International Journal of Data Mining & Knowledge Management Process (IJDKP), Vol.15, No.

2, March 2025

MINING THE AUTHORS CATALOG OF THE

RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES: SOME
STATISTICS ON LEONHARD
EULER’S PUBLICATIONS
Deepali Chawla, Nidhi Desai, Goutham Sekharamantri, Eugene Pinsky

Department of Computer Science, Metropolitan College, Boston University, 1010

Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, MA, 02215, USA.

ABSTRACT
Leonhard Euler, one of the most influential mathematicians of the 18th century, has been accredited for
introducing a significant portion of modern mathematics. Since its founding, Euler has been an active
member of the Imperial Russian Academy of Sciences in Saint Petersburg. With an emphasis on the era of
Leonhard Euler’s influence, this study explores the intellectual output of the Russian Academy of Sciences
throughout the 18th century. Scholarly work published by the Academy was collected and analyzed by
examining various aspects, including authorship and disciplinary trends. Our primary source is the detailed
catalog of the Academy published in the nineteenth century by Paul Heinrich Fuss, the secretary of the
Imperial Academy. Mining data in this catalog, our findings reveal key contributors, publication patterns,
and the evolution of scholarly focus within the academy. Euler emerges as a dominant figure whose prolific
output significantly shaped the academy’s intellectual landscape. The study provides insights into the
academy’s development and the additional context of Euler’s groundbreaking work.

KEYWORDS
Leonhard Euler, Russian Academy, Prussian Academy

1. INTRODUCTION
The eighteenth century was a metamorphic period for Europe. The concepts of reason and
intellectualism gained widespread acceptance throughout the Western world. This era is
commonly called the Age of Enlightenment, built upon the ideas from the Scientific
Revolution of the preceding centuries. Experimentation, observation, reason, and critical
thinking became central themes to the ideas of Enlightenment.

Several European countries established their scientific academies during the Age of
Enlightenment. The most notable ones are the Royal Society of London, the Paris
Academie des Sciences, the Prussian Academy of Sciences, the Royal Swedish Academy of
Sciences, and eventually, the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences joined this cohort. These
academies facilitated the ideas of Enlightenment by publishing scientific journals and
encouraging communication among scholars. Our academy of interest is the Imperial
Russian Academy of Sciences in Saint Petersburg, where Leonhard Euler was an active
member. He joined the St. Petersburg Academy in 1726 upon being invited by Daniel
Bernoulli. He remained an active member until his death in 1783.

DOI:10.5121/ijdkp.2025.15202 17
 International Journal of Data Mining & Knowledge Management Process (IJDKP), Vol.15, No. 2, March 2025

Our main source for this paper is the authors catalog of the Russian Imperial
Academy: ”Registre alphabétique des noms des auteurs : dont les pièces sont insérées
dans les différents recueils”, published by Paul Heinrich Fuss in 1846 [7]. Paul Fuss was
a secretary of the Academy. Nicholaus Fuss's father was a mathematician in the
academy working with Euler. Like Euler, Nicholaus Fuss was also of Swiss origin and was
married to Leonhard Euler’s granddaughter Albertine Benedikte Philippine Luise Euler
(1766-1822) [9].

Leonhard Euler was a Swiss mathematician active during the 18th century. Euler is
considered to be one of the most prolific and influential mathematicians in the his- tory of
mathematics [8, 12]. Euler’s work was a catalyst that shaped the intellectual development of
the era, stimulating further contributions to the evolution of Mathematics. Euler’s work ignited
a movement that fostered collaborations between renowned mathematicians which led to
groundbreaking advancements in the field and laid a foundation for modern
mathematics. We will understand his many contributions to mathematics via this study,
many of which are still essential today. A third of all the mathematical and scientific
research published as papers during the 18th century has been authored by Euler [12].

