dataesr/scientific-paragraphs-categorization huggingface dataset:
Acknowledgements. We thank the referee for the constructive report, which helped to clarify and improve the manuscript. O. M. is grateful to the  Swiss National Science Foundation  for financial support. The authors thank  Pieter van Dokkum  for fruitful discussions about the observations and providing the Dragonfly data shown in Figure 2. The authors also thank  Marina Rejkuba  and  Rodrigo Ibata  for valuable comments. This work was supported by the  Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development of the Republic of Serbia (MESTDRS)  through project no. 176021 ,  "Visible  and  Invisible Matter  in Nearby Galaxies: Theory and Observations". We acknowledge the financial support by the  European Commission  through project  BELISSIMA (BELgrade Initiative for Space Science, Instrumentation and Modelling in Astrophysics , call  FP7-REGPOT-2010-5 , contract No.
Materials and Methods To test the weight of the Salon on artistic careers, it would be ideal to have an exhaustive biographical information on all artists and to link it to the economic performance of their works. However, the artist dictionaries used by the Whites do not contain any exhaustive information on the prices of artworks. One solution to this methodological problem is to use a source that provides access to the price of works over a long period of time. Parisian auctions are the only way in. The results presented in Section 3 are thus based on the analysis of a twofold dataset, regarding Parisian auctions of paintings, drawings and sculptures.
The Exhaustive Surveys of 1875, 1900 and 1925 Auction catalogues are a very valuable source that allows a macroscopic view, whereas an artist's or dealer's account book only considers part of the market, by definition. The Getty Research Institute has put online a database of annotated catalogues, mainly for the 18th century up to the 1820-1840s in Europe, and for the 1900-1945 period in Germany. This exceptional source has already made it possible to identify the major changes in London sales between 1780 and 1835 (Fox and Lincoln 2016). It should be noted, however, that the period 1840-1900 is absent from the Getty's dataset, which hinders any 2 "The dealers and critics, one marginal figures to the Academic system, became, with the impressionists, the core of the new system. " (White and White 1965, p.
3 The bibliography of the art market is very abundant. Nevertheless, the majority of publications do not take this institutional change as the focus of their study-for example, monographic studies of dealers, such as Goupil, Durand-Ruel, Vollard or Kahnweiler. Robert Jensen analyzed the socio-economic profile of dealers (Jensen 1994) and Béatrice Joyeux-Prunel, that of the avant-gardes (Joyeux-Prunel 2009). 4   This two-fold source is the only one that provides a comprehensive dataset. The private sales between dealers, collectors and artists thus constitute a blind spot, as there is no available and global archive. cross-sectional analysis of the market for the 19th century. To have an overall view of Parisian auctions, it is, therefore, necessary to group together all the auction catalogues regarding paintings, drawings and sculptures and to transcribe them by hand into a database: this task being impossible for a single person over the entire period, I carried out surveys by considering all the auction catalogues for certain years:  1831, 1850, 1875, 1900, and 1925.
11 As the minute is produced by the auctioneer himself, there cannot be any errors on the hammer price or the identity of the purchaser, unlike annotated catalogues. It is therefore the most exhaustive and reliable reference source available for researchers. The combination of the auction catalogues and the corresponding minutes therefore provides information on the artworks and their hammer price for all the paintings, drawings and sculptures put up for sale in Paris in 1875, 1900 and 1925. At the end of this long work, this corpus includes 11,586 paintings, drawings and sculptures for sale in 1875, 8,137 in 1900 and 24,724 in 1925. The bibliographic references are fully available online (Saint-Raymond 2018c), as well as the database that served as a basis for the econometric analysis (Saint-Raymond 2018f).
In the end, this final corpus is divided into three groups, according to the degree of certainty of the seller: (1) sales where the applicant was indeed an artist or group of artists; (2) sales where the applicant was a dealer or expert, as it is impossible to verify whether the dealer/expert auctioned off his own stock or whether he acted as an intermediary or a mere applicant for the artist, and (3) uncertain sales, for which neither the minutes nor the quitus are available. I enriched this dataset with some biographical data, through the Bénézit dictionary. In particular, I added the artists' age at the moment of the sale, and a dummy variable that equals to 1 if the artist is a sculptor. If the artist previously organized an auction sale for his/her works, the variable "already come" equals to 1.
