Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Analysis of the Deletions of DOIs

What Factors Undermine Their Persistence and to What Extent?

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Linking Theory and Practice of Digital Libraries (TPDL 2022)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 13541))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) are regarded as persistent; however, they are sometimes deleted. Deleted DOIs are an important issue not only for persistent access to scholarly content but also for bibliometrics, because they may cause problems in correctly identifying scholarly articles. However, little is known about how much of deleted DOIs and what causes them. We identified deleted DOIs by comparing the datasets of all Crossref DOIs on two different dates, investigated the number of deleted DOIs in the scholarly content along with the corresponding document types, and analyzed the factors that cause deleted DOIs. Using the proposed method, 708,282 deleted DOIs were identified. The majority corresponded to individual scholarly articles such as journal articles, proceedings articles, and book chapters. There were cases of many DOIs assigned to the same content, e.g., retracted journal articles and abstracts of international conferences. We show the publishers and academic societies which are the most common in deleted DOIs. In addition, the top cases of single scholarly content with a large number of deleted DOIs were revealed. The findings of this study are useful for citation analysis and altmetrics, as well as for avoiding deleted DOIs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cornell University: New arXiv articles are now automatically assigned DOIs \(|\)arXiv.org blog (2022). https://blog.arxiv.org/2022/02/17/new-arxiv-articles-are-now-automatically-assigned-dois/

  2. Crossref: January 2021 Public Data File from Crossref. Academic Torrents. https://doi.org/10.13003/gu3dqmjvg4

  3. Crossref: Crossref Metadata API JSON Format (2021). https://github.com/CrossRef/rest-api-doc/blob/master/api_format.md

  4. Crossref: Crossref REST API (2021). https://api.crossref.org/

  5. Crossref: crossref.org : : crossref stats (2022). https://www.crossref.org/06members/53status.html

  6. Farley, I.: Conflict report - Crossref (2020). https://www.crossref.org/documentation/reports/conflict-report/

  7. Franceschini, F., Maisano, D., Mastrogiacomo, L.: Errors in DOI indexing by bibliometric databases. Scientometrics 102(3), 2181–2186 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1503-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hendricks, G., Tkaczyk, D., Lin, J., Feeney, P.: Crossref: the sustainable source of community-owned scholarly metadata. Quantit. Sci. Stud. 1(1), 414–427 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Himmelstein, D., Wheeler, K., Greene, C.: Metadata for all DOIs in Crossref: JSON MongoDB exports of all works from the Crossref API. figshare (2017). https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.4816720.v1

  10. Kemp, J.: New public data file: 120+ million metadata records (2021). https://www.crossref.org/blog/new-public-data-file-120-million-metadata-records/

  11. Kikkawa, J., Takaku, M., Yoshikane, F.: Dataset of the deleted DOIs extracted from the difference set between Crossref DOIs as of March 2017 and January 2021. Zenodo (2022). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6841257

  12. Klein, M., Balakireva, L.: On the persistence of persistent identifiers of the scholarly web. In: Hall, M., Merčun, T., Risse, T., Duchateau, F. (eds.) TPDL 2020. LNCS, vol. 12246, pp. 102–115. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-54956-5_8

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Klein, M., Balakireva, L.: An extended analysis of the persistence of persistent identifiers of the scholarly web. Int. J. Digit. Libr. 23(1), 5–17 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00799-021-00315-w

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Levenshtein, V.I.: Binary codes capable of correcting deletions, insertions, and reversals. Sov. Phys.-Dokl. 10(8), 707–710 (1966)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. Smulyan, S.: Defunct DOI - Crossref (2020). https://www.crossref.org/_deleted-doi/

  16. Van de Sompel, H., Klein, M., Jones, S.M.: Persistent URIs must be used to be persistent. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference Companion on World Wide Web, WWW 2016 Companion, pp. 119–120. International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee (2016). https://doi.org/10.1145/2872518.2889352

  17. The International DOI Foundation: Factsheet DOI Resolution Documentation - 4. Which RA? (2020). https://www.doi.org/factsheets/DOIProxy.html#whichra

  18. Tkaczyk, D.: Double trouble with DOIs - Crossref (2020). https://www.crossref.org/blog/double-trouble-with-dois/

  19. Zhu, J., Hu, G., Liu, W.: DOI errors and possible solutions for web of science. Scientometrics 118(2), 709–718 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2980-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Ziegler, A.: halostatue/diff-lcs: generate difference sets between Ruby sequences (2022). https://github.com/halostatue/diff-lcs

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was partially supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Numbers JP21K21303, JP22K18147, JP20K12543, and JP21K12592. We would like to thank Editage (https://www.editage.com/) for the English language editing.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan

    Jiro Kikkawa, Masao Takaku & Fuyuki Yoshikane

Authors
  1. Jiro Kikkawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Masao Takaku
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fuyuki Yoshikane
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jiro Kikkawa .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Padua, Padua, Italy

    Gianmaria Silvello

  2. Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Madrid, Spain

    Oscar Corcho

  3. CNR-ISTI – National Research Council, Pisa, Italy

    Paolo Manghi

  4. University of Padua, Padua, Italy

    Giorgio Maria Di Nunzio

  5. Linnaeus University, Växjö, Sweden

    Koraljka Golub

  6. University of Padua, Padua, Italy

    Nicola Ferro

  7. Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy

    Antonella Poggi

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Kikkawa, J., Takaku, M., Yoshikane, F. (2022). Analysis of the Deletions of DOIs. In: Silvello, G., et al. Linking Theory and Practice of Digital Libraries. TPDL 2022. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 13541. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-16802-4_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-16802-4_13

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-16801-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-16802-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics