Results are reported of what is believed to be the first survey of the quantitative contributions Earth scientists make to their research publications. Based on a return of 26 (from 45; 254 total documents), two key patterns are observed. For most articles, there is a steady decrease in the roles of the first through fifth authors. The former fall from 65 ± 14% for two-author outputs, to 52 ± 9% for five, to 46 ± 10% for ten; fifth authors are perceived as having contributed 5–6%. The term ‘balanced’ is used to describe such contributor lists. The second pattern, which is labelled ‘imbalanced’, is recognized with teams of five or more and involves the first author shouldering a disproportionately large amount of the work; consequently, the inputs of the third and lesser authors range from small to negligible (5–1%). In some cases, it is observed in a few of a researcher’s publications (≤3); in others, it is more pervasive. There are two basic explanations: estimation problems and excessive numbers of authors, which can be split into two and three subcategories, respectively. The key features of the survey data are dwelt upon. The work concludes with an exploration of a proposed H-Index-type metric that is weighted by the contribution fractions a researcher makes to their publications. This, I contend, would be more reflective of their impact.

中文翻译：

---

对地球科学研究出版物的定量作者投入：调查结果、见解和潜在应用

报告的结果被认为是对地球科学家对其研究出版物的定量贡献的第一次调查。根据返回的 26 个（来自 45 个；总共 254 个文档），观察到两个关键模式。对于大多数文章，第一作者至第五作者的角色稳步减少。前者从两位作者产出的 65 ± 14% 下降到五位作者的 52 ± 9% 和十位作者的 46 ± 10%；第五作者被认为贡献了 5-6%。术语“平衡”用于描述此类贡献者列表。第二种模式，被标记为“不平衡”，由五人或五人以上的团队认可，第一作者承担了不成比例的大量工作；因此，第三位和次位作者的投入范围从小到可以忽略不计（5-1%）。在某些情况下，在少数研究人员的出版物中观察到（≤3）；在其他情况下，它更为普遍。有两个基本的解释：估计问题和过多的作者，可以分别分为两个和三个子类别。详述了调查数据的主要特征。这项工作最后探索了一个提议的 H 指数类型指标，该指标由研究人员对其出版物的贡献分数加权。我认为，这将更能反映他们的影响。这项工作最后探索了一个提议的 H 指数类型指标，该指标由研究人员对其出版物的贡献分数加权。我认为，这将更能反映他们的影响。这项工作最后探索了一个提议的 H 指数类型指标，该指标由研究人员对其出版物的贡献分数加权。我认为，这将更能反映他们的影响。