Related papers: Decentralized Peer Review in Open Science: A Mecha…
Blockchain has received much attention recently, due to its promises of verifiable, permanent, decentralized, and efficient data handling. In 2017-2019 blockchain and associated technologies such as smart contracts has progressed beyond…
Peer review is the foundation of scientific publication, and the task of reviewing has long been seen as a cornerstone of professional service. However, the massive growth in the field of machine learning has put this community benefit…
While ancient scientists often had patrons to fund their work, peer review of proposals for the allocation of resources is a foundation of modern science. A very common method is that proposals are evaluated by a small panel of experts (due…
Peer review remains the central quality-control mechanism of science, yet its ability to fulfill this role is increasingly strained. Empirical studies document serious shortcomings: long publication delays, escalating reviewer burden…
Scientific evaluation is a determinant of how scientists, institutions and funders behave, and as such is a key element in the making of science. In this article, we propose an alternative to the current norm of evaluating research with…
In this paper, we propose a novel framework for a scholarly journal, a token-curated registry (TCR). This model originates in the field of blockchain and cryptoeconomics and is essentially a decentralized system where tokens (digital…
Open science has become a synonym for modern, digital and inclusive science. Inclusion does not stop at open access. Inclusion also requires transparency through open datasets and the right and ability to take part in the knowledge creation…
The rapid growth of AI conferences is straining an already fragile peer-review system, leading to heavy reviewer workloads, expertise mismatches, inconsistent evaluation standards, superficial or templated reviews, and limited…
An increasing number of scientific publications are created in open and transparent peer review models: a submission is published first, and then reviewers are invited, or a submission is reviewed in a closed environment but then these…
Data sharing is very important for accelerating scientific research, business innovations, and for informing individuals. Yet, concerns over data privacy, cost, and lack of secure data-sharing solutions have prevented data owners from…
Peer review is a cornerstone of science. Research communities conduct peer reviews to assess contributions and to improve the overall quality of science work. Every year, new community members are recruited as peer reviewers for the first…
A decentralized online petition system enables individuals or groups to create, sign, and share petitions without a central authority. Using blockchain technology, these systems ensure the integrity and transparency of the petition process…
Blockchain has proven to be an emerging technology in the digital world, changing the way everyone thinks about data security and bringing efficiency to several industries. It has already been applied to a wide range of applications, from…
Peer review shapes which scientific claims enter the published record, but its internal dynamics are hard to measure at scale because reviewer criticism and author revision are usually embedded in long, unstructured correspondence. Here we…
In this paper peer review reliability is investigated based on peer ratings of research teams at two Belgian universities. It is found that outcomes can be substantially influenced by the different ways in which experts attribute ratings.…
Peer review is central to scientific publishing, yet reviewers frequently include claims that are subjective, rhetorical, or misaligned with the submitted work. Assessing whether review statements are factual and verifiable is crucial for…
The ability to assess the reputation of a member in a web community is a need addressed in many different ways according to the many different stages in which the nature of communities has evolved over time. In the case of reputation of…
We propose an enhanced peer-review process where the reviewers are encouraged to truthfully disclose their reviews. We start by modelling that process using a Bayesian model where the uncertainty regarding the quality of the manuscript is…
Research funding allocation remains a critical bottleneck in scientific advancement, yet the review process for funding proposals lacks the transparency that has revolutionized academic paper peer review. Traditional funding agencies…
Peer review is a critical process for ensuring the integrity of published scientific research. Confidence in this process is predicated on the assumption that experts in the relevant domain give careful consideration to the merits of…