We've already discussed about [which bibliometric indeces are diffused the most](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/42/what-are-the-common-productivity-measures-of-a-scientist-like-h-index), and how they work.

We all know that, along the most common [**h-index**](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H-index), there are many other parameters deriving from it or similar to it.
From [Publish or Perish website](http://www.harzing.com/pophelp/metrics.htm), we can list:

* g-index: [Egghe's g-index](http://www.harzing.com/pophelp/metrics.htm#gindex)
* hc-index: the [contemporary h-index](http://www.harzing.com/pophelp/metrics.htm#hcindex)
* individual h-index: [its three variations hI-index, hI-norm, and hm-index](http://www.harzing.com/pophelp/metrics.htm#hiindex)

Between these (and other) bibliometrics indeces, **which one do you trust more?**
Which one do you think is the **best one** to get the scientific excellence of an author?
Why?

Thanks!