The origins of Euler’s revolutionary mathematical journey have been attributed to his early
years as a student of Johann Bernoulli - one of Europe’s first formal mathematicians. His
scholarly work began when he became an associate at the Russian Academy in 1727.
When he joined the academy, the chair of mathematics was Daniel Bernoulli, but soon
enough he took over that position. Euler actively contributed to the Russian Academy of
Sciences publications throughout the 18th century. In order to understand the patterns of
his development as a mathematician and the expansion of mathematics at the Academy, we
examine his contributions to the Russian Academy and contrast them with events in his
personal life.

2. RELATED WORKS: THE FRENCH ACADEMY OF SCIENCES

This study draws inspiration from ”The Academie Royale des Sciences, 1699-1793: A
Statistical Portrait.” by McClellan [1]. We aim to present a statistical report on the well-
known fact that Euler shaped mathematics in the eighteenth century. Similar to the
referred paper, we delve into the catalogs of publications by Russian scholars to provide
evidence of Euler’s groundbreaking work. The French Academy is also of interest to us
because of the heavy influence it had on shaping the academic atmosphere in Europe.
Many scientific academies established in Europe in the eighteenth century (such as the
Imperial Academy of Sciences in St. Petersburg and the Royal Academy in Prussia) were
modeled after the French Academy of Sciences established in the seventeenth century by
Louis XIV.

The French Academy of Sciences, or the Academie Royale des Sciences, from 1699 to
1793, was a prominent scientific institution. The Academy, which was founded under
royal support, had a significant influence on scientific research and theory in eighteenth-
century Europe.

The French Academy was set up with different divisions for specialized and
multidisciplinary research, including chemistry, natural history, mathematics, astronomy,
mechanics, and physics. This organizational structure promoted collaboration and a
comprehensive approach to scientific investigation, creating a setting where theoretical
study and real-world applications coexisted. Leading scientists and intellectuals of their
era, the Academy’s members worked on various tasks, from the invention of scientific
18
 International Journal of Data Mining & Knowledge Management Process (IJDKP), Vol.15, No. 2, March 2025

tools and technology to astronomical observations and mathematical investigations.

Through its publications and journals, the Academy also contributed substantially to
the dissemination of scientific knowledge and the concepts of the Enlightenment
throughout Europe. It established rigorous criteria for scientific proof and rigor that
significantly impacted scientific procedures outside of France.

The Academy’s vital role in furthering research is highlighted by James E. McClel- lan III’s
statistical analysis of the organization [1], which thoroughly examines its membership,
operations, and scientific output. His work demonstrates how the Academy has facilitated
intellectual exchange and scientific innovation, positioning it as a crucial organization in
advancing contemporary science. The Academy’s model for scientific societies has had a
long-lasting impact on scientific organizations worldwide, shaping their composition and
operations.

The French Academy of Sciences (Academie Royale des Sciences) set a benchmark for the
organization and operation of scientific societies across Europe. Its structured approach to
scientific inquiry, rigorous standards for membership, and emphasis on empirical research
became a model for other academies. Here’s how it influenced the structure of other
academies:

1. Sectional Organization: The French Academy’s division into specialized sections for
different scientific fields influenced other academies to adopt a similar structure,
promoting focused and interdisciplinary research.
2. Rigorous Standards: The French Academy’s commitment to empirical evidence
and scientific rigor set a standard that other academies emulated to ensure the
credibility and quality of their research.
3. Publication Model: Its use of publications and journals to disseminate research
findings inspired other academies to establish their journals, facilitating the
exchange of scientific knowledge globally.
4. Interdisciplinary Collaboration: The Academy’s encouragement of collaboration
across different fields influenced other institutions to foster cross-disciplinary
research and innovation.
5. Integration of Theory and Practice: The Academy’s blend of theoretical research
with practical applications became a model for other scientific societies aiming to
combine knowledge creation with technological advancement.
6. Institutional Prestige: The French Academy’s status as a prestigious institution
inspired other nations to establish similar academies to enhance their scientific
reputation.
7. Patronage System: The success of the Academy under royal patronage influenced
the funding models of other academies. It highlighted the important role played by
state funding in the advancement of scientific studies.

