of publications just by the publications of their scholars and finally get promoted to Associate Professor or Professor with zero effort almost Unfortunately, in many universities in many cases, instead of “supervisors produce Ph.D scholars” it is “Ph.D scholars produce supervisors” It is like continuous construction of large number of floors one above the another to be seen from outside as a beautiful multi-storied building on unnoticed or un-estimated poor foundation, while even the first floor itself should have NOT been constructed Even if few Professors in such a university are excellent who are truly correct/appropriate at every steps, but they form a minority among all the Professors in that university, in particular in all the important Committees/Boards/Councils of that university It is presently a very serious matter but was not in existence in our country 30-50 years back even, and of course beyond that The very quick expansion by opening a number of Govt universities and private universities was a bold step but it is now so explosive that it is difficult for the MHRD to monitor them appropriately, to confine them within at least a minimum prescribed amount of quality All the universities and institutions are basically children of MHRD, and I personally feel that MHRD in India is now heavily overloaded, compared to other ministries With such a pathetic figure on the issue of Ph.D guidance, it is quite clear that many universities in India need a number of Ph.D.’s who are quality Ph.D.’s from good universities, not just degree holders from poorly rated universities The unique powerful merit of this theory is that it brings homogeneity upto a good extent among all the universities across the country in terms of quality in the overall system Excellent universities are always excellent, but our concern is on how to truly impose quality in other universities which are majority in number The proposed “Five Conditions Ph.D Rule of UGC” is an important part of the “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” It consists of a number of quantified real-time measures to monitor the progress of the research work being carried out by a Ph.D scholar time-to-time in a university It provides a fair and transparent method to the scholars and supervisors for self-assessment and accuracy The “Five Conditions Ph.D Rule of UGC” consists of five conditions which are to be mandatorily fulfilled by a Ph.D scholar before the submission of thesis which is to be checked by the judgement of the concerned supervisor However, the last i.e the 5th condition is to be satisfied by the concerned university, not by the research scholar Finally, all the first four conditions will be surely counterchecked by the university before the university accepts a thesis for applying the 5th condition and for further processing of it It is also suggested that every Ph.D scholar, on submission of his thesis, will be issued by the Controller of Examination of the university a “Provisional Thesis Submission Certificate” But after his successful defend of his thesis in the Viva-voce, he will be finally issued an important certificate called by “Thesis Submission Certificate” for which a standard common format is proposed which is to be followed by all the universities across the country We expect that the “Ministry of HRD (MHRD)” will consider our proposed “Five Conditions Ph.D Rule of UGC” for implementation in all the universities across the country with the sole purpose to attain a minimum standard at least, in the quality of the Ph.D.s of future generation to bring a minimum layer of homogeneity across the country We strongly feel that the weak universities/NITs, which are of our concern today, surely want to produce good quality Ph.D.s by their whole hearted mission But in ground reality they are in uncontrolled situations and hence paralyzed in hidden ways because of non-existence of an excellent model prescribed by the “Ministry of HRD (MHRD)” for the seven major problems identified in this work We also expect that the “Ministry of HRD (MHRD)” will consider our proposed “Fuzzy Evaluation Training Programme (FETP)” for implementation of fuzzy evaluation system along with the classical evaluation system across the country We are sure that if a serious attention be given by the “Ministry of HRD (MHRD)” in implementation of FETPs and the “Five Conditions Ph.D Rule of UGC” method, then the “Ministry of HRD (MHRD)” 342  “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” can bring a major breakthrough in imposing a guaranteed high quality in the higher education systems in India up to a very high extent within a maximum of next ten years’ span A new method has been also proposed to control/restrict poor publications by the researchers in bad or fake journals The Director of HEM Engineering Centre has a huge role in UGC in this national/international issue One of the important topic in the Theory of IRE is a new method proposed for recruitment of teachers in universities The existing recruitment policy is good but cannot satisfy the candidates who are not finally selected The new method is highly scientific and logical It can map the amount of talent of a candidate to a quantified data which can help the selection board to evaluate them in a very right way The method is so fair and transparent that the candidates themselves can make self-assessment about their own positions anytime in any selection process One of the beautiful features in our country’s constitution is that in most of the