I see citations differently than some you know and trust "pre-vetting"
and pointing to an article. Plus citations do not always distinguish
whether they are in agreement or against the other work. (01)
If you are interested in maps of co-citation networks, please see the
exhibit Places & Spaces: Mapping Science at www.scimaps.org.
The first map of science by Henry Small at Thomson ISI
Mapping Topic Bursts by Ketan Mane and Katy Borner
http://www.scimaps.org/dev/map_detail.php?map_id=50 most cited PNAS
articles and Mapping the Evolution of Co-Authorship Networks by Weimao
Ke and Katy Borner
and Map of Scientific Paradigms by Kevin Boyack and Richard Klavans
Projects Director, Accuracy&Aesthetics
On 1/12/07, Patrick Durusau <patrick@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Ed Dodds wrote:
> >Ontolog Journal maybe? Saw this http://pkp.sfu.ca/?q=ojs
> >>>since June??
> >that's an eternity in internet time. I feel compelled to make an open
> >criticism of how the journal reviews business sadly can sometimes slow
> >down and hinders scientific progress, rather than promoting it (making
> >the case for an open research group I guess)
> Well, yes and no. I am sure part of the problem is that most reviewers
> are working as volunteers, that may not be the case with some of the
> $10,000/year medical journals, but it has been my experience in the
> I don't think it is anyone's intention to slow down progress but
> reviewing articles for a journal is one task among many, all of which
> are competing for attention.
> Personally I favor a system of "open peer review" which is what actually
> happens if you want the citation of literature over time. There are some
> articles that are cited 10, 15, or even 20 years after publication, but
> the number of those is vanishingly small. The same is true for
> monographs. So much for publishers and peer review insuring publication
> of significant research.
> By "open peer review" I mean a system where I could decide to follow any
> articles that Peter Yim marks as "must read" as ones that I want to
> read. Which would mean more to me than an article appearing in a journal
> that was reviewed by someone undisclosed or unknown to me.
> We all do this now by forwarding each other pointers to specific
> articles and what I am suggesting simply makes it a bit more regularized.
> You can do this with CiteSeer to some degree by looking at the citation
> history of articles. If it is more than a year old and has no (or few)
> citations, it is very likely a real dog.
> Perhaps as part of the Ontolog community a system could be setup for
> people to enter articles (with access pointers) that others can rate as
> they read them. If that could be done so that I could choose what rating
> qualifies something as something that I would like to read or to enable
> me to follow the recommendations of a particular individual, that would
> be really useful. We have the technology to do all aspects of this now.
> I guess we simply need the will to implement it.
> Hope you are looking forward to a great weekend!
> Patrick Durusau
> Chair, V1 - Text Processing: Office and Publishing Systems Interface
> Co-Editor, ISO 13250, Topic Maps -- Reference Model
> Member, Text Encoding Initiative Board of Directors, 2003-2005
> Topic Maps: Human, not artificial, intelligence at work!
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
The content of this email may contain private
confidential information. Do not forward, copy,
share, or otherwise distribute without explicit
written permission from all correspondents. (011)
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (013)