2.1. Euler’s Golden Era at the Royal Prussian Academy of Sciences

The Royal Prussian Academy of Sciences, founded in 1700 and later reorganized by
Frederick the Great in 1744, was a pivotal institution in the scientific landscape of the
eighteenth century. Under Frederick’s patronage, the Academy became a hub for
Enlightenment thought. The Prussian Academy attracted many prominent scholars,
including Leonhard Euler, who contributed substantially to mathematics and physics
during his tenure.

Euler’s time at the Prussian Academy of Sciences (1741–1766) proved to be very

19
 International Journal of Data Mining & Knowledge Management Process (IJDKP), Vol.15, No. 2, March 2025

rewarding in terms of his academic output. Invited by Frederick the Great of Prussia,
Euler joined the Prussian Academy to escape the political instability in Russia. His
arrival marked the start of a highly productive period, during which he published a
substantial body of work. In Berlin, Euler published several articles and influential
books, such as ”Introductio in Analysin Infinitorum” and ”Institutiones Calculi
Differentialis”. These works laid the groundwork for modern analytical mathematics and
introduced many concepts, including the notation for functions and the expansion of
trigonometric functions into series. His book ”Introductio in Analysin Infinitorum” is
considered by many mathematicians as the most significant book in mathematics since
Euclid’s The Elements and Isaac Newton’s Principia.

Interestingly, despite his absence from St. Petersburg for about 20 years, the Russian
Imperial Academy of Sciences continued to regularly publish Euler's works.

3. MINING THE ”FUSS’S CATALOG”: THE DATASET

The main objective of this review is to study the works published by the Russian
Academy of Sciences, during the 18th Century - when Leonhard Euler was one of the
most influential members of the Academy. During this period (1728 - 1802), four separate
multi-volume publications of the Imperial Academy were published:

1. Commentarii Academiae Scientiarum Imperialis Petropolitanae [3],

2. Novi Commentarii Academiae Scientiarum Imperialis Petropolitanae [4],
3. Acta Academiae Scientiarum Imperialis Petropolitanae [5]
4. Nova Acta Academiae Scientiarum Imperialis Petropolitanae [6].

To analyze these four publication series, we constructed a dataset from Fuss’s catalog
comprising the following three tables:

1. Author Information
2. Combined Index of all four series
3. Publication Details

A digital copy of the Fuss’s catalog is made available by Columbia University.

https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/100463261

3.1. Author Information

The first part of our dataset details the focus of study of authors who contributed to the
Russian Academy of Sciences during the 18th century. This data provides information on
several authors and the disciplines associated with their specific study category. We
tabulated the place of birth, years of activity, nationality, etc. for some of the authors.

3.2. Combined Index of all Four Publication Series

This dataset is our most comprehensive source of information, containing the key
details required for our analysis. This dataset has been drafted using the Columbia
University Catalog and completed using the actual papers published by the Russian
Academy of Sciences made available by the Biodiversity Heritage Library [? ].

Each paper published by the Russian Academy of Sciences during the 18th century is

20
 International Journal of Data Mining & Knowledge Management Process (IJDKP), Vol.15, No. 2, March 2025

recorded in our dataset as a separate tuple. Each record details the author’s name, the
publication name (C./N.C./A./N.A.), the associated volume number, the discipline, and
the page numbers. This dataset serves as a comprehensive resource to analyze the
output of the Russian Academy of Sciences during Euler’s period of activity. A brief
summary of this dataset as a snapshot is available in Table 1.

3.3. Publication Details

For each publication volume, we needed the year of publication and the length of each
volume. This dataset allowed us to generate chronological visualizations of each of the trends
we have analyzed.