cases there are seats (for jobs, for promotions, for admissions, etc.) kept reserved for Minority/SC/ST/OBC etc i.e for the reserved category candidates There is a strong Philosophy behind such strategy/policy adopted in our constitution The existing method of implementation of reservation policy followed in India is good, but surely an obsolete To make a better justice to this philosophy, we have made an attempt here to make allocation of all the reserved admission-seats or jobs to the reserved category candidates most appropriately and to the very right candidates It must be very clear to any reader that this article is not proposed to reduce or to disturb the number of existing quota for Minority/SC/ST/OBC etc in jobs, admission, scholarships, or in selection procedure wherever reservation system is applicable Besides that, in our proposed formula all the reserved quota of SC will surely remain exclusively for the SC reserved candidates only, and the same philosophy is true for ST or OBC or minority communities, which is of course followed in the existing policy too The Theory of IRE with Coded Reservation Formula (CRF) proposed here does not disturb the quota figure (i.e the number of vacancies reserved for any individual reserved community) under any circumstances There is no confusion in it But CRF makes a better kind of selection among the reserved category candidates for an appropriate distribution of reserved seats or reserved jobs or any reserved items to the right candidates It is better in the sense that it justifies at a very deep extent the beautiful philosophy and logic of our reservation policy, which were missing presently in the existing implementation style By applying CRF, the quota will go to the right candidates among the reserved category candidates The existing policy of allotment of seats to the reserved candidates is a very straightforward policy, but our proposed CRF is designed considering a number of important real parameters as input in order to locate and identify the most appropriate candidates of respective reserved categories A link with UIDAI Aadhaar Card database maintained by the Government of India will be surely helpful as an additional asset to compute CC on real time basis Although CC is computed here using a linear equation, it can be generalized further and can be made non-liner too if necessary for a possible further better result (but it needs a rigorous amount of research and field work before making any comment) we have designed this CRF method with a honest intention to make better justice to the reservation policy followed in our country It is expected that the Govt of India would consider this proposal for implementation if found suitable and meritorious, for a much higher national interest and for successful implementation of the beautiful philosophy behind the reservation policy In a university, for the beginners in teaching career (for Assistant Professors at various levels), a good internal promotion policy is also proposed in the “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” The CRF is to be applicable for reserved category candidates The accreditation of universities/institutes in India are done by NAAC One major problem in this context is: ‘How to select true Experts for the visiting teams of NAAC’ Although India is having a large 343  “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” number of true Experts in every fields, but most of them are not invited for this very important job, because of several real problems which are mostly politically influenced Even most of the true experts are not being identified too, by any method of UGC An excellent solution to this problem is proposed here by applying the “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” India is a vast country having a large number of scientists in various fields like: Science, Engineering & Technology, Medical Science, Management, Literature, Social Science, etc It is the basic nature of the scientists that while they work they never think of any return in terms of any awards/honors But Govt of India has a huge respect in its governing system to honor the scientists from youngs to seniors The “Theory of IRE With (α,β,γ) Norm” has proposed here an excellent and improved method on how to select the most talented scientists among many nominations for giving prestigious awards/honors The method is so precise, fair and transparent that even the candidates who not get into the final selection lists will be satisfied by self-assessment A country walks ahead by development of its excellent Literatures, by its excellent Constitution, by excellent Governance, by excellent technologies, by excellent Plans, Strategies & Systems, by excellent sincerity, honesty and integrity, by excellent services, by excellent decision makings etc to list a few only out of many, and finally by excellent hard work; But a country can jump several kilometers ahead at any moment by excellent research only LIMITATION OF THE “THEORY OF IRE WITH (α,β,γ) NORM” The proposed method is highly applicable to all the cases in all the universities/institutions in all the subjects, in all the departments, for all the teachers There is no doubt in it But there are few talents on this earth (say, one birth in one decade) who works for very few papers only and out of these few papers it happens that one (or more) is equivalent to work like Nobel Prize winning work Even many of them not publish their work too in any journal! Our proposed work will not be appropriate and