Hanoi University of Civil Engineering

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND STRATEGIC VISION

Hanoi University of Civil Engineering presents a robust and well-balanced scientific integrity profile, with an overall risk score of -0.020 indicating general alignment with expected standards. The institution demonstrates exceptional strengths and effective internal governance in several key areas, including a near-absence of retracted publications, hyper-prolific authors, redundant output, and hyper-authorship, often performing significantly better than the national average. These strengths are complemented by a strong national standing in core thematic areas, with SCImago Institutions Rankings placing the university 16th in Viet Nam for Environmental Science and 17th for Earth and Planetary Sciences. However, a primary vulnerability exists in the rate of publication in discontinued journals, which is higher than the national trend and poses a direct challenge to the university's mission to "train high-quality human resources" and ensure "sustainable development." This practice risks undermining the quality of research and knowledge transfer. To fully align its operational practices with its strategic vision of excellence, it is recommended that the university implement targeted training on responsible publication strategies, thereby mitigating this reputational risk and reinforcing its commitment to generating high-impact, socially responsible knowledge.

ANALYSIS BY INDICATOR

Rate of Multiple Affiliations

The institution shows a low rate of multiple affiliations, with a Z-score of -0.174, which is more conservative than the national average of -0.035. This suggests that the university manages its collaborative processes with greater rigor than the national standard. While multiple affiliations are often a legitimate result of researcher mobility or partnerships, this prudent approach effectively minimizes the risk of strategic "affiliation shopping" or attempts to artificially inflate institutional credit, ensuring that collaborative attributions are clear and justified.

Rate of Retracted Output

The university demonstrates an exceptionally low rate of retracted publications (Z-score: -0.465), in stark contrast to the medium-risk dynamic observed nationally (Z-score: 0.749). This indicates that the institution does not replicate the systemic vulnerabilities seen elsewhere in the country. This strong performance suggests that the university's pre-publication quality control mechanisms are highly effective, successfully preventing the types of recurring malpractice or lack of methodological rigor that can lead to retractions. The institution appears to have cultivated a robust culture of integrity that insulates it from broader environmental risks.

Rate of Institutional Self-Citation

With a Z-score of 0.138, the university's rate of institutional self-citation is at a medium level but remains below the national average of 0.192. This suggests a differentiated management approach, where the institution successfully moderates a risk that appears more common across the country. A certain level of self-citation is natural and reflects the continuity of established research lines; however, this controlled rate indicates that the university is less prone to the "echo chambers" or endogamous impact inflation that can arise from excessive self-validation, reflecting a healthier balance between internal development and external scrutiny.

Rate of Output in Discontinued Journals

The institution's rate of publication in discontinued journals presents a notable area of concern, with a Z-score of 2.148 that significantly exceeds the national average of 1.127. This indicates a high exposure to this particular risk, suggesting the center is more prone than its national peers to channeling research into outlets that fail to meet international ethical or quality standards. This pattern constitutes a critical alert regarding due diligence in selecting dissemination channels. It exposes the institution to severe reputational damage and suggests an urgent need for enhanced information literacy and stricter policies to prevent the waste of resources on 'predatory' or low-quality practices.

Rate of Hyper-Authored Output

The university maintains a very low rate of hyper-authored publications (Z-score: -1.250), which is consistent with the low-risk national context (Z-score: -0.822). The absence of risk signals in this area aligns well with the national standard. This indicates that the institution's authorship practices are transparent and accountable, successfully avoiding the trend of author list inflation. This responsible approach ensures that authorship reflects genuine intellectual contribution rather than 'honorary' or political attributions, reinforcing individual accountability.

Gap between Impact of total output and the impact of output with leadership

The university exhibits a low Z-score of -0.635 for the gap between its overall impact and the impact of its led research, a more rigorous position than the national average of -0.112. This prudent profile demonstrates strong internal capacity and intellectual leadership. It suggests that the institution's scientific prestige is not overly dependent on external partners but is instead built on a solid foundation of structural, endogenous research excellence. This healthy balance mitigates the sustainability risks associated with relying on collaborations where the institution does not exercise primary leadership.

Rate of Hyperprolific Authors

With an extremely low Z-score of -1.413, the university shows a near-complete absence of hyperprolific authorship, a signal that aligns with the low-risk national standard (Z-score: -0.501). This demonstrates a healthy balance between productivity and quality. The data suggests that the institution is not exposed to risks such as coercive authorship or the assignment of credit without real participation—dynamics that prioritize metrics over the integrity of the scientific record. This indicates a research environment where meaningful intellectual contribution is valued over sheer publication volume.

Rate of Output in Institutional Journals

The university's rate of publication in its own journals is very low (Z-score: -0.268), perfectly matching the national average. This demonstrates integrity synchrony and a total alignment with an environment of maximum scientific security in this regard. By avoiding excessive dependence on in-house journals, the institution effectively mitigates potential conflicts of interest and the risk of academic endogamy. This practice ensures that its scientific production undergoes independent external peer review, enhancing its global visibility and validating its research through standard competitive channels.

Rate of Redundant Output

The institution displays a very low rate of redundant output (Z-score: -0.744), positioning it as an exemplar of integrity in a national context that shows medium-level risk (Z-score: 0.313). This preventive isolation indicates that the university does not replicate the risk dynamics observed in its environment. The data strongly suggests that the institution's researchers prioritize the publication of significant, coherent studies over the practice of 'salami slicing'—artificially inflating productivity by fragmenting data into minimal units. This commitment to substance over volume strengthens the scientific record and reflects a highly responsible research culture.