Peer Review as Structured Commentary: Immutable Identity, Public Dialogue, and Reproducible Scholarship
Abstract
This paper reconceptualises peer review as structured public commentary. Traditional academic validation is hindered by anonymity, latency, and gatekeeping. We propose a transparent, identity-linked, and reproducible system of scholarly evaluation anchored in open commentary. Leveraging blockchain for immutable audit trails and AI for iterative synthesis, we design a framework that incentivises intellectual contribution, captures epistemic evolution, and enables traceable reputational dynamics. This model empowers fields from computational science to the humanities, reframing academic knowledge as a living process rather than a static credential.
Cite
@article{arxiv.2506.22497,
title = {Peer Review as Structured Commentary: Immutable Identity, Public Dialogue, and Reproducible Scholarship},
author = {Craig Steven Wright},
journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.22497},
year = {2025}
}
Comments
66 pages, 0 figures, interdisciplinary framework, includes proposed architecture and metadata layer structures