  Metrics based on percentile ranks (PRs) for measuring scholarly impact
involves complex treatment because of various defects such as overvaluing or
devaluing an object caused by percentile ranking schemes, ignoring precise
citation variation among those ranked next to each other, and inconsistency
caused by additional papers or citations. These defects are especially obvious
in a small-sized dataset. To avoid the complicated treatment of PRs based
metrics, we propose two new indicators - the citation-based indicator (CBI) and
the combined impact indicator (CII). Document types of publications are taken
into account. With the two indicators, one would no more be bothered by complex
issues encountered by PRs based indicators. For a small-sized dataset with less
than 100 papers, special calculation is no more needed. The CBI is based solely
on citation counts and the CII measures the integrate contributions of
publications and citations. Both virtual and empirical data are used so as to
compare the effect of related indicators. The CII and the PRs based indicator
I3 are highly correlated but the former reflects citation impact more and the
latter relates more to publications.
