Mon Oct 27 09:35:00 UTC 2025: Here’s a summary and a news article based on the provided text:

Summary:

A recent list ranking the world’s top 2% of scientists, compiled by Stanford University professor John Ioannidis using a “c-score,” has sparked debate in India. While many Indian institutions tout the inclusion of their scientists as a sign of excellence, the list’s methodology raises concerns. Several Indian scientists from lesser-known institutions rank surprisingly high, even surpassing many Nobel laureates. The author argues that the “c-score,” based on citation counts and other factors, can be easily gamed and doesn’t accurately reflect the quality, validity, or contribution of the research. He suggests that focusing on improving research quality and facilitating good science is more important than chasing vanity metrics.

News Article:

Indian Scientists Rank High on Global List, But Methodology Questioned

NEW DELHI, October 27, 2025 – A recent ranking of the world’s top scientists by Stanford University professor John Ioannidis has sparked both celebration and scrutiny in India. The list, which identifies the top 2% of scientists globally based on a composite score called the “c-score,” includes over 6,000 scientists from India, a number that has steadily increased in recent years.

Numerous Indian institutions have highlighted the inclusion of their researchers as evidence of scientific excellence and a testament to their supportive research environments. However, the methodology behind the ranking, which heavily relies on citation counts and other metrics, is facing criticism.

Notably, the top-ranked Indian scientists on the list hail from relatively lesser-known institutions, raising questions about the correlation between the ranking and the actual quality of research. What’s more, some Indian scientists rank higher than some Nobel laureates.

“The c-score, while aiming for a comprehensive assessment, has serious limitations,” argues Swaminathan S., retired professor, BITS Pilani – Hyderabad, and former scientist at ICGEB, New Delhi. “It can be gamed through practices like reciprocal citations, and doesn’t adequately account for differences in citation practices across fields, the quality of journals, or instances of retracted papers.”

Critics argue that the focus on metrics like the “c-score” distracts from the core goal of producing high-quality, impactful research. They suggest that resources should be directed towards fostering a supportive research environment and promoting ethical research practices, rather than chasing numbers on a ranking list.

Read More