The four main points raised by Turki et al. in their letter “Facts to consider when analyzing the references of Nobel Prize scientific background” are discussed. It is argued that while the suggestions of Turki et al. are interesting, most require subjective choices to be made regarding the data analysis. Both in the analysis of author rank, of articles with multiple references, and of citation networks suggested by Turki et al. subjective choices on behalf of the analyzer is required, clouding the raw data obtained from the Nobel Foundation Scientific Background material. Finally, we show that the references specified in the “Further reading” section is already included in the discussed analysis.

中文翻译：

---

对 Turki 等人评论的回应。关于“发表诺贝尔奖研究的期刊”

Turki 等人提出的四个要点。在他们的信件“分析诺贝尔奖科学背景参考资料时要考虑的事实”中进行了讨论。有人认为，虽然 Turki 等人的建议。有趣的是，大多数都需要对数据分析做出主观选择。在分析作者排名、具有多个参考文献的文章以及 Turki 等人建议的引文网络中。需要代表分析仪进行主观选择，使从诺贝尔基金会科学背景材料中获得的原始数据变得模糊不清。最后，我们表明“进一步阅读”部分中指定的参考文献已经包含在所讨论的分析中。