MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390108069 · doi:10.47974/cjsim-2022-0006

Russian Publications in Web of Science: A bibliometric study

2023· article· en· W4390108069 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dalibor Fiala, Daria Maltseva

Bibliographic record

VenueCollnet Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicScientific Research and Philosophical Inquiry
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeb of scienceLibrary scienceCitationCitation analysisRegional scienceCitation impactVisibilityPolitical scienceScopusGeographyComputer scienceMEDLINELaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents a bibliometric study of 1.38 million Russian publications indexed in Web of Science as of May 2022 without any restrictions as to document types, time periods, scientific disciplines, etc. From this perspective, the present analysis reflects Russian research’s true presence and visibility in the most prestigious scientific literature database. The main results obtained are: a) There was a rapid increase in research production in the 2010s, but the share of the Russian output in the global research production is still below 3%. b) International collaborative publications account for about 30% of Russian papers but around 70% of Russian citations. c) Physics, chemistry, and engineering are the most productive Russian research areas, but their citation impact is below the world average in those respective fields. d) The most frequently collaborating countries are the United States, Germany, and France, but Canada and Switzerland consistently contribute to the greatest relative citation impact of collaborative papers in the top ten research areas.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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 armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmaBibliometrics
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptBibliometrics
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0470.105
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.077
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.290 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCollnet Journal of Scientometrics and Information ManagementSame topicScientific Research and Philosophical InquiryCategoryBibliometricsFrench-language works237,207