Skip to content
#edge computing Dataset Open access

Corpus, network code and outputs for a bibliometric and critical review of iron pyrite (FeS2) photovoltaics

Oct 2026 · Mendeley Data

Abstract

This dataset supports the article "Why has iron pyrite (FeS2) not delivered its photovoltage? A bibliometric and critical review of synthesis, defects, surfaces and devices" (submitted to Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells). Scope. A Scopus search on 25 August 2026 (title, abstract and keywords; articles and reviews in English; no date limit) returned 378 records on iron pyrite (FeS2) as a photovoltaic material. Two authors screened them and included 217 records published between 1981 and 2026. The query and screening criteria are given in the article. Contents. (1) records_217.csv: bibliographic metadata of the 217 included records (Scopus EID, DOI, authors, author IDs, title, year, source, volume, pages, citation count on 25 August 2026, author and index keywords, document type). (2) S2.2_identified_378_records_inclusion_flag.csv: all 378 records returned by the search, with inclusion flag. (3) cited_documents.csv, cited_document_labels.csv and reference_parsing.json: the cited-document keys (first-author surname, year, volume and, where needed, first page) derived from the reference lists of the 217 records, 9,991 record-document pairs and 4,947 distinct cited documents. (4) Python code that builds four networks (co-authorship, keyword co-occurrence, co-citation and bibliographic coupling), clusters them with the Louvain method (networkx 3.6.1, resolution 1.0, seed 42), tests stability over 100 random seeds and runs robustness tests (thresholds, resolution, null model, alternative weights, removal of reviews, subsampling). (5) All outputs: node and edge tables, network summaries, research-front and co-citation tables, robustness results, a recall check and the figures of the article. Provenance and AI. No data in this dataset was generated by an AI or language model. The records come from Scopus, screening decisions were made and confirmed by the authors, and all outputs are computed deterministically by the included scripts; they are byte-identical across runs and across Python hash seeds. Scopus content. Abstracts and raw reference strings are Scopus content and are not redistributed. The Scopus EIDs allow the full export to be regenerated; the code then gives identical results. Bibliographic metadata of Scopus records © Elsevier B.V. See README.md for a description of every file and instructions to reproduce all results.

View source

Similar papers

#computer vision Review Sep 2017

Agile Software Development Methods: Review and Analysis

This publication proposes a definition and a classification of agile software development approaches and analyses ten software development methods that can be characterized as being "agile" against the defined criterion.

P. Abrahamsson, O. Salo, Jussi Ronkainen et al. · 727 citations · ⚡54
#computer vision Jun 2008

The impact of agile practices on communication in software development

The study shows that agile practices improve both informal and formal communication, but indicates that, in larger development situations involving multiple external stakeholders, a mismatch of adequate communication mechanisms can sometimes even hinder the communication.

M. Pikkarainen, Jukka Haikara, O. Salo et al. · 401 citations · ⚡48
#machine learning Review Open access Oct 2014

Software development in startup companies: A systematic mapping study

The results indicate that software engineering work practices are chosen opportunistically, adapted and configured to provide value under the constrains imposed by the startup context.

Nicolò Paternoster, Carmine Giardino, M. Unterkalmsteiner et al. · 394 citations · ⚡54

Related blog posts

Microsoft Research Blog Oct 6, 2026

What AI gets wrong and what failure teaches us

Jennifer Neville did not want to go into computer science—but that’s exactly where she landed. Neville discusses the starts and stops that led to her professional sweet spot and her work identifying “surprising failures” making it hard for AI to handle complexity.  The post What AI gets wrong and what failure teaches us appeared first on Microsoft Research.

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.