Not a bug, just results have 'false-positives'? (Test scenario) about pdf2doi HOT 1 CLOSED

Thanks for your feedback!
Indeed, it is possible to have "false positives". This tool tries several methods to identify the DOI, first in conventional ways (i.e. looking into the pdf metadata, or looking for a valid DOI in the pdf title or text). If these methods do not succeed, it tries more complicated things, such as extracting portions of text from the pdf file, googling them, and then looking for DOIs in the results of the google search. Thus, if your pdf file contains some text which can be somehow associated with a published paper via a google result, that will likely happen. In general, there is not a standard way to understand if a pdf file is a scientific publication or anything else, so I recommend running pdf2doi only on pdf files that contain scientific publications.

If you make the output more verbose (with the optional command -v), you can have more info about what pdf2doi is doing for each pdf file, and figure out why that specific DOI was associated with that file. If you are running it again on the same files, first make sure to clear the pdf metadata, because during the previous call to pdf2doi the found DOIs were stored in the pdf metadata. In summary, run the commands

pdf2doi "path/to/folder"  -v -id ""
pdf2doi "path/to/folder"  -v 

The first command will replace any DOI previously stored by pdf2doi in the file metadata by "". See also https://github.com/MicheleCotrufo/pdf2doi#manually-associate-the-correct-identifier-to-a-file-from-command-line and the third-to-last paragraph here https://github.com/MicheleCotrufo/pdf2doi#description.

from pdf2doi.