Responsible indicators are crucial for research assessment and monitoring. Transparency and accuracy of indicators are required to make research assessment fair and ensure reproducibility. However, sometimes it is difficult to conduct or replicate studies based on indicators due to the lack of transparency in conceptualization and operationalization. In this paper, we review the different variants of the Probabilistic Affinity Index (PAI), considering both the conceptual and empirical underpinnings. We begin with a review of the historical development of the indicator and the different alternatives proposed. To demonstrate the utility of the indicator, we demonstrate the application of PAI to identifying preferred partners in scientific collaboration. A streamlined procedure is provided, to demonstrate the variations and appropriate calculations. We then compare the results of implementation for 5 specific countries involved in international scientific collaboration. Despite the different proposals on its calculation, we do not observe large differences between the PAI variants, particularly with respect to country size. As with any indicator, the selection of a particular variant is dependent on the research question. To facilitate appropriate use, we provide recommendations for the use of the indicator given specific contexts.

中文翻译：

---

对应用于科学合作的概率亲和度指数的不同变体的实证回顾

负责任的指标对于研究评估和监测至关重要。需要指标的透明度和准确性才能使研究评估公平并确保可重复性。然而，有时由于概念化和操作化缺乏透明度，很难根据指标进行或复制研究。在本文中，我们回顾了概率亲和指数 (PAI) 的不同变体，同时考虑了概念和经验基础。我们首先回顾该指标的历史发展和提出的不同替代方案。为了展示该指标的实用性，我们展示了 PAI 在确定科学合作中的首选合作伙伴方面的应用。提供了一个简化的程序，以演示变化和适当的计算。然后，我们比较了参与国际科学合作的 5 个特定国家的实施结果。尽管对其计算提出了不同的建议，但我们没有观察到 PAI 变体之间的巨大差异，特别是在国家规模方面。与任何指标一样，特定变体的选择取决于研究问题。为了便于适当使用，我们提供了在特定情况下使用指标的建议。特定变体的选择取决于研究问题。为了便于适当使用，我们提供了在特定情况下使用指标的建议。特定变体的选择取决于研究问题。为了便于适当使用，我们提供了在特定情况下使用指标的建议。