The PIRUS Project
objectives, outcomes and next steps
Gary Van Overborg
Scholarly iQ
The PIRUS project has been funded by JISC. the UK Joint
Information Systems Committee
PIRUS: why now?
Increasing interest in article-level usage

Journal articles are now available in a range of locations:






The main journal website
Aggregator sites ( OVID, ProQuest, etc)
Subject repositories ( PubMed Central, etc)
Institutional Repositories
Authors and funding agencies are increasingly interested in a
reliable, global overview of usage of individual articles
Online usage becoming an alternative, accepted measure of
article and journal value
PIRUS: why now?
Article-level usage metrics now more practical


Implementation by COUNTER of XML-based usage reports
makes more granular reporting of usage a practical proposition
Implementation by COUNTER of the SUSHI protocol facilitates
the automated consolidation of usage data from different
sources.
PIRUS: support for the principle
of reporting article-level usage




Authors: very positive. Evidence from PLoS experience
and growing numbers of requests to other publishers for
individual article usage reports
Publishers: support growing, as they receive more
requests from authors for usage data on individual
articles.
Repositories: mixed. Some question the need for a global
standard. Others are concerned about costs.
Research institutions: positive. Interested in measures of
the value and impact of research outputs
PIRUS: benefits





Reliable usage data will be available for journal
articles, wherever they are held
Repositories will have access to new functionality from
open source software that will allow them to produce
standardised usage reports from their data
Publishers will be able to provide their authors with
more reliable usage statistics
The authoritative status of PIRUS usage statistics will
enhance the status of article-level usage reports
The standard can be extended to cover other
categories of content stored by repositories
PIRUS: mission and project aims
Mission
To develop a global standard to enable the recording, reporting and
consolidation of online usage statistics for individual journal
articles hosted by Institutional Repositories, Publishers and
other entities
Project aims
 Develop COUNTER-compliant usage reports at the individual
article level

Create guidelines which, if implemented, would enable any
entity that hosts online journal articles to produce these reports

Propose a model for a Central Clearing House (CCH) in which
these reports might be consolidated at a global level in a
standard way.
PIRUS: nature and mission of the
Central Clearing House

One global CCH







Cost-effective
Industry is global, with global standards
Easier to set and modify standards
Simpler interface with publishers and
repositories
Can be outsourced
Existing organizations exist with the required
capabilities
Scenarios to be supported

See next slide……..
Step 1: a fulltext article is downloaded
Step 2: tracker code invoked, generating an OpenURL log entry
Scenario A
Step A1: OpenURL log entries sent to CCH
responsible for creating and consolidating the
usage statistics
Step A2: logs filtered by COUNTER rules
Step A3: COUNTER-compliant usage
statistics collected and collated per article
(DOI) in XML format
Step A4: COUNTER compliant usage
statistics available from CCH to authorized
parties
Scenario B
Scenario C
Step B1: OpenURL log entry sent to local
server
Step C1: OpenURL log entry sent to local
server
Step B2: OpenURL log entries harvested by
CCH responsible for creating and
consolidating usage statistics
Step C2: logs filtered by COUNTER rules
Step B3: logs filtered by COUNTER rules
Step B4: COUNTER-compliant usage
statistics collected and collated per article
(DOI) in XML format
Step B5: COUNTER compliant usage
statistics available from CCH to authorized
parties
Step C3: COUNTER-compliant usage
statistics collected and collated per article
(DOI) in XML format
Step C4: COUNTER compliant usage
statistics available from repository or publisher
to CCH
PIRUS: CCH operating principles



The “bucket” of usage data should be
controlled by the participants - they can
decide whether to compile the usage
reports themselves or to delegate that
role to the CCH
Access to the CCH should be limited to
authorised parties
Usage reports must state the sources
from which they have been compiled to
ensure transparency
PIRUS2: role of CCH
Role 1: consolidated processing (applies to most repositories
and to some publishers)

Relies on all journal article downloads invoking a tracker code that sends data to a
single big bucket






Requirements can be met by various counting or analytics packages
Compliance with the standard can be checked by the “data gathering” audit
All data in one place allows mining - deeper insights into data and easy integration of
other projects, e.g. JUF
Publishers who use this option could lose control of own data and report compilation