I made a second data enrichment, regarding the artists' activity at the Salon. To do so, I used the "Base Salons et expositions de groupes 1673-1914", developed by the Musée d'Orsay and INHA. This resource is exhaustive until 1879: for the period after 1900, no online database provides any comprehensive information. Before the creation of the Société des Artistes français, in 1882, I thus created the variable "Experience", accounting for the total number of years since the artist first exhibited at the Salon. The dummy variables "hors concours" and "medal" respectively equal to 1 if the artist was awarded as a "hors concours" or received a medal at the Salon. After 1882, I therefore chose not to enrich my auction corpus with external information, but to analyze the auction catalogues themselves: the variable entitled "mention of the Salon" thus indicates whether the catalogue highlights the Salon in the artist's career or in the description of the works.
Econometric Analysis of These Two Datasets These two corpora were analyzed by using the hedonic regression method. The purpose of this technique is to describe how an "explained variable" varies according to different "explanatory variables". In this paper, the two explained variables are the hammer price 18  (Table  A1 ) and the average sales revenue (Table  A2 ). The hedonic regression method remains descriptive: it highlights correlations but does not reveal causalities. 19 Its advantage is to make comparisons "all other things being equal", i. e. , pretending that all the observed characteristics are unchanged, except for the explanatory variable in question. For instance, the impact of the explanatory variable "reproduction in the catalogue" is calculated as if two works were identical in all respects, with the difference that one will be reproduced in the catalogue and the other not.
Results The econometric analysis of these two datasets, as shown in Tables  A1  and A2   For Harrison and Cynthia White, the dealer-critic system appeared as a rival of the Academic one, the former replacing the latter between the 1850s and the 1870s (White and White 1965,  pp. 2, 151). However, the expansion of the Parisian art market does not necessarily mean that the Salon stopped acting as a taste-maker and gate-keeper.
This article examines the evolution of peer review and the modern editorial processes of scholarly journals by analyzing a novel data set derived from the Royal Society's archives and covering 1865-1965, that is, the historical period in which refereeing (not yet known as peer review) became firmly established. Our analysis reveals how the Royal Society's editorial processes coped with both an increasing reliance on refereeing and a growth in submissions, while maintaining collective responsibility and minimizing research waste. By engaging more of its fellows in editorial activity, the society was able to establish an equilibrium of number of submissions per reviewer that was relatively stable over time. Nevertheless, our analysis shows that the distribution of editorial work was significantly uneven.
Our data come from the archives of the Royal Society, London, and cover the period 1865-1965. The Royal Society is the publisher of the world's longest-running scientific journal, the Philosophical Transactions, founded in 1665  (Fyfe, McDougall-Waters, and Moxham 2015). Written referees' reports have been part of its editorial process since 1832  (Csiszar 2016 (Csiszar , 2018;; Moxham and Fyfe 2018). A vast amount of information about the editorial process survives in manuscript in the London archive, but this is the first time a digitized data set has been available for analysis. Unfortunately, the data set does not include the full text of the reports themselves, which are not currently available in machine-readable form. The period available for analysis begins in 1865. At this time, refereeing was a well-established practice at the Royal Society and some similar societies  (Newman 2019) , but it was rarely used by nonsociety journals or any journal where speed of publication was prioritized  (Clarke 2015; Clarke and Mussell 2015; Baldwin 2015).
The Royal Society Editorial Data Set Our data set comprises five-year samples covering 1865-1965, transcribed from a series of handwritten ledgers held in the Royal Society's archives, known as the "Register of Papers" (see Figure  1 ). The data set contains 6,665 records of submitted manuscripts, of which 787 (11. 8 percent) went on to be published in Philosophical Transactions, 5,214 (78. 2 percent) were published in the Society's Proceedings, and 665 (10 percent) were not published by the Society (these were either withdrawn by the author, deposited unpublished in the Society's archive, or rejected). The Transactions is the Society's oldest journal and carried lengthy and well-illustrated papers. Since 1887, it has been issued in two series, A and B (for physical and biological sciences), but has otherwise remained a broad, generalist journal.
Funding The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Our collaboration was supported by the  COST Action TD1306 "New Frontiers of Peer Review " (PEERE). The historical research for this paper was supported by the  UK Arts & Humanities Research Council , grant  AH/K001841 , "Publishing the Philosophical Transactions, 1665Transactions, -2015. ". ".
In the 1990s, its US distributor hailed it as 'the most complete source of information on international bodies available anywhere' and repeated a review proclaiming 'here's everything you could possibly want to know about international organizations'. 2 Such brazen statements have attracted little scrutiny. Commentators and scholars largely seem to take the comprehensiveness, accuracy, coverage and consistence of the UIA's volumes for granted. Consider the Yearbook of Civil Society series, until recently the flagship of the Global Civil Society Programme at the London School of Economics. It relies heavily on the raw data and statistical visualizations of the Yearbook of International Organizations to assess, chart and map the rise and evolution of international non-governmental organizations (INGOs).
