Veille dédiée aux Sciences de l'Information et des Bibliothèques // Collecting and Sharing research papers in Library and Information science ISSN 2429-3938
eXtensible Text Framework (XTF) :
“The eXtensible Text Framework (XTF) is a powerful open source platform for providing access to digital content. Developed and maintained by the California Digital Library (CDL), XTF functions as the primary access technology for the CDL’s digital collections and other digital projects worldwide.”
URL : http://xtf.cdlib.org/
Towards Scholarly Communication 2.0: Peer-to-Peer Review & Ranking in Open Access Preprint Repositories :
“In this paper we present our unified peer-to-peer review model for Open Access preprint repositories. Its objective is to improve the efficiency and effectivity of digital scholarly communication. The key elements of this model are standardized quality assessment instruments, public and private communication channels, special rankings and novel incentives. The model allows scholars to proficiently evaluate both the manuscripts and their peer reviews. These scrutinized manuscripts and peer reviews will then be made available to the relevant parties. These standardized quality assessments allow for new quality metrics for papers and peer reviews. The Reviewer Impact, which represents the peer review proficiency and peer review output of scholars, is one such metric. The model includes diverse rankings for scholars to appear in to receive better odds of having their own manuscripts noticed, read, peer reviewed and cited. Their specific ranking is proportional to their Reviewer Impact and the overall quality of their manuscripts. The Open Access preprint repository model is a suitable foundation for our model because of its high degree of accessibility, but little to no certification of its deposited manuscripts. With this combination we envision a novel, Open Access, peer-to-peer scholarly communication model that functions independently of, but not incompatibly with, the traditional journal publishing model: Scholarly Communication 2.0.”
URL : http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1681478
SCHOLARLY COMMUNICATION INSTITUTE 8: EMERGING GENRES IN SCHOLARLY COMMUNICATION :
“The following essay attempts to represent and synthesize the rich discussions of SCI 8, the eighth gathering of the Scholarly Communication Institute at the University of Virginia Library, especially the many original insights that emerged into the ways technology transforms the process of creation, dissemination, stewardship, use, and above all, reception of humanities
scholarship.”
URL : http://www.uvasci.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/SCI-8-report-final.pdf
Mapping the Intellectual Structure of the Open Access Field Through Co-citation Analysis :
“Open access has been one of the major research trends and hottest topics in electronic publishing. This paper aims to assess the evolution of open access as a research field using bibliometric and scientific visualization techniques. It maps the intellectual structure of open access based on 281 articles that appeared in professional literature on the topic between 2000 and 2010. Using bibliometric and co-citation analyses, co-citation patterns of papers are visualized through a number of co-citation maps. CiteSpace was used to analyze and visualize co-citation maps. Maps show major areas of research, prominent articles, major knowledge producers and journals in the field of open access. The letter written by Steven Lawrence (“Free online availability substantially increases a paper’s impact”, 2001) appears to be the most prominent source as it was cited the most. The journal article by Kristin Antelman (“Do open Access articles have a greater research impact”, 2004) and the report by Alma Swan and Sheridan Brown (“Open access self-archiving: An author study”, 2005) are the second most highly cited papers in the network. JASIS / JASIST is the most frequently cited journal by the authors writing on open access. The most recent research topics appear to be institutional repositories, open access publishing/open access journals and scientific communication. Stevan Harnad is most frequently co-cited author, followed by Alma Swan, Steven Lawrence and Peter Suber. The preliminary findings show that open access is an emerging research field. Findings of this study can be used to identify landmark papers along with their impact in terms of providing different perspectives and engendering new research areas.”
URL : http://yunus.hacettepe.edu.tr/~tonta/yayinlar/tonta-duzyol-taskin-ifla-satellite-2010.pdf
Why Linked Data is Not Enough for Scientists :
“Scientific data stands to represent a significant portion of the linked open data cloud and science itself stands to benefit from the data fusion capability that this will afford.
However, simply publishing linked data into the cloud does not necessarily meet the requirements of reuse. Publishing has requirements of provenance, quality, credit, attribution, methods in order to provide the reproducibility that allows validation of results. In this paper we make the case for a scientific data
publication model on top of linked data and introduce the notion of Research Objects as first class citizens for sharing and publishing.”
URL : http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/21587/
Archives ouvertes. Le savoir scientifique est-il en accès libre ? :
“L’auto-archivage permet le libre accès au savoir scientifique, mais repose encore trop sur l’altruisme des auteurs. Pour massifier et systématiser cette pratique, des actions plus fortes sont nécessaires. Le conte à rire narre les déboires d’un chercheur «connu de Hal» à l’insu de son plein gré, découvrant qu’il a 148 notices bibliographiques sur un serveur d’archives ouvertes.”
URL : http://archivesic.ccsd.cnrs.fr/sic_00518786/fr/
OpenAccess Statistics: Alternative Impact Measures for Open Access documents? An examination how to generate interoperable usage information from distributed Open Access services :
“Publishing and bibliometric indicators are of utmost relevance for scientists and research institutions as the impact or importance of a publication (or even of a scientist or an institution) is mostly regarded to be equivalent to a citation-based indicator, e.g. in form of the Journal Impact Factor or the Hirsch-Index. Both on an individual and an institutional level performance measurement depends strongly on these impact scores. This contribution shows that most common methods to assess the impact of scientific publications often discriminate Open Access publications – and by that reduce the attractiveness of Open Access for scientists. Assuming that the motivation to use Open Access publishing services (e.g. a journal or a repository) would increase if these services would convey some sort of reputation or impact to the scientists, alternative models of impact are discussed. Prevailing research results indicate that alternative metrics based on usage information of electronic documents are suitable to complement or to relativize citation-based indicators. Furthermore an insight into the project OpenAccess- Statistics OA-S is given. OA-S implemented an infrastructure to collect document-related usage information from distributed Open Access Repositories in an aggregator service in order to generate interoperable document access information according to three standards (COUNTER, LogEc and IFABC). The service also guarantees the deduplication of users and identical documents on different servers. In a second phase it is not only planned to implement added services like recommender.”
URL : http://eprints.rclis.org/19068/