The number of scholarly documents available on the web is estimated using capture/recapture methods by studying the coverage of two major academic search engines: Google Scholar and Microsoft Academic Search. Our estimates show that at least 114 million English-language scholarly documents are accessible on the web, of which Google Scholar has nearly 100 million. Of these, we estimate that at least 27 million (24%) are freely available since they do not require a subscription or payment of any kind. In addition, at a finer scale, we also estimate the number of scholarly documents on the web for fifteen fields: Agricultural Science, Arts and Humanities, Biology, Chemistry, Computer Science, Economics and Business, Engineering, Environmental Sciences, Geosciences, Material Science, Mathematics, Medicine, Physics, Social Sciences, and Multidisciplinary, as defined by Microsoft Academic Search. In addition, we show that among these fields the percentage of documents defined as freely available varies significantly, i.e., from 12 to 50%.
References
[1]
Web of Science fact page. Available: http://wokinfo.com/realfacts/qualityandq？uantity/.
[2]
Based on the statistics reported at the homepage of Microsoft Academic Search as of January 10, 2013. Available: http://academic.research.microsoft.com.
[3]
Bar-Ilan J (2008) Which h-index? a comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics 74: 257–271.
[4]
Bar-Ilan J (2010) Citations to the introduction to informetrics indexed byWOS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics 82: 495–506.
[5]
Bj？rk BC, Roos A, Lauri M (2009) Scientific journal publishing—yearly volume and open access availability. Information Research 14: 391.
[6]
Noorden RV (2013) Open access: The true cost of science publishing. Nature 495: 426–429. doi: 10.1038/495426a
[7]
Lawrence S, Giles C (1998) Searching the world wide web. Science 280: 98–100. doi: 10.1126/science.280.5360.98
[8]
Lawrence S, Giles C (1999) Accessibility of information on the web. Nature 400: 107–9. doi: 10.1038/21987
[9]
Bharat K, Broder A (1998) A technique for measuring the relative size and overlap of public web search engines. Computer Networks and ISDN Systems 30: 379–388. doi: 10.1016/s0169-7552(98)00127-5
[10]
Dobra A, Fienberg SE (2004) How large is the world wide web. Web Dynamics: 23–44.
[11]
Broder AZ, Glassman SC, Manasse MS, Zweig G (1997) Syntactic clustering of the web. Computer Networks and ISDN Systems 29: 1157–1166. doi: 10.1016/s0169-7552(97)00031-7
[12]
Norris M, Oppenheim C, Rowland F (2008) The citation advantage of open-access articles. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 59: 1963–1972. doi: 10.1002/asi.20898
[13]
Hogg R, Tanis E (2010) Probability and Statistical Inference. Pearson/Prentice Hall.
[14]
Gargouri Y, Hajjem C, Larivière V, Gingras Y, Carr L, et al. (2010) Self-selected or mandated, open access increases citation impact for higher quality research. PloS ONE 5: e13636. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0013636
[15]
Hajjem C, Harnad S, Gingras Y (2005) Ten-year cross-disciplinary comparison of the growth of open access and how it increases research citation impact. IEEE Data Engineering Bulletin 28: 39–47.
[16]
Bj？rk BC, Welling P, Laakso M, Majlender P, Hedlund T, et al. (2010) Open access to the scientific journal literature: situation 2009. PloS one 5: e11273. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0011273
[17]
Page L, Brin S, Motwani R, Winograd T (1999) The pagerank citation ranking: Bringing order to the web. Technical Report 1999-66, Stanford InfoLab.