Using these three datasets, we were able to gain an insight into the contribution of each
author for the four publications. We could also recognize the fields of study that were
most prominent and rising during this time.

4. Analysis
We analysed records of publications from the four volumes: Commentarii, Novi Com-
mentarii, Acta, Nova Acta of t h e Russian Academy Of Sciences. These volumes were
published by the Academy in the 18th Century, specifically during the time period 1726
- 1802. Table 1 describes the volumes, their editions, and the corresponding time period of
publication.

Table 1 Publication Volumes and Time Periods

Publication Volumes Time

Commentarii 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 Period
1726 - 1751
Novi Commentarii 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14.1, 1748 - 1775
14.2, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
Acta 1.1, 1.2, 2.1, 2.2, 3.1, 3.2, 4.1, 4.2, 5.1, 5.2, 6.1, 1777 - 1782
Nova Acta 1,
6.22, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 1783 - 1802

Leveraging the extensive data, we began our analysis of the scientific output across the 18th
century. Our analysis can be broadly divided into three subcategories: Authorship and
Publication Distribution, Trends in Disciplines, and Euler’s Contributions and Influence

4.1. Authorship and Publication Distribution

An Author’s contribution to the works published by the Academy can be measured in

terms of two parameters: the number of papers produced and the length of the papers.
We first identify the top authors throughout the 18th century determined by the
volume of papers published under their name. Figure 1 shows the trends in
contributions by the top 5 authors throughout the decades in terms of the total number of
papers published. Starting with this visualization we see how Euler’s contributions tower
and stand out at the Academy.

21
 International Journal of Data Mining & Knowledge Management Process (IJDKP), Vol.15, No. 2, March 2025

Fig. 1 Top 5 Authors by Contributions in terms of papers published through the Decades

The second part of this analysis identifies the top authors in terms of the total length of
the papers they published. This is illustrated in Figure 2.

Fig. 2 Top 5 Authors by Contributions in terms of number of pages through the Decades

Figure 2 illustrates the length of the papers published by the top 5 authors for each decade
during the 18th century. The authors with the most contributions in terms of the length
and number of papers are Leonhard Euler, Andre-Jean Lexell, and Nicolas Fuss, each
making multiple contributions to their respective disciplines.

From the two figures 1 & 2, it is evident that while some authors might have more
publications, their papers may not be as lengthy. We arrive at this conclusion owing to
the fact that the two plots feature different lists of the top five authors. George-
Wolfgang Krafft and Daniel Bernoulli have made numerous and highly significant academic
contributions. Still, when the lengths of their papers weigh their academic output, their
contributions get overshadowed by other scholars who also contributed to extensive
research for the Academy. Gaspard-Frederic Wolff and Theophile-Siedgfried Byer are
examples of two such researchers whose contributions lie heavily in the length of their
academic outputs.

22
 International Journal of Data Mining & Knowledge Management Process (IJDKP), Vol.15, No. 2, March 2025

The frequency of publications in the 18th century varied with each decade. The years
through the 1740s and 1760s show consistency in the amount of papers published by the
top authors. The plots suggest a period of stability starting from the 1740s to the 1760s,
with relatively high and consistent published works. We observe a notable peak during the
1770s in both plots, primarily due to a significant increase in Euler’s contributions. This
peak coincides with Euler’s return to Russia from Berlin. The post-1780s period
shows these authors' general decline in contributions, which might be attributed to the
emergence of new faces in the scientific landscape. As new researchers started to appear
in the scientific world, it is fair to assume that the time of these well-known writers was
coming to an end. This does not, however, mean that they were losing relevance or
influence; instead, they left a lasting impact on the field and shaped the future of the
scientific landscape.

