CSIRO Publishing

Clayton South, VIC, Australia · Member ID: 67 · 124,036 total works

Global Rank

#2,971

of 28,259

Percentile

Top 11%

of all publishers

To Reach Top 10%

points needed

View Full Leaderboard

Nearby in Rankings:

#2969The Convergence Liver Cancer Study Group(37 pts)#2970Fakultet društvenih nauka(37 pts)#2972Elsevier BV(36 pts)#2973National Library of Serbia(36 pts)

Nexus Score

35/ 100

+25 points vs historical

Score Breakdown by Era

Current

Last 2 years

#1,919

5,254 works

Backfile

Older than 2 years

#2,971

118,782 works

Ranked #1,919 for recent publications vs #2,971 overall — improving with recent work

Dimension Breakdown

Provenance

References, update policies, similarity check

12.6 / 25

People

ORCID coverage

6.4 / 20

Organizations

Affiliations and ROR IDs

2.8 / 15

Funding

Funder registry and award numbers

2.5 / 20

Access

Licenses, full-text links, abstracts

10.7 / 20

Score by Content Type

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

Content Type	Score	Grade	Prov	People	Orgs	Fund	Access
Journal ArticlesTOP	26	F	41%	9%	13%	2%	57%
Grant	20	F	0%	0%	0%	100%	0%
Monographs	6	F	0%	0%	0%	0%	29%
Books	6	F	0%	0%	0%	0%	28%
Book Chapters	6	F	23%	0%	2%	0%	2%
Edited Books	6	F	0%	0%	0%	0%	28%
Journals	2	F	7%	0%	0%	0%	0%

Non-article content types (reviews, components, corrections) typically have lower metadata coverage, which can reduce the aggregate score above.

Why doesn't the leaderboard use per-type scores? Deciding which content types count as "primary research" is subjective and varies by discipline and publisher model. The leaderboard uses Crossref's aggregate coverage to ensure a consistent, comparable baseline across all 27,000+ publishers. This per-type breakdown lets you see the full picture for any individual publisher.

Detailed Metrics

Metric	Coverage	Points	Status
References provenance	72%	10.8 / 15	Good
Update Policies provenance	0%	0.0 / 5	Poor
Similarity Check provenance	98%	4.9 / 5	Excellent
ORCID Coverage people	59%	11.7 / 20	Good
Affiliations (Text) organizations	80%	4.0 / 5	Excellent
ROR IDs organizations	0%	0.0 / 10	Poor
Funder Registry funding	28%	2.8 / 10	Needs Work
Award Numbers funding	21%	2.1 / 10	Needs Work
Licenses access	87%	6.1 / 7	Excellent
Full-text Links access	0%	0.0 / 7	Poor
Abstracts access	84%	5.0 / 6	Excellent

Quick Wins to Improve Your Ranking

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

Improve Funding

+14 pts potential

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

Current: 12% coverageView Crossref Documentation →

Improve People

+10 pts potential

Include ORCID iDs for authors. Encourage authors to authenticate their ORCID during submission.

Current: 32% coverageView Crossref Documentation →

Improve Organizations

+9 pts potential

Add author affiliations with ROR IDs. The ROR API can help match institution names to IDs.

Current: 19% 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.

CSIRO Publishing

Score Breakdown by Era

Dimension Breakdown

Score by Content Type

Detailed Metrics

Quick Wins to Improve Your Ranking

Improve Funding

Improve People

Improve Organizations

Improvement Recommendations

Add ROR IDs for Affiliations

Add Full-Text URLs

Enable Crossmark

Increase ORCID Coverage

Deposit Complete References

About This Score

Crossref Reports

Share Results