相关论文: Rapid, Impartial and Comprehensive (RIC) publishin…

Evaluating and comparing the academic performance of a journal, a researcher or a single paper has long remained a critical, necessary but also controversial issue. Most of existing metrics invalidate comparison across different fields of…

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…

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…

We develop a simple model of the scientific peer review process, in which authors of varying ability invest to produce papers of varying quality, and journals evaluate papers based on a noisy signal, choosing to accept or reject each paper.…

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…

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…

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…

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,…

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…

Scientific publishing seems to be at a turning point. Its paradigm has stayed basically the same for 300 years but is now challenged by the increasing volume of articles that makes it very hard for scientists to stay up to date in their…

Communicating new scientific discoveries is key to human progress. Yet, this endeavor is hindered by monetary restrictions for publishing one's findings and accessing other scientists' reports. This process is further exacerbated by a large…

With the recognized crisis of credibility in scientific research, there is a growth of reproducibility studies in computer science, and although existing surveys have reviewed reproducibility from various perspectives, especially very…

Peer review is a laborious, yet essential, part of academic publishing with crucial impact on the scientific endeavor. The current lack of incentives and transparency harms the credibility of this process. Researchers are neither rewarded…

The purpose of this study is to analyze the research article publishing with special reference to preparing to publish and peer reviewing. Peer reviewing is the process required for standardizing any publications. Manuscript writing is an…

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…

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…

Scientific writing builds upon already published papers. Manual identification of publications to read, cite or consider as related papers relies on a researcher's ability to identify fitting keywords or initial papers from which a…

Computational reproducibility, the possibility for independent researchers to exactly reproduce published empirical results, is fundamental to science. Despite its importance, the proportion of research articles aiming for reproducibility…

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…

We advocate the publication of review/survey articles that will be updated regularly, both in traditional journals and novel venues. We call these "perpetual reviews." This idea naturally builds on the dissemination and archival…