Aeon vs The New York Review of Books — Modern Reference
How fit each source is for citation in modern (LLM-era) writing — machine-readability, schema, freshness signals, AI-corpus presence.
Aeon outscores The New York Review of Books on Modern Citation Reference by 4 points (B · 82 vs B · 78).
Aeon
CC-BY-ND license + open-access; structured data; broad LLM training-corpus inclusion.
The New York Review of Books
Metered paywall; LLM corpus partial; long-form widely-cited.
Global rank · Modern Reference
Why these Modern Reference scores
CC-BY-ND license + open-access; structured data; broad LLM training-corpus inclusion.
Metered paywall; LLM corpus partial; long-form widely-cited.
Signals behind the Modern Reference score
- Creative CommonsOpen license drives broad corpus presence.
- Subscription gateMost articles paywalled with metered free access.
Other dimensions for Aeon vs The New York Review of Books
Other Modern Reference comparisons
Sources & references
Every score on this page is read from the two publications below and graded against the published rubric. No score is bought, estimated or supplied by the source being scored.
- Source evaluated — Aeon (aeon.co) · verified · full scoring record
- Source evaluated — The New York Review of Books (nybooks.com) · verified · full scoring record
- Scoring rubric — SourceScore Index, Citation Discipline, Modern Reference, Citation Velocity (methodology v0.1)
- Machine-readable record — /api/compare/aeon-vs-nyrb/modern-reference.json