RN Score

Society of Psychoceramics

Lynnfield, MA, United States · Member ID: 17333 · 88 total works

Global Rank

#2,651

of 28,379

Percentile

Top 9%

of all publishers

View Full Leaderboard

Nearby in Rankings:

#2649Institute of Agrophysics Polish Academy of Sciences(38 pts)#2650Faculty of Military Health Sciences, University of Defence(38 pts)#2652Plantae Scientia(38 pts)#2653Muszaki Katonai Kozlony(38 pts)

Nexus Score

37/ 100
D
+21 points vs historical

Score Breakdown by Era

Current

Last 2 years

#1,926

48

27 works

Backfile

Older than 2 years

#2,651

27

61 works

Ranked #1,926 for recent publications vs #2,651 overall — improving with recent work

Dimension Breakdown

Provenance

References, update policies, similarity check

4.3 / 25
People

ORCID coverage

14.1 / 20
Organizations

Affiliations and ROR IDs

6.9 / 15
Funding

Funder registry and award numbers

8.5 / 20
Access

Licenses, full-text links, abstracts

3.5 / 20

Dimension Profile

Visual overview of metadata coverage across all five dimensions.

Score by Content Type

Scores calculated separately for each content type registered with Crossref. The aggregate score above includes all types.

Content TypeScoreGrade
ProceedingsTOP70B
Posted Content69B
Book Chapters53C
Grant50C
Dissertations45D
Journal Articles35D
Book Sets35D
Monographs31F
Reports30F
Standards30F
Book Series30F
Proceedings Series28F
Datasets27F
Peer Reviews20F
Edited Books18F
Database5F
Journal Issues5F
Components3F
Non-article content types (reviews, components, corrections) typically have lower metadata coverage, which can reduce the aggregate score above.
Want to compare by content type? The leaderboard supports filtering by content type — use it to see how publishers rank for journal articles, peer reviews, or other types individually.

Detailed Metrics

MetricCoveragePointsStatus

References

provenance

19%
2.8 / 15Poor

Update Policies

provenance

11%
0.6 / 5Poor

Similarity Check

provenance

7%
0.4 / 5Poor

ORCID Coverage

people

96%
19.3 / 20Excellent

Affiliations (Text)

organizations

19%
0.9 / 5Poor

ROR IDs

organizations

85%
8.5 / 10Excellent

Funder Registry

funding

63%
6.3 / 10Good

Award Numbers

funding

67%
6.7 / 10Good

Licenses

access

7%
0.5 / 7Poor

Full-text Links

access

7%
0.5 / 7Poor

Abstracts

access

22%
1.3 / 6Needs Work
Your proceedings score 70 (Grade B) — strong work on your primary research outputs! The tips below reflect your aggregate coverage across all content types, where there's still room to grow.

Quick Wins to Improve Your Ranking

Small metadata improvements can significantly boost your score. Here are the highest-impact changes you can make:

1

Improve Provenance

+16 pts potential

Add reference lists to your DOI deposits. Even partial references help establish citation links.

Current: 17% coverageView Crossref Documentation →
2

Improve Access

+12 pts potential

Add abstracts, license URLs (using SPDX identifiers), and full-text links to your metadata.

Current: 18% coverageView Crossref Documentation →
3

Improve Funding

+7 pts potential

Include funder information using Open Funder Registry IDs and grant/award numbers.

Current: 43% coverageView Crossref Documentation →

Pro Tip: Focus on your current (recent) publications first. Improving metadata on new deposits is easier than updating backfiles, and it will immediately improve your "current" coverage scores.

Improvement Recommendations

Actionable steps to improve your Nexus Score

Showing 5 of 7 recommendations

About This Score

Data Source
Crossref /members API
Last Updated
4/9/2026

Crossref Reports

View detailed metadata coverage on Crossref's official tools.

Crossref Participation ReportView Raw API Data

Share Results

Share your Research Nexus Score with stakeholders or use it in reports.