will not be applicable to such extra ordinary researchers/scientists Otherwise this proposed method is applicable to 100% of the researchers around the world REFERENCES Ball, P (2005) Index aims for fair ranking of scientists Nature, 436(7053), 900 doi:10.1038/436900a PMID:16107806 Biswas, R (2011) r-Train (Train): A New Flexible Dynamic Data Structure INFORMATION: An International Journal (Japan), 14(4), 1231–1246 Biswas, R (2012) Heterogeneous Data Structure “r-Atrain” INFORMATION: An International Journal (Japan), 15(2), 879–902 Biswas, R (2013) Heterogeneous Data Structure “r-Atrain” In B.K Tripathy & D.P Acharjya (Eds.), Global Trends in Knowledge Representation and Computational Intelligence (Ch 12) Hershey, PA, USA: IGI Global 344  “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” Biswas, R (2014) Introducing Soft Statistical Measures The Journal of Fuzzy Mathematics, 22(4), 819–851 Biswas, R (2015a) Atrain Distributed System (ADS): An Infinitely Scalable Architecture for Processing Big Data of Any 4Vs In D.P Acharjya, Satchidananda Dehuri and Sugata Sanyal (Eds.), Computational Intelligence for Big Data Analysis Frontier Advances and Applications (Part 1, pp 1-53) Switzerland: Springer International Publishing Biswas, R (2015bin Press) Introducing Data Structures for Big Data In Dileep Kumar (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Big Data Management and Applications Hershey, PA, USA: IGI Global Biswas, R (2015c) Is ‘Fuzzy Theory’ An Appropriate Tool for Large Size Problems? In Springer Briefs in Computational Intelligence Heidelberg: Springer Biswas, R (2015d) Is ‘Fuzzy Theory’ An Appropriate Tool for Large Size Decision Problems? In Imprecision and Uncertainty in Information Representation and Processing (Ch 8) Heidelberg: Springer Biswas, R (2015e) “THEORY OF CESFM”: A Proposal to FIFA & IFAB for a new ‘Continuous Evaluation Fuzzy Method’ of Deciding the WINNER of a Football Match that Would Have Otherwise been Drawn or Tied after 90 Minutes of Play The Journal of Fuzzy Mathematics, 23(4), 991–1008 Biswas, R (2015f) A Proposal for UGC 7th Pay Commission, submitted to the Govt of India Biswas, R (in press) Introducing ‘NR-Statistics’: A New Direction in Statistics In J Sunil (Ed.), Generalized and Hybrid Set Structures and Applications for Soft Computing Hershey, PA, USA: IGI Global doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-9798-0.ch023 Egghe, L (2006a) Theory and practice of the g-index Scientometrics, 69(1), 131–152 doi:10.1007/ s11192-006-0144-7 Egghe, L (2006b) An improvement of the h-index: The g-index ISSI Newsletter., 2, 8–9 Egghe, L (2006c) How to improve the h-index Scientist (Philadelphia, Pa.), 20, 14 Garfield, E (1955) Citation Indexes for Science: A New Dimension in Documentation through Association of Ideas Science, 122(3159), 108–111 doi:10.1126/science.122.3159.108 PMID:14385826 Garfield, E (2006) The History and Meaning of the Journal Impact Factor Journal of the American Medical Association, 295(1), 90–93 doi:10.1001/jama.295.1.90 PMID:16391221 Hirsch, J E (2005) An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(46), 16569–16572 doi:10.1073/ pnas.0507655102 PMID:16275915 Jin, B H (2006) H-index: An evaluation indicator proposed by scientist Science Focus, 1, 8–9 Jin, B H., Liang, L M., Rousseau, R., & Egghe, L (2007) The R- and AR-indices: Complementing the h-index Chinese Science Bulletin, 52(6), 855–863 doi:10.1007/s11434-007-0145-9 Laskar, M.H (2010) Rethinking Reservation in Higher Education in India ILI Law Review, 2010, 25-53 Rao, P.P (2010) Right to Equality and Reservation Policy JILI, 2010, 42 345  “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” Zadeh, L A (1965) Fuzzy Sets Information and Control, 8(3), 338–353 doi:10.1016/S00199958(65)90241-X KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS (α,β,γ) Norm: With respect to a pre-fixed and valid value of (α,β,γ) by a university, there is a set of three conditions called collectively by (α,β,γ) Norm (α,β,γ) Normed Expert: A teacher or a scientist in a university/organization is called an ‘Expert’ if he fulfills the three constraints called collectively by (α,β,γ) Norm AOIA: The abbreviation AOIA stands for “Acceptable Other Indexing Agents” This is a list of other indexing agent which are accepted and approved by the UGC for inclusion in AOIA BI Table and JPI Table: These are two dynamic twin tables called by summary tables of a researcher (who is not a beginner in research) showing all details information about the research performance of him Bibliometric Index: The Bibliometric Index (BI) of a researcher (usually not a beginner in research) is the sum of his Hm-index, Gm- index and im10-index Coded Reservation Formula: This a new improved model for a refined ‘reservation policy’ for minority / SC / ST / OBC etc in Higher Education Management (HEM), without disturbing any interest of the existing system Core Subject: In the Theory of IRE, the subjects like Mathematics, Statistics, Botany, Zoology, Sociology, Computer Science (Computer Engineering), Electronics Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Law, etc are the core subjects in which usually bachelor degrees are awarded by universities Usually, it is the department name too in a university Expert Rating Set: This is a set of 10 number of triplets fixed by UGC Five Conditions Ph.D Rule of UGC: The “Five Conditions Ph.D Rule of UGC” is a kind of checkitems using which a Ph.D scholar can self-assessment and his supervisor can quantitatively compute and take decision