The initial rise and stabilization indicate the growing phase of the academy. The
Academy was established in 1724, with the commencement of work on the first volume of
Commentarii occurring in 1726. During these initial years of publishing under the
Commentarii series, the Academy was still in the process of solidifying its foundation. The
1730s ushered in a period of research instability, eventually giving way to stability as the
academy’s research practices matured. The same has been illustrated by the subsequent
fluctuations in these years from Figures 1 and 2. The peaks during the 1770s highlight
the periods of intense academic activity, which was likely influenced by prolific
contributors like George Wolfgang Krafft and Euler.

Our analysis also ventures into the contributions of the top 10 scholars based on the
length and number of papers they published, as shown in Table 2 and Table 3,
respectively. This provides an insight into the distribution of scholarly work among the
leading contributors to the Russian Academy of Sciences, highlighting the key figures who
shaped its scientific output during the 18th century.

It is observed that Euler dominates the chart with a substantial margin, contributing over
10,000 pages. This highlights his significant influence and the breadth of his work during
this period. Similarly, Euler’s publication count is significantly higher, reaffirming his
pivotal role. The other authors contributed between 500 and 2,000 pages each. While
not as extensive as Euler’s, their contributions were still significant and indicated active
engagement with the Academy’s publications.

Additionally, our analysis of author contributions throughout the decades holds here as
well. For example, George-Wolfgang Krafft appears in the top contributors for papers but
not for pages, indicating shorter but numerous contributions. Similarly,

Table 2 Authors with Highest contribution in terms of length of papers published

Author Number of
Leonhard Euler Pages 11,035
Andre-Jean Lexell 1,859
Gaspard-Frederic Wolff 1,066
Theophile-Siedgfried Bayer 899
Nicolas Fuss 884
Daniel Bernoulli 851
George-Wolfgang Krafft 91
Wolfgang-Louis Krafft 652
Joseph-Theophile Koelreuter 651
Frederic-Theodore Schubert 598

23
 International Journal of Data Mining & Knowledge Management Process (IJDKP), Vol.15, No. 2, March 2025
Table 3 Authors with Highest contribution in terms of number of papers published

Author Number of
Leonhard Euler Publications 446
George-Wolfgang Krafft 59
Andre-Jean Lexell 59
Nicolas Fuss 51
Daniel Bernoulli 50
Etienne Roumovsky 45
Joseph-Theophile Koelreuter 39
Jean-Albert Euler 36
Wolfgang-Louis Krafft 36
Gaspard-Frederic Wolff 35

Gaspard-Frederic Wolff ranks higher in terms of the number of pages contributed but not
in terms of the number of publications, suggesting fewer but more extensive works. Several
authors appear in both charts, indicating consistent contributions in terms of the number
of pages and papers.

Figure 3 illustrates the contributions of the top 5 authors in terms of pages contributed over
the years. Figure 3 chart showcases how different authors rose to prominence during
different periods. Euler consistently maintains a significant presence in contrast to the
shifting prominence of other key contributors.

We have already established that our period of interest is during the time when Euler was
a prominent member of the Academy, as evidenced by his influence in Figure 1 & 2 and
Tables 2 & 3 discussed above. However, it is noteworthy that from 1741 to 1766, Euler
was an active member of the Prussian Academy rather than the Russian Academy. Even
though he was not a formal member during that specific timeframe, his contributions were
undeniable. This is further illustrated in Figure 4.

From Figures 3 & 4, we see a few peaks in contribution observed for the publication
volume series C. and N. C. These peaks are attributed to two or more volumes published
in the same year. As an example, in 1738, Commentarii volumes 5 and 6 were
published. The other years saw consistency (one volume per year), with a few
fluctuations.

