April 1, 1999
Paper journals use a small number of trusted academics to select information on behalf of all their readers. This inflexibility in the selection was justified due to the expense of publishing. The advent of cheap distribution via the internet allows a new trade-off between time and expense and the flexibility of the selection process. This paper explores one such possible process one where the role of mark-up and archiving is separated from that of review. The idea is that authors publish their papers on their own web pages or in a public paper archive, a board of reviewers judge that paper on a number of different criteria. The detailed results of the reviews are stored in such a way as to enable readers to use these judgements to find the papers they want using search engines on the web. Thus instead of journals using generic selection criteria readers can set their own to suit their needs. The resulting system might be even cheaper than web-journals to implement.
Similar papers 1
April 23, 2023
We propose an academic publishing system where research papers are stored in a network of data centres owned by university libraries and research institutions, and are interfaced with the academic community through a website. In our system, the editor is replaced by an initial adjusted community-wide evaluation, the standard peer-review is accompanied by a post-publication open-ended and community-wide review process, aiming at a more objective and longer-term evaluation, the...
May 30, 2013
This article shows why the diffusion and peer-reviewing of research results would be more efficient, precise and relevant if all or at least some parts of the descriptions and peer-reviews of research results took the form of a fine-grained semantic network, within articles or knowledge bases, as part of the Semantic Web. This article also shows some ways this can be done and hence how research journal/proceeding publishers could allow this. So far, the World Wide Web Consort...
November 23, 2010
Today's peer review process for scientific articles is unnecessarily opaque and offers few incentives to referees. Likewise, the publishing process is unnecessarily inefficient and its results are only rarely made freely available to the public. Here we outline a comparatively simple extension of arXiv.org, an online preprint archive widely used in the mathematical and physical sciences, that addresses both of these problems. Under the proposal, editors invite referees to wri...
April 18, 2005
Pre-print repositories have seen a significant increase in use over the past fifteen years across multiple research domains. Researchers are beginning to develop applications capable of using these repositories to assist the scientific community above and beyond the pure dissemination of information. The contribution set forth by this paper emphasizes a deconstructed publication model in which the peer-review process is mediated by an OAI-PMH peer-review service. This peer-re...
August 29, 2016
In post-publication peer review, scientific contributions are first published in open-access forums, such as arXiv or other digital libraries, and are subsequently reviewed and possibly ranked and/or evaluated. Compared to the classical process of scientific publishing, in which review precedes publication, post-publication peer review leads to faster dissemination of ideas, and publicly-available reviews. The chief concern in post-publication reviewing consists in eliciting ...
November 18, 2013
This article challenges the assumption that journals and peer review are essential for developing,evaluating and disseminating scientific and other academic knowledge. It suggests a more flexible ecosystem, and examines some of the possibilities this might facilitate. The market for academic outputs should be opened up by encouraging the separation of the dissemination service from the evaluation service. Publishing research in subject-specific journals encourages compartment...
August 19, 1999
This paper is concerned with tracking and interpreting scholarly documents in distributed research communities. We argue that current approaches to document description, and current technological infrastructures particularly over the World Wide Web, provide poor support for these tasks. We describe the design of a digital library server which will enable authors to submit a summary of the contributions they claim their documents makes, and its relations to the literature. We ...
August 11, 2002
Scientific publishing is in a transition between the old paper-bound, static forms and the new electronic media with its interactive, dynamic possibilities. This takes place in the context of imploding library budgets and exploding magazine costs. The scientists as authors, reviewers and editors of scientific journals are exposed to an increased pressure by the their administrations and the public towards quantification, objectification and certification of scientific achieve...
June 11, 2001
Computer scientists are in the position to create new, free high-quality journals. So what would it take?
April 30, 2014
"Academia 2.0" is a proposal to organize scientific publishing around true peer-to-peer distributed dissemination channels and eliminate the traditional role of the academic publisher. This model will be first presented at the 2014 workshop on Reproducible Research Methodologies and New Publication Models in Computer Engineering (TRUST'14) in the form of a high-level overview, so as to stimulate discussion and gather feedback on its merits and feasibility. This report complem...