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.

Problem

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.

Solution

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.

Problem

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.

Solution

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.

Licences

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

Scientometrics

exalyGoogle ScholarWeb of Science + PublonsScopusCrossrefResearchGate
Author, No of ArticlesIMAGE_YESIMAGE_NOIMAGE_YESIMAGE_YESIMAGE_NOIMAGE_YES
Author, No of CitationsIMAGE_YESIMAGE_YESIMAGE_YESIMAGE_YESIMAGE_NOIMAGE_YES
Author, PercentileIMAGE_YESIMAGE_NOIMAGE_YESIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NOIMAGE_YES
Journal, Impact FactorIMAGE_YESIMAGE_NOIMAGE_YESIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NO
Journal, h-indexIMAGE_YESIMAGE_YESIMAGE_YESIMAGE_YESIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NO
Author, h-indexIMAGE_YESIMAGE_YESIMAGE_YESIMAGE_YESIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NO
Author, g-indexIMAGE_YESIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NO
Author, L-indexIMAGE_YESIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NO

Author Rankings

exalyGoogle ScholarWeb of Science + PublonsScopusCrossrefResearchGate
most cited authorsIMAGE_YESIMAGE_NOtop 6,602 authors onlyIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NO
most published authorsIMAGE_YESIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NO
most cited authors of a disciplineIMAGE_YESIMAGE_NOIMAGE_YESIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NO
most published authors of a disciplineIMAGE_YESIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NO
most cited authors of a journalIMAGE_YESIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NO
most published authors of a journalIMAGE_YESIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NO

Full-Text Search

exalyGoogle ScholarWeb of Science + PublonsScopusCrossrefResearchGate
full-text searchIMAGE_YESIMAGE_YESIMAGE_YESIMAGE_YESIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NO
Search in Figure CaptionsIMAGE_YESIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NO
Search in TablesIMAGE_YESIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NOIMAGE_NO

exaly Impact Factor vs JCR Impact Factor

exaly Impact FactorJCR Impact Factor (JIF)
excluding non-peer-reviewed articlesIMAGE_YESIMAGE_YES
excluding retracted articlesIMAGE_YESIMAGE_NO
re-calculation and error correctionIMAGE_YESIMAGE_NO
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.