24
 International Journal of Data Mining & Knowledge Management Process (IJDKP), Vol.15, No. 2, March 2025

Fig. 3 Authors throughout the years in terms of page contributions

Fig. 4 Authors throughout the years in terms of publications

4.2. Discipline Wise Distribution

Each volume in all four publication volume series was divided into 4 broad sections
according to the field of study. The four categories were:

1. Mathematics
2. Physico-mathematics
3. Physics
4. Astronomy

25
 International Journal of Data Mining & Knowledge Management Process (IJDKP), Vol.15, No. 2, March 2025

However, as per current standards of disciplines, these categories do not give us proper
insights into the work carried out by scholars in the academy. In this sub-section, we
attempt to identify the prominent fields of study during the 18th century at the Russian
academy.

In this section, our first set of graphs in Figure 5 illustrates the top 5 disciplines
according to the number of papers published.

Fig. 5 Top 5 disciplines for each publication

Throughout the four publications series, Astronomy, Geometry, and Physics were the
most researched disciplines. Zoology became more prominent after the 1770s. The highest
amount of work has been done in the field of Geometry, and this can be attributed to
Euler. Throughout the 18th Century, Geometry, Physics, Astronomy, Botany, and Zoology
emerged as the leading disciplines in the academic community. The trends show a rising
interest in Zoology and Astronomy, an established interest in Geometry and Physics, and
fluctuations in the number of Astronomy papers. This is shown in Figure 6.

26
 International Journal of Data Mining & Knowledge Management Process (IJDKP), Vol.15, No. 2, March 2025

Fig. 6 Top 5 disciplines throughout the decades

Table 4 provides a breakdown of the number of authors in various academic

disciplines.

Table 4 Distribution of the top Disciplines in each Category

Category Discipline Number of

Physical Sciences Chemistry Authors 20
Physicien 39
Minerelogue 9
Geognoste 8
Physiologue 4
Mathematical Sciences Geometre 47
Astronome 42
Statisticien 3
Life Sciences Zoologue 29
Botaniste 25
Medicine 6
Anatome 6
Arts and Others Historian 16
Orientalist 13
Juriste 6
Archeologue 4

The following observations can be made:

1. Geometry, Astronomy, and Physics are dominant fields with the highest number of
authors, reflecting a strong interest and focus in these disciplines. This observation
aligns with the fact that these fields also appear among the top 5 disciplines with
the highest number of publications. The number of notable authors in these areas
suggests significant interest and, therefore, research activity in these key scientific
disciplines.
2. Statistics, Physiology, Archaeology, Anatomy, and Medicine have fewer
contributors, indicating these fields may have been less developed or less emphasized
at the time.
3. Zoology and Botany are prominent fields with a considerable number of authors,
which aligns with their ranking among the top 5 disciplines with the highest number
of publications. This correspondence highlights the significant attention and
27
 International Journal of Data Mining & Knowledge Management Process (IJDKP), Vol.15, No. 2, March 2025

growing interest these fields received during the period in question.

4. History and Oriental studies are more prominent than other fields in Arts,
suggesting a significant but smaller focus compared to the sciences.

4.3. Euler’s Publications

Turning specifically to Leonhard Euler, let us recall a few facts about his work with the
Russian Imperial Academy of Sciences [9]

1. Euler arrived in St. Petersburg in 1729. The first paper he published for the Russian
academy was in 1729, for Commentarii vol. 2
2. Euler’s involvement as an active member of the Academy seemed to have been
unaffected by his move to Berlin in 1741. His contributions to the Russian Academy
seem more or less stable throughout his stay in Berlin (1741-1766).
3. On September 18, 1783, Euler passed away after suffering a brain hemorrhage. This
cannot be inferred from the data on his works published towards the end of the
18th century. After Euler passed away, his mathematical assistant, Nicolas Fuss
kept submitting his unpublished works - which is why we see no decline in his
contributions to the Academy.

Euler’s contributions are marked by a high number of pages, a general increase in the
number of pages, peaking in the mid-18th century. During his time at the Prussian
Academy, Euler maintained substantial output. Despite primary affiliations with the
Prussian Academy, his continued contributions to the Russian Academy are significant.
This is illustrated in Figure 7.

