Archive

Archive for August, 2008

Improving WordPress’ Tag Surfer?

August 31, 2008 3 comments

Tags are cool. And WordPress’ Tag Surfer is very useful. A little less “automatic” than a recommendation system, but a promising high quality relevant content filter for sure. There are a couple of things about it that bug me, though. So for this blog post I will provide some of my complaints that may have also been expressed by others. So here they are (not necessarily in the order of importance, though)…
Read more…

Categories: Web (2.0) Tags: ,

Feasibility of PLoS ONE’s Peer Review Model?

August 31, 2008 14 comments

There is a growing urge to deal with the significant issues that plague both the peer review and the scientific paper format. The peer review issues concern the inefficiency and ineffectiveness of validating the quality of a scientific paper. The scientific paper issues concern the inflexibility of communicating more scientific knowledge, e.g. not limited by some journal paper page limit, complementary (raw) data sets or even corrections to the paper. Thanks to the advent of digital communication, these issues are now more apparent than ever. However, that does not mean that the solutions that are conceptualized or even practically realized are the be-all end-all solutions to our problems.

In this blog post, I express my concerns with PLoS ONE’s peer review and publication model as the model that can stand on its own as a/the new peer review model. I suggest some features that are based on existing concepts to complement their peer review system to make the transition to their vision of how (their) peer review should work perhaps more feasible.
Read more…

Pages: 1 2 3 4

The Future of IT and Science (2): Accreditation and Validation Issues

August 25, 2008 1 comment

The impact of Information Technology (IT), and in particular the Internet, on scholarly communication has been revolutionary. Digital communication allowed for digital collaboration, digital research papers and digital scholarly journals. However, the rate at which the Internet is utilized for academic purposes is seemingly much lower than for nonacademic (e.g. commercial and “social”) purposes. Attempts to get that same kind of degree of digital communication & collaboration going on between scholars are often hampered by the same pair of bottlenecks: a lack of (personal) incentives and a lack of time for scholars to exploit the benefits of IT.

As a response, this blog post provides some thoughts on new tools and practical incentives to encourage scholars to be a bigger part of this digital revolution in science…is what I would like to say. Sadly, while conceptualizing those ideas, I ran into some more issues that I need to share first. They are rather important issues pertaining to the actual development of new tools and incentives for scholarly communication: certification and efficiency.

“Great, another blog post dedicated to negativity.”
Read more…

Pages: 1 2 3

The Future of IT and Science (1)

August 20, 2008 5 comments

Motivation: Interesting tidbits on the future of science and the role IT will play in it.
Problem Motivation: Although interesting, the conclusions remain, sadly, the same: lack of incentives and lack of time are the bottlenecks to a more open scientific culture (using IT tools).
Results: This blog post will cover some of those aspects from other blogs. The next blog post focuses more on my own insights and the necessity of (new) tools/ideas in line with the significance of the bottlenecks of scientific progress.

So over at “A Blog Around The Clock” I found a post that links to a blog post titled ‘The Future of Science’ by Michael Nielsen.
Read more…