TOOLS
METHODOLOGY
FAQs
Initializing...

📂

Previous Scan Found

Saved data found for
Scanned on:

👋
New to LabMetrics?

We calculate mentorship metrics to help you choose the right lab.

Lab Co-Authorship Scanner

? How it works:
1. AI determines a PI's current and past lab members.
2. Check the frequency of co-authorships on recent papers.
3. Calculate M-Index to measure mentorship impact.

Enter a PI and institution to map their student network.

Anonymous Lab Environment Reviews

Search our database to read experiences or share your own.

Compare Labs

Search and select two saved profiles to analyze.

VS
Database Insights
Most Recently Added
Highest M-Index
Lowest M-Index
View Full Leaderboards →

Methodology

1. The M-Index Formula

We calculate a weighted score based on the frequency of co-authorships within the lab's network, normalized by the total number of papers scanned.

$$ \displaystyle M = \frac{1}{N_{\text{total}}} \sum_{i \in G} w_i \cdot C_i $$
Variable Breakdown
  • Ntotal Total papers scanned
  • G Set of identified Lab Members
  • wi Role Weight (see table below)
  • Ci Co-authorship count for i
2. Role Weighting - wi

Different roles contribute differently to the score. Principal Investigators which demonstrate exceptional mentorship have a higher frequency of co-authorships with junior students (MSc/BSc). Likewise, inclusion of staff scientists and technicans on papers suggests the PI values contributions of these members.

Role i Role Description Weight wi
BSc Undergraduate Students 4
MSc Master's Students 3
Staff Technicians & Lab Managers 3
PhD PhD Students & Candidates 2
Postdoc Postdoctoral Fellows 1
3. Why Mentorship Metrics Matter

The Academic "Currency": For undergraduate and graduate students, co-authored publications are the single strongest predictor of future success. Securing a position in top-tier medical schools, PhD programs, and post-doc fellowships heavily relies on a demonstrated track record of early research output.

The Problem with H-Index: Traditional bibliometrics like the H-Index measure a Principal Investigator's (PI) total impact, but fail to measure student outcomes. A PI may have a high H-Index solely by collaborating with other senior scientists, while their own students struggle to publish.
Result: Students often choose "famous" labs based on prestige, only to find themselves in environments with little support or publication opportunity.

The LabMetrics Solution: We bridge this information gap by quantifying the "Mentorship Footprint." The M-Index algorithm specifically filters for co-authorships with junior roles (BSc, MSc, PhD). By weighting these student-led papers higher than staff or senior collaborations, LabMetrics allows you to identify PIs who are not just productive researchers, but active, effective mentors committed to student career growth.

Frequently Asked Questions

To find a good PI, look beyond the H-Index. Analyze their co-authorship history to ensure they actively publish with junior students. A high rate of student first-author papers is the strongest indicator of supportive mentorship.

Co-authorship is critical for career advancement. It serves as the primary metric for graduate school admissions, fellowship funding, and securing postdoctoral positions.

The M-Index is a mentorship metric that weighs a Principal Investigator's publications based on the role of their co-authors. It assigns higher value to papers published with undergraduates and PhD students compared to senior staff.

Major red flags include: high turnover of graduate students, lack of first-author papers from current students, students taking 6+ years to graduate, and a reputation for stealing credit.

New PIs often provide hands-on mentorship and urgency to publish, but may lack tenure stability. Senior PIs offer prestige/funding but are often absentee mentors. Check the M-Index to see which specific PI prioritizes student growth.

Don't just count total papers. Look for 'Student First-Author' papers. If a PI has 10 papers this year but none are led by students, it suggests a lab culture where the PI or senior staff dominate the output.

Micromanagement often stems from anxiety about funding. Set clear deliverables and weekly update schedules to build trust. If it becomes abusive, consult your thesis committee.

Ask current students about 'resource scarcity'—do they have to ration reagents? Also, check if the PI has active federal grants (NIH/NSF) listed. A lack of recent papers often correlates with a lack of funding.

Switching is common and often necessary. It is better to switch in year 1-2 than to struggle for 6 years in a toxic environment. Ensure you have a new advisor lined up before formally resigning.

H-Index measures citation impact, not mentorship quality. A PI with a high H-Index might be famous but a terrible mentor. The M-Index is a better metric for student outcomes.

Ask: 'How often do you meet with the PI?', 'Do you get timely feedback on drafts?', and 'Where do alumni work now?' Listen for hesitation or vague answers.

Document your contributions (emails, git commits). Discuss authorship order *before* writing. If a PI removes your name, this is misconduct; involve your department head.

Some PIs exploit senior students as cheap, skilled labor. Check the 'Time-to-Degree' for past alumni. If the average is over 6 years, proceed with caution.

A hands-off PI gives autonomy but is available when needed. An absentee PI is physically/mentally unavailable, ignores emails, and delays graduation due to negligence.

In massive labs (30+), you are mentored by postdocs. In tiny labs (2-3), you get PI attention but less social support. Mid-sized labs (8-15) often offer the best balance.

Generally, no. If work was done in their lab using their funding, they must be an author. Publishing without them is often academic misconduct.

Supportive mentors advocate for you publicly, introduce you to collaborators, send you to conferences, and prioritize your career goals (even non-academic ones).

Use LinkedIn or LabMetrics to track former students. A high rate of 'unemployed' or 'perpetual postdoc' alumni can indicate poor training.

This is a trap. Cultivate relationships with other committee members early so you have backup letter writers. You are not owned by your PI.

Labs heavy on postdocs are often 'paper factories' prioritizing speed over training. Students may get lost in the shuffle or compete with postdocs for projects.

Refer to ICMJE guidelines. Authorship should be based on contribution, not seniority. Have these conversations early in the project.

Absolutely. Ask 'How do you handle conflict?' during the interview. Their reaction (defensive vs open) tells you everything.

Rotations allow you to test-drive a lab for 6-8 weeks. Assess the social vibe and PI availability. Never join a lab blindly if rotations are an option.

Look for 3 AM emails and expectations of immediate replies. Check if students are shamed for taking vacations. High productivity should not cost your health.

For PhDs, the PI matters more. A famous PI at a mid-tier university can launch your career better than a toxic PI at an Ivy League.

Check the alumni turnover. On LabMetrics, look at the graph: if you see many 'Unverified' or short-term members who didn't publish, that is a red flag.

Use the LabMetrics M-Index. A high score means the PI actively co-authors papers with junior staff (MSc/BSc), not just Postdocs.

LabMetrics is the alternative to RateMyProfessor for research. We combine subjective anonymous reviews with objective data on student publishing rates.