Fig. 7 Euler’s contribution to Russian Academy

After his return to Russia in 1767, Eulers’ output remained significant, gradually declining
after 1775. Consistent contributions after 1770 demonstrate his involvement in research
despite advancing age and health challenges. Even in times when he produced fewer
papers, his total contributions are still unmatched, establishing his central role.

28
 International Journal of Data Mining & Knowledge Management Process (IJDKP), Vol.15, No. 2, March 2025

Euler moved to Berlin in 1741 and lived in Berlin for about 25 years. During this period,
he became an active member of the Prussian Academy. The years Euler spent in Berlin,
1741 - 1766, marked the period of his peak productivity in terms of scientific output.
About 125 of his papers during this period were published by the Prussian Academy.
Therefore, we also wanted to do a comparative study on Euler’s publications to Berlin and
Russian Academies of Sciences. Figure 8 displays Euler’s contributions to the Russian
and Prussian Academies over the years, showing the number of papers he published in
each Academy.

Fig. 8 Comparative study of Euler’s Contributions to Prussian and Russian Academy of Sciences

29
 International Journal of Data Mining & Knowledge Management Process (IJDKP), Vol.15, No. 2, March 2025

We observe that the frequency with which he published papers varied drastically through
the years. In the early years of 1729 - 1741, he published several papers, but these were
not periodical. This can be attributed to the fact that the Russian Academy was not
publishing a volume edition every year while establishing its footing. In the following
years, his frequency of publication became more stable, with his work being published by
both the Prussian and Russian Academies. The only exception was the time from 1760 -
1764 when the number of his publications saw a minute decline, but only in the
Prussian Academy and not the Russian Academy. This could be because of the Seven
Years’ War’s disturbances, which had an impact on his capacity to work with colleagues
as well as the general stability of educational institutions. Another reason for the minute
decline can be attributed to the political tensions, specifically the deteriorating relations
between Euler and Frederick the Great of Prussia. The strained relationship with the
Berlin monarch might have contributed to the temporary decline in Euler’s publication
frequency with the Prussian Academy. Another reason could be his declining vision. In
1766, a cataract was discovered in Euler’s left eye. Although the surgery initially
provided some temporary improvement in his vision, complications ultimately led to
near-total blindness in that eye. Despite this significant setback, Euler’s productivity
remained remarkably unaffected.

However, his contributions to the Prussian Academy resumed in 1765. In 1766, Euler
accepted an invitation to return to the St. Petersburg Academy. Despite his move to
Russia, Euler continued to publish papers in Berlin. However, his publication output
started to decrease after 1770. This reduction might reflect the increased demands of
his role at the St. Petersburg Academy, his advancing age, or other personal and
professional factors. The most publications appear to occur in the Russian Academy in
the early 1780s, with 20 papers published.

The graph illustrates a tapering off in Euler’s publications after the early 1780s, with
only a few papers appearing in the late 1780s and 1790s. This decline likely
corresponds to Euler’s death in 1783, after which his assistant, Nicholas Fuss, took on the
task of publishing the remainder of Euler’s papers.

5. CONCLUSION
Our work examined the statistics of contributions of Leonhard Euler, primarily to the
Russian Academy of Sciences. This was accomplished by data mining the Academy catalog.
Through our work, we have illustrated an example of how data mining can be used to
correlate a scholar’s academic journey with concrete evidence of their scientific output.
Our work aims to take well-established facts about a prolific mathematician like Euler and
provide concrete evidence of his journey in shaping mathematics. In the future, we can
use this template to study the impact and growth of other revolutionary scholars. We can
obtain many additional insights about well-known scientists by analyzing corresponding
scientific catalogs.

We propose expanding the dataset to include catalogs from the French Academy of
Sciences and the Prussian Academy of Sciences. This broader dataset would enable a
more comprehensive assessment of Euler’s academic influence across multiple institutions,
allowing for comparative analyses of his work in different scientific environments.
Additionally, integrating multiple catalogs would facilitate studies on collaboration
networks, publication trends, and institutional impacts on scientific progress.

