Related papers: Decentralized Peer Review in Open Science: A Mecha…
Peer-review is a necessary and essential quality control step for scientific publications but lacks proper incentives. Indeed, the process, which is very costly in terms of time and intellectual investment, not only is not remunerated by…
One of the most important tasks in scientific publishing is the articles' evaluation via the editorial board and the reviewers' community. Additionally, in scientific publishing great concern exists regarding the peer-review process and how…
Peer review is a cornerstone of modern scientific endeavor. However, there is growing consensus that several limitations of the current peer review system, from lack of incentives to reviewers to lack of transparency, risks to undermine its…
Academic publications of latest research results are crucial to advance the development of all disciplines. However, there are several severe disadvantages in current academic publication systems. The first is the misconduct during the…
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…
Blockchain as an emerging technology has transformed many traditional and conventional ecosystems and business models. Publication review system is one of the interesting subjects for transformation. The conventional models of publication…
In an era of increasing concerns over intellectual property rights, traditional peer review systems face challenges including plagiarism, malicious attacks, and unauthorized data access. BeerReview, a blockchain-enabled peer review…
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,…
Scholarly communication is today immersed in publish or perish culture that propels noncooperative behaviour in the sense of strategic games played by researchers. Here we introduce and describe a blockchain based platform for decentralized…
We design and implement Publication Chain (PubChain), a decentralized open-access publication platform built on decentralized and distributed technologies of blockchain and IPFS peer-to-peer file sharing systems. The existing publication…
Peer review, as a widely used practice to ensure the quality and integrity of publications, lacks a well-defined and common mechanism to self-incentivize virtuous behavior across all the conferences and journals. This is because information…
Scholarly journals rely on peer review to identify the science most worthy of publication. Yet finding willing and qualified reviewers to evaluate manuscripts has become an increasingly challenging task, possibly even threatening the…
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…
Online portals include an increasing amount of user feedback in form of ratings and reviews. Recent research highlighted the importance of this feedback and confirmed that positive feedback improves product sales figures and thus its…
Peer review is the main mechanism by which the software engineering community assesses the quality of scientific results. However, the rapid growth of paper submissions in software engineering venues has outpaced the availability of…
One of the virtues of peer review is that it provides a self-regulating selection mechanism for scientific work, papers and projects. Peer review as a selection mechanism is hard to evaluate in terms of its efficiency. Serious efforts to…
The number of scientific publications is constantly rising, increasing the strain on the review process. The number of submissions is actually higher, as each manuscript is often reviewed several times before publication. To face the deluge…
It is not easy to rationalize how peer review, as the current grassroots of science, can work based on voluntary contributions of reviewers. There is no rationale to write impartial and thorough evaluations. Consequently, there is no risk…
In computer science, conferences and journals conduct peer review in order to decide what to publish. Many have pointed out the inherent weaknesses in peer review, including those of bias, quality, and accountability. Many have suggested…
Traditional closed peer review systems, which have played a central role in scientific publishing, are often slow, costly, non-transparent, stochastic, and possibly subject to biases - factors that can impede scientific progress and…