The g-index, proposed by Leo Egghe, is positioned as a complement to the h-index. Roughly, it seeks the largest g such that the top g cited papers together have at least g² citations. A few blockbuster “star” papers are rewarded more visibly than under h. Where h sets a flat threshold bar, g is more sensitive to citation mass in the upper tail.
In practice g is usually at or above h. In fast-citing fields with review articles, g can pull ahead clearly. g still depends on database coverage and grows with career length. It is not enough, alone, to label someone a “star researcher”; field norms matter.
Many Turkish guidelines never ask for g; Scopus/WoS UIs may not surface it like h. It can still support a CV narrative of “a few highly cited papers plus a solid core.” i10-index is Scholar-specific; g is discussed more in bibliometric literature.
Read g with the h-index and citation entries. Heavy self-citation or citation rings pollute both g and h. Without a clean author identity (ORCID), it is unclear which publication set g was computed on.
When you use g-index in a dossier or journal choice, state the year, official source, and category or collection name when relevant. Cross-reading related entries in this glossary prevents slogan-only explanations and produces verifiable wording that matches how committees and funders actually read evidence.