Open database of authors and journals

About exaly

exaly is a non-profit project to address the absence of an open and comprehensive resource of scholarly literature and scientometric data. We prefer to call it a project rather than an organisation to avoid corporate interest. Otherwise, as highlighted below, exaly provides almost all services by Google Scholar, Web of Science, Publons, Scopus, Crossref, and ResearchGate combined.


Almost all databases are based on user-generated or user-corrected entries. Therefore, these databases cannot be used for author ranking, as they are biased toward the authors who are active on the platform. Similar bias can occur for authors who are active on other platforms (e.g., Google Scholar tends to include several versions of an article found on different websites, though the aim is to merge them eventually). The problem arises from the fact that every platform welcomes user contribution, as it improves both engagement and pageviews along with free correction of the machine errors but at the expense of sacrificing the integrity of the whole dataset.


exaly is an unbiased database with no human contribution/alteration. Instead of fixing errors, we alter the whole algorithm to reduce the probability of that error. Therefore, any correction is applied system-wide. If there is a machine error, it applies to all authors.


Almost all platforms have their own agenda. For example, Scopus introduced CiteScore (instead of impact factor), favouring Elsevier's journals (its parent company) in comparison with journals putting more weight on non-citable articles. Google Scholar put weights on web documents (i.e., the target of its parent company) rather than scholarly literature itself. ReseachGate introduced RG Score (as an alternative to metrics like h-index), which increases by the user activities on the platform (it is about to be removed). Crossref excludes (or does not include) articles without a DOI or those whose DOIs have been issued by other DOI issuers.


exaly is not perfect, but at least, it is totally unbiased and independent. There is no corporate or commercial interest to affect the strategies and policies.

The following tables compare the features of exaly with similar databases. Note that this is NOT a marketing comparison, and the purpose is to highlight what is missing in the available commercial products. If any estimation is incorrect, please let us know to correct it.


exalyGoogle ScholarWeb of Science + PublonsScopusCrossrefResearchGate
Parent CompanynoneGoogle Inc.ClarivateElsevierInternational DOI Foundation (registration agency of)ResearchGate GmbH
SubscriptionNoNostrictly requiredrequired (previews are available)required for some servicesNo
LicenceCreative CommonsCommercialCommercialCommercialOpen CitationsCommercial

Journal Coverage

exalyGoogle ScholarWeb of Science + PublonsScopusCrossrefResearchGate
Journals81.6 K [1]no journal profile22 K [2]27 K [3]no journal profileno journal profile
Articles143 M [4]no journal profile82 M [2]84 M [3]137 M [5]no data
Authors4.9 M [6]~3 Mno data17 M [3]no author profile~3 M (20 M registered accounts)
Institutions63 K [7]no institution profile~90 K94 K [3]no institution profileno institution profile


exalyGoogle ScholarWeb of Science + PublonsScopusCrossrefResearchGate
Author, No of ArticlesYesNOYesYesNOYes
Author, No of CitationsYesYesYesYesNOYes
Author, PercentileYesNOYesNONOYes
Journal, Impact FactorYesNOYesNONONO
Journal, h-indexYesYesYesYesNONO
Author, h-indexYesYesYesYesNONO
Author, g-indexYesNONONONONO
Author, L-indexYesNONONONONO

Author Rankings

exalyGoogle ScholarWeb of Science + PublonsScopusCrossrefResearchGate
most cited authorsYesNOtop 6,602 authors onlyNONONO
most published authorsYesNONONONONO
most cited authors of a disciplineYesNOYesNONONO
most published authors of a disciplineYesNONONONONO
most cited authors of a journalYesNONONONONO
most published authors of a journalYesNONONONONO

Full-Text Search

exalyGoogle ScholarWeb of Science + PublonsScopusCrossrefResearchGate
full-text searchYesYesYesYesNONO
Search in Figure CaptionsYesNONONONONO
Search in TablesYesNONONONONO

exaly Impact Factor vs JCR Impact Factor

exaly Impact FactorJCR Impact Factor (JIF)
excluding non-peer-reviewed articlesYesYes
excluding retracted articlesYesNO
re-calculation and error correctionYesNO
This is not a criticism of JIF™, and the impact factors are computed by two different models. Clarivate publishes the JIF™ once a year, and the values remain forever. Instead, exaly updates the values following error correction or article retraction. We believe the latter is of great importance, as retracted articles are often controversial reports attracting numerous citations.

Services provided by other platforms, but not exaly

Publons provides the summary of reviewing tasks completed by authors whenever the publisher shares the peer-review process with Publons. Not only are those data not available to exaly, but it also falls outside the scope of the present project.
Scopus calculates CiteScore as an alternative to Impact Factor. Adding CiteScore to exaly is easy and straightforward, but we are not sure about its trademark status. CiteScore is considered an Elsevier property rather than a well-established scientometric index since Elsevier substantially changed its calculation method in 2020.
ResearchGate as a social network allows the interaction of members, but the authors' contribution is the opposite of our philosophy in creating an unbiased database.