A Bibliometric Analysis of the Literature on Open Access in Scopus
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using bibliometric techniques, this study investigates the characteristics of the literature on open access related research. The bibliometric data collected from Scopus, such as document type, country of publication, language of publication, subject area and the publication year of the open access documents, is used. In addition, the most cited articles, the top journals, the most productive authors and the institutions with the highest number of papers are also identified. The results of the study show that: 1.thirteen document types and 7,721 documents from 1972 to 2012, peer-reviewed journal articles (4,793; 62%) are the most frequently used type and the most popular publication media; 2.the US (2,204; 27%) and the UK (1,172; 14%) with 3,376 (41%) of the articles, are the countries with the greatest contribution, from a total of 128 countries’ authors; 3.English (7,316; 94%) dominates the other languages as the most frequently used language; 4.the top 3 subject areas are medicine ( 2,753; 22％), social science (1,787; 14%), biochemistry and genetics, molecular biology (1,253; 10％); 5.the last 10 years (20032012) account for 6513 (84.3%), as the highest output; 6.the most cited papers, published on Remote Sensing of Environment, are cited 2043 times, written by 13 coauthors in 1998 and supported by NASA in the US; 7.Plos One, with the most total publications on open access, published 554 papers; 8.the top 3 most productive authors are Bjork, B.C., from Finland, with 29 articles on open access, McGrath, M., from the United Kingdom, with 27articles on open access and Harnad, S., from Canada, with 24articles; and 9.the top institution is the University of Toronto (Canada). The future development of open access research will be of increasing importance, with more subject areas, authors, institutions and journals. The OA movement, an innovation in scholarly communication, is growing quickly and will widely influence in different subject areas and changes in related research worldwide.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | MetaresearchBibliometrics Domain: Reproducibility · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | Bibliometrics Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | high |
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.064 | 0.258 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.558 | 0.835 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it