Consolidated usage reports can be generated by the CCH
Single data standard, not necessarily data tool
Terms and Conditions could handle some aspects of this
All steps are auditable:

Data gathering
•
•

Counting
•

Correct interpretation of data packets received
Compilation of usage reports
•

Process of sending data packet to bucket
Profile of data packet – does it meet standards?
Correctness, completeness
Audit overhead lower due to standard system
PIRUS2: role of the CCH
Role 2: distributed processing (applies to most publishers and
some repositories)

Relies on repositories and publishers gathering data in own buckets




All steps are auditable:




Publishers
• count and produce own usage reports according to the specifications of Article
Report 1.
Repositories
• count and produce own usage reports and send reports to CCH OR
• send data to CCH who count and produce usage reports (and return to
repositories?)
CCH sends repository reports to publishers
Data gathering
• Process of sending data packet to bucket
• Profile of data packet – does it meet standards?
Counting
• Correct interpretation of data packets received
Compilation of usage reports
• Correctness, completeness
Many possible risk areas due to multiple supply points
PIRUS2: outputs from the CCH
Usage reports for publishers
 Usage reports for repositories
 Usage reports for research institutions
Key requirements:
 Set of core reports
 Flexibility in outputs

PIRUS2: example of a report
PIRUS: project outcomes



Technical: a workable technical model for the collection,
processing and consolidation of individual article usage
statistics has been developed.
Organizational: an organizational model for a Central Clearing
House that would be responsible for the collection, processing
and consolidation of usage statistics has been proposed.
Economic: the costs for repositories and publishers of
generating the required usage reports, as well as the costs of
any central clearing house/houses have been calculated and a
model for recovering these costs has been proposed .
For full report on the PIRUS project go to:
http://www.projectcounter.org/News/Pirus2_oct2011.pdf
PIRUS: Next steps
The outcomes of the PIRUS project provide a solid
technical and organizational model on which to base a
standard and process for the recording and reporting
of usage at the individual article level. The next steps
to be taken are as follows:
 Publication of a draft PIRUS Code of Practice




Based on COUNTER standards
Reporting usage at the individual article level
Specification of a structure for the ongoing governance
of PIRUS
Stepwise implementation of the CCH
PIRUS: Next steps
- a draft PIRUS Code of Practice

The Code of Practice will be consistent with COUNTER and will provide:
 A list of Definitions and other terms that are relevant to PIRUS
 A methodology for the recording and reporting of usage at the individual
article level, including specifications for the metadata to be recorded, and the
content types and article versions whose usage may be counted.
 Specifications for the PIRUS usage reports
 Data processing rules to ensure that the usage data are credible, consistent
and compatible
 Specifications for the independent auditing of the PIRUS reports
 A description of the role of the Central Clearing House

The draft Code of Practice will be published in early 2012, for comments

Publishers are already requesting a PIRUS Code of Practice and will be able to
test the draft Code of Practice using their own data
PIRUS: governance
Principles
 Independent, not-for-profit organization
 International
 Representation of the main stakeholder groups
 Repositories
 Publishers
 Research Institutions
Role
 Define and implement PIRUS mission
 Strategic oversight
 Set and monitor standards
 Set fees and manage finances
 Select and monitor suppliers
PIRUS: Next steps
-Stepwise implementation of the CCH
In view of the technical challenges that the CCH faces, its
strong dependency on other initiatives, such as ORCID
and institutional identifier and the requirements for
publishers to re-engineer some of their processes, it
will be prudent to implement the CCH in two Stages:
 Stage 1: gather and consolidate usage data only from
repositories and provide the usage statistics generated
by the CCH to publishers and other authorised bodies


Work will begin on Stage 1 in 2012
Stage 2: and collect usage data from publishers that
wish to use the CCH service for this purpose

The timetable for implementation of Stage 2 will depend
on the outcomes of Stage 1
PIRUS: Further information and
updates
For further information and updates on the PIRUS project:
http://www.projectcounter.org/news.html
For further information and updates on Scholarly iQ:
http://www.scholarlyiq.com