3 But it does not comment about the data itself. We need to contrast this stance with Daniel Laqua's comment that the UIA's founders 'sought to validate their efforts by demonstrating the extent of "international life" -and in so doing, generated data that has informed the work of subsequent generations '. 4  This self-fulfilling prophecy often goes under the radar: the Annuaire de la Vie Internationale -published before the First World War and acknowledged as a forerunner of the Yearbook -was part and parcel of an attempt to organize, strengthen and support international life. 5 This sends us back to the claim about the UIA being 'apolitical' and its work 'scientific'. In fact, the organization's internationalism was a political project that championed a specific version of global order, and was defended as such by its founders and subsequent leaders.
96  Until the 1976 edition, this, for instance, altogether excluded organizations whose activities, budget and membership did not cover at least three countries. After 1976, such organizations could be included in the Yearbook but under different and shifting categories separated from 'genuinely international' organizations: the tag from the early 1980s was 'internationally oriented national organizations', whose number was comparable to the number of 'genuinely international' organizations, and in the 1990s new classes were created to accommodate emergent and 'non-conventional' types of organizations (networks and virtual groups, religious orders, governmental and non-governmental bodies connected to intergovernmental organizations). 97  In almost every article I have found where Yearbook data has been used, authors have conflated the number of existing INGOs with the content of the Yearbook, and even more narrowly with the Yearbook's category of 'genuinely international bodies'.
Through a comparison between the data from the Yearbook and the online Human Rights Directory (www. hri. ca), Bush concluded 'that research using the Yearbook (…) is indeed biased toward the more powerful organizations in the human rights field ', and that the Yearbook 'religious organizations' category did not adequately capture the growth of religion motivated organizations engaging public issues such as human rights. 101  Her points ring true when bearing in mind the publication's wider history and context: the UIA's commitment to support organized internationalism through its publication and the arrangement with the UN that shaped the criteria for inclusion. The next question, then, is to evaluate how heavily research on international organizations has relied on the Yearbook. Indeed, researchers did not only use the Yearbook as a source for lists, facts and figures.
International relations specialists and sociologists have also given it prominence as a source of data for their quantitative approaches. 102   Those with a knack for more sophisticated quantitative analysis used Yearbook data to create dependent, independent or control variables about INGOs as they implemented regressive analysis or event history analysis to understand the development of international organization at large, or international organizations' development in one domain after the other. 119  The references in all these articles make it clear that the data extracted and coded from the Yearbook -alongside the indicators or variables it helped to build -was exchanged among individuals and generations of researchers. 120  The Yearbook and its data became part of a toolkit that circulated between collaborators, among colleagues and from masters to disciples, helping to Yearbook provided sufficient grounds for caution.
These questionnaires have never been included in the Yearbooks, but some can be found in archives. 127  The articles that I have consulted do not confront the questions that arise from this situation. How many INGOs have been able to commit enough staff's energy, competence and time to complete the UIA's questionnaires sent by the Union? What has been the response rate for these surveys, especially when the updating of an existing entry was required? To what extent have organizations provided up-to-date and accurate facts or figures about such sensitive matters as membership distribution by country, budget amount or connections to other international organizations, considering the likely consequences for both their inclusion in the Yearbook and their public image? What has been the capacity of the Yearbook editorial team to fact-check this information or to complete questionnaire items that were not filled by the organizations? How far were UIA staff members able to chase organizations that had not yet been included in the Yearbook or to follow up with organizations that did not return questionnaires? These questions are important to appraise the coverage, accuracy and consistency of the Yearbook's content -and, consequently, of the data researchers derived from it.
They are not part of the critical apparatus of the articles in my sample, though. Answers to these questions are scarce. Some clues, however, are offered by the 1968 'Judge report' and by the appendixes published since the Yearbook's 1983-1984. From the former, we learn that 'the quality cannot be controlled because the UIA only includes what it gets and does not make, or cannot make, extensive efforts to improve the quality of individual entries'. 128  Judge blamed this incapacity to upgrade data quality to the lack of mechanisms for searching missing or additional information; the poor quality of existing files at UIA; the dearth of staff and time to gather information from external sources; the belatedness of questionnaire campaigns; and the costs involved in modifying existing text between different editions.
129  The UIA's shoe-string operation was taking its toll. Judge's conclusion was stern: data for many organizations was insufficient, the accuracy of information was diminishing and chances to reverse this development were complicated by the Yearbook's principle to only include information approved by the organization concerned. This remained a constant challenge, as confirmed by appendixes present since the 1983-1984 edition, chiefly the 'Editorial Problems and Policies' section. It acknowledged the under-reporting of INGOs that did not fit with the 'genuinely international' category and the fact that some organizations did not want to provide information on their budget or other items they deemed confidential. Some appendixes claimed that editors made their best to corroborate inflated statements and claims, but the method for collecting and publishing information remained unchanged: 'the guiding principle has been to portray the organization as its sees itself usually from its own documents (…).
