# Large-scale comparison of bibliographic data sources: Scopus, Web of Science, Dimensions, Crossref, and Microsoft Academic

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.10732 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.10732/

## Key facts

- Cited by 11 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 21 May 2020.

## Built on by (most cited first, 11 of 11)

- [Artificial Intelligence for Literature Reviews: Opportunities and Challenges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.08565/) (2024)
- [SemOpenAlex: The Scientific Landscape in 26 Billion RDF Triples](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.03671/) (2023)
- [Impact-Oriented Contextual Scholar Profiling using Self-Citation Graphs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.12217/) (2023)
- [Analyzing the Impact of Companies on AI Research Based on Publications](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.20444/) (2023)
- [Foundation Models for Autonomous Robots in Unstructured Environments](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.14296/) (2024)
- [BiblioDAP: The 1st Workshop on Bibliographic Data Analysis and Processing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.12320/) (2021)
- [Artificial Intelligence in Concrete Materials: A Scientometric View](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2209.09636/) (2022)
- [Artificial intelligence technologies to support research assessment: A review](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.06574/) (2022)
- [From Toil to Thought: Designing for Strategic Exploration and Responsible AI in Systematic Literature Reviews](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.05514/) (2026)
- [Where Do Your Citations Come From? Citation-Constellation: A Free, Open-Source, No-Code, and Auditable Tool for Citation Network Decomposition with Complementary BARON and HEROCON Scores](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.24216/) (2026)
- [Can LLMs Predict Academic Collaboration? Topology Heuristics vs. LLM-Based Link Prediction on Real Co-authorship Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.01379/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

We present a large-scale comparison of five multidisciplinary bibliographic data sources: Scopus, Web of Science, Dimensions, Crossref, and Microsoft Academic. The comparison considers scientific documents from the period 2008-2017 covered by these data sources. Scopus is compared in a pairwise manner with each of the other data sources. We first analyze differences between the data sources in the coverage of documents, focusing for instance on differences over time, differences per document type, and differences per discipline. We then study differences in the completeness and accuracy of citation links. Based on our analysis, we discuss strengths and weaknesses of the different data sources. We emphasize the importance of combining a comprehensive coverage of the scientific literature with a flexible set of filters for making selections of the literature.