Missing Citations in COCI: Publishers Analytics Result
<p>This dataset contains a JSON file containing the results retrieved through the<a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4735621"> software developed by the authors</a>. We opted for JSON file format to store the obtained data, since this format allows the storage of heterogeneous information in a complex and structured way. The four main structures stored in the present file are: </p> <p>1) "publishers", a list of dictionaries representing each publisher encountered;</p> <p>2) "citations", a dictionary containing two lists, the one storing the validated citational data and the other storing the still invalid citational data. Each processed citation is represented as a dictionary. </p> <p>3) "total_num_of_valid_citations", whose value is the number of citational data that could be validated throughout the process implemented by our software.</p> <p>4) "external_data_for_unrecognized_prefixes": a dictionary of dictionaries representing the publishers we didn't find on Crossref, but that were identified through other online services. </p> <p>We used as input material open data from the dataset “<a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4625300">Citations to invalid DOI-identified entities obtained from processing DOI-to-DOI citations to add in COCI</a>”. </p>
ShareScore
36/100
Overall dataset sharing score
Score breakdown
These five areas show where the dataset supports — or may limit — practical reuse.
- Stewardship
- 8
- Harmonization
- 4
- Access
- 12
- Reuse readiness
- 8
- Engagement
- 4