30
 International Journal of Data Mining & Knowledge Management Process (IJDKP), Vol.15, No. 2, March 2025

DECLARATIONS
Conflict of Interest: There are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this
paper.

Author Contributions: All the authors contributed equally to the effort.

Funding: This research was conducted without any external funding. All study aspects,
including design, data collection, analysis, and interpretation, were carried out using the
resources available within the authors’ institution.

REFERENCES

[1] McClellan, James E., III. ”The Académie Royale des Sciences, 1699-1793: A Sta- tistical
Portrait.” Isis, vol. 72, no. 4, 1981, pp. 541–567. The University of Chicago Press on behalf
of The History of Science Society. https://www.jstor.org/stable/ 231248.
[2] The Euler Archive. http://eulerarchive.maa.org/.
[3] Commentarii Academiae scientiarum imperialis Petropolitanae. https://www.
biodiversitylibrary.org/bibliography/9482.
[4] Novi commentarii Academiae Scientiarum Imperialis Petropolitanae.https://www.
biodiversitylibrary.org/bibliography/9527.
[5] Acta Academiae scientiarum imperialis petropolitanae. https://www.
biodiversitylibrary.org/bibliography/9526.
[6] Nova acta Academiae scientiarum imperialis petropolitanae. https://www.
biodiversitylibrary.org/bibliography/9519.
[7] Fuss, Paul Heinrich. Registre alphab´etique des mati`eres contenues dans les 40 volumes des
m´emoires de l’Acad´emie Imp´eriale des Sciences de St.-P´etersbourg, imprim´es depuis l’ann´ee
1726 jusqu’a` 1803 inclusivement. St.-P´etersbourg, 1846. https://ia600607.us.archive.org/cors
get.php?path=/26/items/registrealphabti00fuss/registrealphabti00fuss.pdf.
[8] Guatschi, Walter. Euler’s contributions to mathematics. Department of Com- puter Science, Purdue
University., 2006 https://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/wxg/ EulerLect.pdf
[9] Calinger, Ronald, Leonhard Euler: Mathematical Genius in the Enlightenment, Princeton University
Press, 2015.
[10] Abalakin, V. K., and E. A. Grebnikov. 2007. “Euler and the Development of Astronomy in Russia.”
Translated by Robert Burns. In Euler and Modern Science, ed. N. N. Bo- golyubov, G. K.
Mikha˘ılov, and A. P. Yushkevich, pp. 245–263. Washington, D.C.: Mathematical Association of
America. LEJA 7.
[11] Alexanderson, G. L. 2007. “Ars Expositioni: Euler as Writer and Teacher.” In The Genius of Euler:
Reflections on His Life and Work, ed. William Dunham, pp. 61–69. Washington, D.C.:
Mathematical Association of America.
[12] Ball, W.W.R. 2007. “Euler’s Output, A Historical Note.” In The Genius of Euler: Reflections on His
Life and Work, ed. William Dunham, pp. 89–91. Washington, D.C.: Mathematical Association of
America.
[13] Barbeau, E. J. 2007. “Euler Subdues a Very Obstreperous Series (Abridged).” In The Genius of
Euler: Reflections on His Life and Work, ed. William Dunham, pp. 135–147. Washington, D.C.:
Mathematical Association of America.
[14] Barrow-Green, June. 2010. “Euler as an Educator.” British Society for the History of Mathematics
Bulletin 25, pp. 10–22.
[15] Bashmakova, I. G. 2007. “Euler’s Contribution to Algebra.” Translated by Robert Burns. In Euler
and Modern Science, ed. N. N. Bogolyubov, G. K. Mikha˘ılov, and A. P. Yushkevich, pp. 137–153.
Washington, D.C.: Mathematical Association of America. LEJA 7.

31