Shri Ramdeobaba College of Engineering and Management

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND STRATEGIC VISION

Shri Ramdeobaba College of Engineering and Management demonstrates a generally robust scientific integrity profile, marked by significant strengths in authorship governance and research practice. The institution exhibits exceptional control over multiple affiliations, hyper-authorship, hyperprolific authors, and redundant publications, consistently outperforming national benchmarks and indicating a culture of responsible conduct. However, this strong foundation is critically undermined by a significant-risk score in the rate of publications in discontinued journals, a vulnerability that sharply contrasts with its otherwise prudent performance. According to SCImago Institutions Rankings data, the institution's key research strengths lie in Physics and Astronomy, Computer Science, Environmental Science, and Engineering. While the institution's specific mission was not available for this analysis, any mission centered on academic excellence and societal contribution is directly threatened by the practice of publishing in low-quality or predatory venues. This single, severe risk factor compromises institutional reputation and the perceived value of its research, contradicting the very essence of scholarly pursuit. It is therefore recommended that the institution prioritize the implementation of stringent due diligence and quality control mechanisms for selecting publication channels, a strategic move that would address its primary weakness and solidify its position as a leader in scientific integrity.

ANALYSIS BY INDICATOR

Rate of Multiple Affiliations

The institution presents a Z-score of -1.220, which is even lower than the national average of -0.927. This result signifies a state of total operational silence, with an absence of risk signals that is more pronounced than the already secure national standard. While multiple affiliations are often a legitimate result of researcher mobility or partnerships, the institution's very low rate confirms a clear and transparent affiliation policy, with no evidence of strategic attempts to inflate institutional credit or engage in “affiliation shopping.”

Rate of Retracted Output

With a Z-score of -0.249, the institution maintains a low-risk profile that contrasts sharply with the medium-risk national average of 0.279. This demonstrates institutional resilience, suggesting that internal control mechanisms are effectively mitigating the systemic risks observed across the country. A low rate of retractions points to responsible supervision and robust quality control measures prior to publication, rather than systemic failures or recurring malpractice that would necessitate a high volume of corrections to the scientific record.

Rate of Institutional Self-Citation

The institution's Z-score of 0.110 is considerably lower than the national average of 0.520, even though both fall within the medium-risk category. This indicates a differentiated management approach that successfully moderates a risk that is otherwise common in its environment. A certain level of self-citation is natural, but the institution's controlled rate ensures it avoids the disproportionately high levels that can signal scientific isolation or 'echo chambers.' This approach ensures that the institution's academic influence is validated by the global community, not just inflated by internal dynamics.

Rate of Output in Discontinued Journals

The institution exhibits a Z-score of 4.396, a critical value that significantly amplifies the medium-risk vulnerability present in the national system (Z-score: 1.099). This finding represents a risk accentuation and constitutes a critical alert regarding the due diligence applied in selecting dissemination channels. A high Z-score indicates that a significant portion of scientific production is being channeled through media that do not meet international ethical or quality standards, exposing the institution to severe reputational risks and suggesting an urgent need for information literacy to avoid wasting resources on 'predatory' or low-quality practices.

Rate of Hyper-Authored Output

With a Z-score of -1.401, the institution shows a very low risk that is consistent with, and even improves upon, the low-risk national standard of -1.024. This low-profile consistency demonstrates an absence of risk signals related to author list inflation. It suggests that authorship practices are well-governed and transparent, reflecting genuine massive collaboration where appropriate, rather than 'honorary' or political attributions that can dilute individual accountability.

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

The institution's Z-score of -0.634 indicates a more prudent profile compared to the national average of -0.292. This suggests that the institution manages its collaborative processes with greater rigor than the national standard. A low negative gap signals a healthy balance, where the impact of its research is not overly dependent on external partners. This is a sign of sustainability, suggesting that the institution's scientific prestige is built upon genuine internal capacity and intellectual leadership, not just strategic positioning in collaborations.

Rate of Hyperprolific Authors

The institution's Z-score of -1.413 represents a state of very low risk, standing in favorable contrast to the low-risk national environment (Z-score: -0.067). This low-profile consistency indicates a complete absence of risk signals in this area. It points to a healthy institutional balance between quantity and quality, with no evidence of the extreme individual publication volumes that can challenge the limits of meaningful intellectual contribution and may signal practices like coercive authorship or the assignment of authorship without real participation.

Rate of Output in Institutional Journals

The institution's Z-score of -0.268 is in near-perfect alignment with the national average of -0.250, reflecting integrity synchrony within a secure environment. This demonstrates that there is no excessive dependence on in-house journals, a practice that can raise conflicts of interest or lead to academic endogamy. By avoiding the use of internal channels as potential 'fast tracks,' the institution ensures its scientific production undergoes independent external peer review, securing its global visibility and competitive validation.

Rate of Redundant Output

With a Z-score of -1.186, the institution demonstrates preventive isolation from the medium-risk dynamics observed at the national level (Z-score: 0.720). The very low score indicates that the institution does not replicate the national tendency towards data fragmentation or 'salami slicing.' This reflects a strong commitment to publishing significant new knowledge rather than artificially inflating productivity metrics by dividing a coherent study into minimal publishable units, thereby upholding the integrity of the scientific record and respecting the review system.