| Indicator | University Z-score | Average country Z-score |
|---|---|---|
|
Multi-affiliation
|
-0.085 | 0.401 |
|
Retracted Output
|
-0.353 | 0.228 |
|
Institutional Self-Citation
|
7.904 | 2.800 |
|
Discontinued Journals Output
|
1.506 | 1.015 |
|
Hyperauthored Output
|
-0.988 | -0.488 |
|
Leadership Impact Gap
|
-2.477 | 0.389 |
|
Hyperprolific Authors
|
-1.413 | -0.570 |
|
Institutional Journal Output
|
-0.268 | 0.979 |
|
Redundant Output
|
8.242 | 2.965 |
Kazan National Research Technical University named after A.N. Tupolev demonstrates a complex scientific integrity profile, marked by significant strengths in governance and areas of critical vulnerability. With an overall score of 0.653, the institution excels in fostering scientific autonomy and responsible authorship, showing very low risk in intellectual leadership (Gap between Impact), hyperprolific authorship, and use of institutional journals. However, this positive performance is severely counterbalanced by two global red flags: an extremely high Rate of Institutional Self-Citation and an alarming Rate of Redundant Output (Salami Slicing). These weaknesses directly challenge the university's mission to form an "intellectual elite" and compete in the "orbit of the world market." While the institution holds top-tier national rankings in key thematic areas such as Energy (#1), Earth and Planetary Sciences (#2), and Environmental Science (#4), the identified integrity risks suggest that its impressive productivity may be inflated by endogamous and fragmented publication practices. Such dynamics undermine the credibility required for true global leadership and social responsibility. To fully align its operational reality with its ambitious vision, it is imperative that the university audits and reforms its publication and citation policies, ensuring that its pursuit of excellence is built upon a foundation of unquestionable scientific integrity.
The institution (Z-score: -0.085) demonstrates effective control over its affiliation practices, presenting a low-risk profile that contrasts sharply with the medium-risk trend observed nationally (Z-score: 0.401). This suggests the presence of robust institutional resilience, where internal mechanisms successfully mitigate the systemic pressures for affiliation misuse seen elsewhere in the country. While multiple affiliations can be a legitimate outcome of collaboration, the university's controlled rate indicates it is not engaging in strategic "affiliation shopping" to artificially inflate institutional credit, thereby preserving the transparency of its collaborative footprint.
With a Z-score of -0.353, the university maintains a low rate of retracted publications, showcasing a performance that is notably more secure than the national average, which sits at a medium-risk level (Z-score: 0.228). This disparity points to effective institutional resilience, suggesting that the university's pre-publication quality control mechanisms and integrity culture are acting as a successful filter against the systemic vulnerabilities that may be contributing to higher retraction rates nationally. This low rate indicates that methodological rigor and responsible supervision are well-integrated into the research process.
The university's Rate of Institutional Self-Citation presents a critical alert, with a Z-score of 7.904 that dramatically exceeds the already significant national average (Z-score: 2.800). This result constitutes a global red flag, indicating that the institution is a primary driver of this high-risk behavior within a country already compromised in this area. A certain level of self-citation is natural, but this disproportionately high rate signals a concerning scientific isolation or an 'echo chamber' where the institution validates its own work without sufficient external scrutiny. This practice creates a severe risk of endogamous impact inflation, suggesting that the institution's academic influence may be oversized by internal dynamics rather than by genuine recognition from the global scientific community.
The institution exhibits a medium-risk Z-score of 1.506 for publications in discontinued journals, a figure that indicates a higher exposure to this risk compared to the national average (Z-score: 1.015). This moderate deviation suggests the university is more prone than its peers to channeling research into outlets of questionable quality or stability. A high proportion of output in such journals is a critical alert regarding due diligence in selecting dissemination channels, as it indicates that a significant portion of scientific production is being placed in media that may not meet international ethical standards. This exposes the institution to severe reputational risks and points to an urgent need for improved information literacy to avoid wasting resources on 'predatory' or low-quality practices.
The university demonstrates a prudent and rigorous approach to authorship, with a Z-score of -0.988 that is well below the national standard (Z-score: -0.488). This indicates that the institution manages its collaborative processes with greater control than its peers. This low rate of hyper-authored output suggests a healthy research culture that effectively distinguishes between necessary massive collaboration in "Big Science" and the risk of author list inflation. By maintaining this standard, the university reinforces individual accountability and transparency in its publications.
The institution displays exceptional scientific autonomy, with a Z-score of -2.477 that signifies a very low-risk profile and a complete disconnection from the national trend of dependency (Country Z-score: 0.389). This result indicates that the impact of research led by the university's own authors is robust and does not rely on external partners for prestige. This performance signals a strong, structural, and endogenous research capacity, where excellence metrics are the result of genuine internal capabilities rather than strategic positioning in collaborations where the institution does not exercise intellectual leadership. This is a clear indicator of a healthy and sustainable research ecosystem.
With a Z-score of -1.413, the university shows a complete absence of risk signals related to hyperprolific authorship, a profile that aligns perfectly with a secure national environment (Country Z-score: -0.570). This low-profile consistency indicates a healthy research culture where productivity is balanced with quality. The data suggests the institution is effectively preventing dynamics such as coercive authorship or the assignment of credit without real participation, thereby ensuring that extreme publication volumes do not compromise the integrity of its scientific record.
The university demonstrates a clear commitment to external validation and global visibility, with a very low-risk Z-score of -0.268 in a national context where publishing in institutional journals is a medium-risk practice (Country Z-score: 0.979). This preventive isolation from national trends shows that the institution does not rely on its own journals for publication. This practice effectively mitigates the conflicts of interest and academic endogamy that can arise when an institution acts as both judge and party. By prioritizing independent, external peer review, the university ensures its research is validated through standard competitive channels, strengthening its international standing.
This indicator represents the most severe integrity challenge for the institution. Its Z-score of 8.242 is a global red flag, drastically amplifying the already significant risk present at the national level (Z-score: 2.965). This extreme value strongly suggests a systemic practice of artificially inflating productivity by dividing coherent studies into minimal publishable units. Such massive and recurring bibliographic overlap between publications, known as 'salami slicing,' distorts the available scientific evidence and overburdens the peer-review system. This prioritization of volume over significant new knowledge poses a direct and urgent threat to the university's scientific credibility and reputation.
