Bibliogifts in <scp>L</scp>ib<scp>G</scp>en? A study of a text‐sharing platform driven by biblioleaks and crowdsourcing

Cabanac, Guillaume

doi:10.1002/asi.23445

Cited by 32 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Cabanac [1] reveals that 36% of all digital object identifier (DOI) articles are available for free at Library Genesis platform (LibGen). For the three major publishers (Elsevier, Springer and Wiley) the percentage is even higher (68%).…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Users crowdsource articles to LibGen directly or indirectly through services such as Reddit Scholar and SciHub. Cabanac [1] also claims that people crowdsource articles through various other channels such as Reddit, Sci-Hub, #icanhazpdf hashtag on Twitter, personal websites and text-sharing platforms.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Access to the research literature is essential to the successful work of researchers and the education of the general public [1]. Scientists and the general public rely on a wide range of channels to access the research literature [2]: printed issues of journals, interlibrary loans, publishers' online platforms such as Elsevier ScienceDirect, preprint repositories such as ArXiv, institutional and authors' web pages.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Analysis of Sci-Hub downloads of computer science papers

Andročec

2017

Acta Universitatis Sapientiae, Informatica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The scientific knowledge is disseminated by research papers. Most of the research literature is copyrighted by publishers and available only through paywalls. Recently, some websites offer most of the recent content for free. One of them is the controversial website Sci-Hub that enables access to more than 47 million pirated research papers. In April 2016, Science Magazine published an article on Sci-Hub activity over the period of six months and publicly released the Sci-Hub's server log data. The mentioned paper aggregates the view that relies on all downloads and for all fields of study, but these findings might be hiding interesting patterns within computer science. The mentioned Sci-Hub log data was used in this paper to analyse downloads of computer science papers based on DBLP's list of computer science publications. The top downloads of computer science papers were analysed, together with the geographical location of Sci-Hub users, the most downloaded publishers, types of papers downloaded, and downloads of computer science papers per publication year. The results of this research can be used to improve legal access to the most relevant scientific repositories or journals for the computer science field.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Analysis of Sci-Hub downloads of computer science papers

Andročec

2017

Acta Universitatis Sapientiae, Informatica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Another response to these shifts in the academic publishing world is what has been termed Guerilla Open Access 1 , Bibliogifts 10 or Black Open Access 11 . Or in short, the usage of semi-legal or outright illegal ways of accessing scholarly publications, like peer2peer file sharing, for example the use of #icanhazpdf on Twitter 10 , or centralized web services like Sci-Hub / LibGen 12 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Looking into Pandora's Box: The Content of Sci-Hub and its Usage

Greshake

2017

F1000Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the growth of Open Access, potentially illegally circumventing paywalls to access scholarly publications is becoming a more mainstream phenomenon. The web service Sci-Hub is amongst the biggest facilitators of this, offering free access to around 62 million publications. So far it is not well studied how and why its users are accessing publications through Sci-Hub. By utilizing the recently released corpus of Sci-Hub and comparing it to the data of ~28 million downloads done through the service, this study tries to address some of these questions. The comparative analysis shows that both the usage and complete corpus is largely made up of recently published articles, with users disproportionately favoring newer articles and 35% of downloaded articles being published after 2013. These results hint that embargo periods before publications become Open Access are frequently circumnavigated using Guerilla Open Access approaches like Sci-Hub. On a journal level, the downloads show a bias towards some scholarly disciplines, especially Chemistry, suggesting increased barriers to access for these. Comparing the use and corpus on a publisher level, it becomes clear that only 11% of publishers are highly requested in comparison to the baseline frequency, while 45% of all publishers are significantly less accessed than expected. Despite this, the oligopoly of publishers is even more remarkable on the level of content consumption, with 80% of all downloads being published through only 9 publishers. All of this suggests that Sci-Hub is used by different populations and for a number of different reasons, and that there is still a lack of access to the published scientific record. A further analysis of these openly available data resources will undoubtedly be valuable for the investigation of academic publishing.

show abstract

“…One of the most extensive studies to date was conducted by Cabanac, who examined full-text content available on the Library Genesis (LibGen) platform. LibGen hosted over 25 million documents at the time of the study; 36% of all articles assigned a digital object identifier (DOI) were found to be available on the platform, with 71% of the content originating from massive paper uploads and 29% originating from crowd-sourced sites [5].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scholarly Sharing via Twitter: #icanhazpdf Requests for Health Sciences Literature

Swab

Romme

2016

J Can Health Libr Assoc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Although requesting access to journal articles and books via colleagues and authors is a longestablished academic practice, websites and social media platforms have broadened the scope and visibility of academic literature sharing among researchers. On Twitter, the #icanhazpdf hashtag has emerged as a way for researchers to request and obtain journal articles quickly and efficiently. This study analyzes use of the #icanhazpdf hashtag as a means of obtaining health sciences literature. Methods: RowFeeder software was used to monitor and aggregate #icanhazpdf requests between 1 February and 30 April 2015. This software records data such as Twitter handle, tweet content, tweeter location, date, and time. Tweets were hand-coded for the journal subject area, the requestor's geographic location, and the requestor's occupational sector. Results: There were 302 requests for health sciences literature during the study period. Many requests were made by users affiliated with a post-secondary academic institution (45%, n 0136). Very few requests were made by users located in Canada (n 015). Conclusion: #icanhazpdf requests for health sciences literature account for a relatively small proportion of peer-to-peer article sharing activities when compared with other online platforms. Nevertheless, this study provides evidence that some faculty and students are choosing social media over the library as a means of obtaining health sciences literature. Examining peer-to-peer article sharing practices can provide insights into patron behaviour and expectations.

show abstract

Bibliogifts in LibGen? A study of a text‐sharing platform driven by biblioleaks and crowdsourcing

Cited by 32 publications

References 34 publications

Analysis of Sci-Hub downloads of computer science papers

Analysis of Sci-Hub downloads of computer science papers

Looking into Pandora's Box: The Content of Sci-Hub and its Usage

Scholarly Sharing via Twitter: #icanhazpdf Requests for Health Sciences Literature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About