on whether the work of his Ph.D scholar is sufficient and worthwhile in all respect for submission now Fuzzy Evaluation Method: The ‘Fuzzy Evaluation Method’ is a soft-computing method for evaluation of a Ph.D thesis or a Master thesis or a Project dissertation etc., where judgment parameters are answered not only by subjective comments but also awarding fuzzy numbers (fuzzy marks) and/or awarding value (membership value) in the closed interval [0,1], by the best intellectual judgment of the expert The integration of all the intellectual comments is done using fuzzy mathematics and of course according to all the other instructions laid down by the concerned university Fuzzy Evaluation Training Programme: A kind of orientation programme for the experts only, in which a team of specialized subject experts (here subject is: “Evaluation & Judgment of academic materials and quality”) sponsored by the “Ministry of HRD (MHRD)” will counsel the present prospective (α,β,γ) Normed Experts to become excellent fuzzy evaluators in the country Hm-Index, Gm-Index and im10-Index: An improved and modified version of the existing definition of H-index, G- index and i10-index respectively Impact Factor Score: It is a score earned by a researcher (a Ph.D scholar or a teacher or a Scientist) corresponding to each publication of research paper in an indexed or sub-indexed journal 346  “Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” Index of Research Excellence: The ‘Index of Research Excellence’ (IRE) is the most important and most useful metric in our Theory of IRE for HEM in any country It is an excellent quantitative measure for any researcher called by ‘Index of Research Excellence’ (IRE) to estimate his overall research performance, his research caliber, and the innovative quality in him by which he is to be regarded as a ‘scientist’ Indexed Journal: A journal is termed as an ‘indexed journal’ if it is indexed in Thomson Reuter’s annual Journal Citation Reports (JCR), indexed by SCIE (Science Citation Index Expanded) Journal Publication Index: There are three types of JPI for every researcher, out of which one is used for evaluating yearly performance, one for cumulative and the other for average Life History of the Manuscript: In every journal, every published paper must disclose some important information about the manuscript called by ‘Life History of the Manuscript’, at the end-page of this paper while published LRY: It is the basically age of his Master degree Non-Indexed Journal: There are a number of journals (having ISSN) which are neither indexed journals nor sub-indexed journals (not indexed by any agent of the respective List of AOIA prescribed by UGC) However, they may be indexed by some other agents not listed in the List of AOIA or may not be indexed at all In the Theory of IRE such a journal is called a Non-indexed journal Ph.D Work Index: At a given point of time during the tenure of Ph.D work of a Ph.D scholar, the PWI is the sum of all IFS the scholar has earned during his Ph.D tenure so far but subject to the condition that the work is in compliance with his Ph.D Proposal which was officially approved for him by the university Proportional Impact Factor Score: It is a score earned by researchers (Ph.D scholars or Professors or Scientists or teachers, etc.) corresponding to each publication of research paper in indexed or subindexed journals on the basis of the amount of actual contribution among all the authors of the paper Provisional Impact Factor: The PIF of a sub-indexed journal in a core subject in a given year is equal to the minimum value of the IF values of all the indexed journals in that core subject in that year Simpson Area: It is a measure to evaluate the research-talent of a researcher, and applicable to those only for whom LRY ≥ Sub-Indexed Journal: In the Theory of IRE, a journal on a core subject which is not an indexed journal as per above definition but indexed by any of the corresponding List of AOIA prescribed by UGC is called a sub-indexed journal Thesis Submission Certificate: In the ‘Five Conditions Ph.D Rule of UGC’ introduced here, every Ph.D scholar on submission of his thesis will be issued by the concerned university a certificate mentioning the value of the ‘university TSI’ and the value of the ‘PWI of the scholar as on the date of submission of thesis’, as per a given format Initially a provisional certificate is issued, and the main certificate is issued after successful defending the thesis by the scholar Thesis Submission Index: The TSI is a positive real number decided/fixed by the university for each of its department such that a Ph.D scholar is eligible to submit his thesis if and only if (i) the PWI of the scholar exceeds the prescribed TSI of the department (prescribed by its university), and also if (ii) the supervisor allows him to submit the thesis, in compliance with the approved “Ph.D Proposal” 347 ... the method of estimation of index This logic is missing in the existing notion of H-index, G-index, i10-index and any other existing indices 282  ? ?Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” We introduce... of G-index 283  ? ?Theory of IRE with (α,β,γ) Norm” Introducing ‘im10-Index’ of a Researcher In an analogous way, one can define imN-index and in particular the im10-index of a researcher incorporating... and infrastructures This is a mandatory requirement for successful implementation of the engineering model of Higher Education Management (HEM) proposed by us in this chapter The “HEM Engineering