←back to thread

20 years of Google Scholar

(blog.google)
418 points thepuppet33r | 3 comments | 18 Nov 24 18:01 UTC | HN request time: 0.569s | source
Show context
teruakohatu ◴[18 Nov 24 20:59 UTC] No.42176959[source]▶
The best thing, by a long way, that Google Scholar has achieved is denying Elsevier & co a monopoly on academic search.

In most universities here in New Zealand, articles have to be published in a journal indexed by Elsevier's Scopus. Not in a Scopus-indexed journal, it does not count anymore than a reddit comment. This gives Elsevier tremendous power. But in CS/ML/AI most academics and students turn to Google Scholar first when doing searches.

replies(2): >>42177049 #>>42182014 #
freefaler ◴[18 Nov 24 21:07 UTC] No.42177049[source]▶
or turn to sci-hub and annas-arhive :)
replies(5): >>42177217 #>>42177399 #>>42177609 #>>42177877 #>>42179815 #
philipkglass ◴[18 Nov 24 21:24 UTC] No.42177217[source]▶
You use Google Scholar to find papers you're interested in, then use sci-hub to actually read them.
replies(3): >>42177444 #>>42180772 #>>42187763 #
freefaler ◴[18 Nov 24 21:45 UTC] No.42177444[source]▶
indeed... and use Zotero with the correct plugin to download them automagically
replies(1): >>42177489 #
1. epcoa ◴[18 Nov 24 21:50 UTC] No.42177489[source]▶
sci-hub hasn't been updated in 4 years and the sources for annas-archive like nexus-stc are seriously hit or miss (depends on the field).
replies(2): >>42177528 #>>42185104 #
2. freefaler ◴[18 Nov 24 21:54 UTC] No.42177528[source]▶
Nothing lasts forever, but the model of buying a paper for 40$ from Elsevier isn't much better. Depending on the field there are other sources, but still a hit rate is about 85-90%.
3. mateus1 ◴[19 Nov 24 16:17 UTC] No.42185104[source]▶
Any alternatives?