Annual Article Processing Charges (APCs) and number of gold and hybrid open access articles in Web of Science indexed journals published by Elsevier, Sage, Springer-Nature, Taylor & Francis and Wiley 2015-2018
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dataset of annual Article Processing Charges (APCs) for 6,252 journals from 2015 to 2018. The dataset contains annual APCs for journals indexed in the Web of Science (WoS) and published by the oligopoly of academic publishers (Elsevier, Sage, Springer-Nature, Taylor & Francis, Wiley). It also includes an estimate of the total APCs paid by the academic community based on the number of gold and hybrid articles published between 2015 and 2018. The dataset was created using publication data from WoS, OA status from Unpaywall and annual APC prices from open datasets (Matthias, 2020; Morrison, 2021) and historical fees retrieved via the Internet Archive Wayback Machine. Detailed methods and findings are reported in the following journal article Butler, L.-A., Matthias, L., Simard, M.-A., Mongeon, P., & Haustein, S. (2023). The Oligopoly's Shift to Open Access. How the Big Five Academic Publishers Profit from Article Processing Charges. Quantitative Science Studies. Preprint: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8322555 Description of included files (v1): APCs.csv: contains the annual APCs for gold and hybrid OA journals indexed in Web of Science published by the oligopoly of academic publishers (Elsevier, Sage, Springer-Nature, Taylor & Francis, Wiley) between 2015 and 2018 including the total estimate of APCs paid per journal per year. It contains APC data for 18,846 journal-year-OA status combinations. countries.csv: contains the fractionalized number of annual gold and hybrid OA articles by oligopoly publishers between 2015 and 2018 and the total estimate of fractionalized APCs paid per country per journal per year. oecd.csv: contains the fractionalized number of annual gold and hybrid OA articles by oligopoly publishers between 2015 and 2018 and the total estimate of fractionalized APCs per discipline per journal per year. ReadMe.csv: contains a description of the variables used in APCs.csv, countries.csv and oecd.csv.
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
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.087 | 0.071 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".