Conclusion Having considered the chain that has been presented here -from production to consumption of the Yearbook and other directories of international organizations -I argue that their value has been overstated. Overstated by the UIA itself, and its publishers, who have staged a narrative of continuity, objectivity and consistency that leaves no place for the more tumultuous history of discontinuity, activism, institutionalization and difficulties that have marked the history of the Annuaire, Handbook and Yearbook. Overstated by us scholars, who have largely accepted and used the Yearbook as an official or semi-official source of comprehensive, accurate and fine-tuned fact and data pool. This stance has been at its strongest for data concerning INGOs that political scientists and sociologists have been using in the last twenty years or so, especially through quantitative approaches to civil society.
as UIA relies on self-reporting'. 136  They follow these remarks with a panorama of the attempts by NGO scholars to build their own ad hoc databases, using but not being bound by Yearbook material, and tailored to their research questions. It remains to be seen whether the insights of scholars like Bush or Bloodgood will blossom into a thorough critical examination, or if the Yearbook, in the absence of other easily accessible cross sector options for INGOs data, is too unique to be failed.
What's next? Evelyn Bush's remarks about the biases embedded within the Yearbook do not seem to have been fully taken aboard yet. As of February 2018, her 2007 article has only been cited 3 times in the journals available on JSTOR, 4 times according to Web of Science, and only one of the 47 citations mentioned in Google Scholar acknowledges or follows up on her analysis of the Yearbook's data. 133  This is the case although, as early as 2007, John Boli and David Brevington pointed readers to Bush's piece in order to assess 'general problems and limitations that are bound to afflict any data source of this nature'. 134  Interestingly, Boli and Brevington's piece included an unprecedented critical appraisal of Yearbook's data: UIA's 'seven rules' used for inclusion were explicitly mentioned, as well as the availability rate rate of the information used in the chapter (membership numbers, for instance, were only available for 51.
3 per cent of the organizations studied). 135  It was, to my knowledge, the first time that qualifications of the Yearbook's INGOs data were made public. Other clues suggest that INGOs researchers are developing a more critical take on the Yearbook. Elizabeth Bloodgood and Hans Peter Schmitz have underlined that this most common source for quantitative data on INGOs has been problematic for 'the definition of INGOs which affects the conceptual assumptions shaping the dataset and the number of INGOs reported' and that 'a large part of the more detailed information is plagued by missing values,.
Within the sample of scholarly articles used for this chapter, and notwithstanding the sample bias, this peaked at two moments in time and in connection with specific disciplinary communities on the US social sciences scene. Firstly, between 1968 and 1980, it was chiefly American scholars of international relations who developed quantitative approaches based on Yearbook's data as they tried to figure out the path to world order through international organization. Other disciplines chipped in, the very first article of that cluster being signed by a development sociologist. 103  INGOs were part of the picture, 104 but specialists working on intergovernmental organizations clearly led this first phase. Twelve out of nineteen articles using Yearbook data dealt exclusively with inter-governmental organizations.
105    A second cluster appeared in the late 1990s, focusing on the place and role of international associations in globalization. Two strands of social scientists -whose work still dominates the field today -contributed to that spike. The first strand comprised specialists of transnational social movements such as Jackie Smith and Kathryn Sikkink. 106  The second group featured researchers who endorsed the global neo-institutionalist approach of US sociologist John Meyer and strived to establish the dynamics and genealogy of 'world society': they mined the Yearbook for data on INGOs, seam after seam, following its initial exploitation by John Boli and George Thomas. Within this large set of articles, the Yearbook is treated, in Jackie Smith's words, as 'the most comprehensive, annual census of international associations'.
107    In both clusters, Yearbook data fuelled different types of quantitative tools. Some were modest but widely adopted: counts of environmental INGOs per country to estimate pressure for environmental compliance in different countries;108  creation rates of INGOs to trace the growing or diminishing strength of 'world discourse' within a specific subject domain; 109 country membership in IGOs and INGOs to assess the political autonomy of post-colonial states; 110 country participation in INGOs to index support and incentives to 'world order' and international cooperation by different nations; 111 and the logging of national memberships in INGOs to estimate 'linkage to world society'. 112 Together with the latter, 'shared membership score' -which measure a country's membership in IGOs or INGOs as recorded in Yearbook entries -have frequently been used ever since Robert C.