For reasons I can't fathom, Internet Archive Scholar got attention today, a mass of it, painting it as a "new" service. Actually, it has been out there for about a year. BUT....
If beautifully structured access to academic citations by the millions is your bag or desperately needed tool, especially ones that are ONLY left in the Wayback Machine, you are in LUCK. And this will be your favorite day. Try it.
@textfiles How does it compare to Google Scholar? Similar name, so I was wondering if it was similar in intent and/or scope.
@textfiles Well of course it's better, that went without saying. No matter what it is, it *has* to be better. We are comparing Internet Archive to Google... There's almost always nothing to worry about as to which of them is better. And honestly, I can't think of a situation Google (as a company) might do a better job of anything the archive does.
we have no current intention of building high-quality author profile pages, or computing "leaderboard" style citation metrics summaries, which are features of Google Scholar.
one difference is that all of our biblio metadata and code is openly available for reuse, and we have an open search API
@scholar All of those differences sound like positive differences. I did some looking very briefly, and other than being a little unfamiliar, and things working in ways that didn't "feel natural" it was only a few seconds of, "Oh, maybe this works this way" to get what I was wanting.
@textfiles I have no idea how I missed this last year, especially since I subscribe to the IA's blog. Amended my post on Waxy.
wow great to learn about this.
i tested it but didn't see some of my pubs so wondering about how completeness
by default we only display results that we have an accessible full text copy of. you can change the "availablity" filter to "all records" to override this.
if you know of an open copy of a paper we don't have, you can click through to 'fatcat' and submit a "Save Paper Now" request for us to crawl and index it
@textfiles is it true you send material to be digitised to places like Philippines because the labour costs are lower?
I read about this (that this exists) from Big Book of R the other night. The attention is news.
@textfiles Well, today I learned!! Very cool - do you know if there are any efforts underway to create something like the equivalent of the GS "profile" functionality where you can verify as yourself and then claim/de-duplicate/correct your own references? Maybe one that uses @ORCID_Org identifiers even...?
@melissaekline @textfiles @ORCID_Org we don't have any plans to take on author profile pages ourselves, though somebody could certainly build something like that on top of the catalog API. getting human names and de-duplication correct is hard and can be harmful if done wrong.
the fatcat catalog does have a concept of "creators" (eg, authors and editors), and can be edited by anybody to update author/paper linkages. it contains a lot of ORCID-based records, but is not very complete
@textfiles Maybe because Paul Ford mentioned it in this month's Wired in his piece "A Tweet Before Dying?"
@textfiles oops. Accidentally added two other relies I meant to be posts. Since deleted. If you saw them sorry for the confused look I’m sure they gave you.
@textfiles do you how to access to the API ? I have seen the doc https://scholar.archive.org/api/redoc#operation/get_search but I am missing the entry point ?
@textfiles The Internet Archive Scholar is the best alternative to Google Scholar I have ever seen. Wow! Can I create an account and curate my publications?
@albertcardona @MarcusStensmyr @textfiles @giorgiogilestro whoops! we have the "editor" metadata in the catalog: https://fatcat.wiki/release/fyescyq5lncvxmzlrnspa3umce/contribs
but doesn't come through in search results. how would you expect this to display in search results? "(Ed.)" after the editor name? PubMed seems not to display; PLOS (publisher) shows in separate metadata box
@textfiles oh my god. this found, in one search, a paper on soveit cybernetics from the 60s i could not find anywhere else.
@email@example.com To be fair, their webpage says: "*This is a new service. Metadata is being improved and features have not been finalized.*" so it would be understandable if someone (like me) happened on the site randomly. we'd think it was a new service.
A Mastodon Server for Internet Archive employees and Role Accounts (Announcements)