Understanding the implications of Open Citations — how far along are we?

Understanding the implications of Open Citations — how far along are we?

The academic discovery space seems to be buzzing again. This space has become relatively stable after the introduction and maturity of Web Scale Discovery between 2009–2013, but things seem to be hotting up once again. Continue reading “Understanding the implications of Open Citations — how far along are we?”

Early adopters of the OpenCitations Data Model

OpenCitations is very pleased to announce its collaboration with four new scholarly Research and Development projects that are early adopters of the recently updated OpenCitations Data Model, described in this blog post.

The four projects are similar, in that they each are independently using text mining and optical character recognition or PDF extraction techniques to extract citation information from the reference lists of published works, and are making these citations available as Linked Open Data. Three of the four will also use the OpenCitations Corpus as publication platform for their citation data.  The academic disciplines from which these citation data are being extracted are social science, humanities and economics. Continue reading “Early adopters of the OpenCitations Data Model”

The holy grail in Open Access: sharing that benefits authors

The holy grail of Open Access: sharing that benefits authors

As a researcher, you are often urged to make your work openly accessible. And sure, that’s a laudable goal, but… What’s in it for you?

With job prospects in academia being not that rosy, it is no surprise that open access is not the primary consideration for researchers considering where to get their work published. When push comes to shove, making a living is more important than access to your research.

But why not both? You can give yourself that career boost and support open access. Continue reading “The holy grail in Open Access: sharing that benefits authors”

I want to create alternatives to traditional publishers. What platform do I use?

After launching Flockademic, a service to help researchers start alternatives to the traditional publishers, one of the most frequent questions I received was: how is it different from Open Journal Systems, the Open Science Framework, arXiv, and other initiatives?

Sometimes it’s easiest to understand a project by comparing it to others. So with that in mind: let’s do a comparison. Continue reading “I want to create alternatives to traditional publishers. What platform do I use?”

OpenCitations and the Initiative for Open Citations: A Clarification

Some folk are confused, but OpenCitations and the Initiative for Open Citations, despite the similarity of their names, are two distinct organizations.

OpenCitations (http://opencitations.net) is an open scholarly infrastructure organization directed by Silvio Peroni and myself, and its primary purpose is to host and build the OpenCitations Corpus (OCC), an RDF database of scholarly citation data that now contains almost 13 million citation links. Continue reading “OpenCitations and the Initiative for Open Citations: A Clarification”

Open access and the versioning issue — do we need to solve this?

Open access and the versioning issue — do we need to solve this?

One of the major issues with institutional repositories is that it is difficult to get researchers to self-deposit their work. Assuming one could wave a magic wand and solve that, institutional repositories still have another barrier to overcome — the discovery barrier.

With content scattered across thousands of sites, one would need an aggregator site to provide a one-search across all of them. Continue reading “Open access and the versioning issue — do we need to solve this?”

Dramatic Growth of Open Access December 31, 2017

Some stats on Open Access from 

“As usual the open access movement has much to celebrate as 2017 draws to a close, and the whole world has much to look forward to from open access in 2018. As of today there are 4.6 million articles in PubMedCentral, thanks in large measure to constantly increasing participation by scholarly journals; sometime in 2018 this is likely to exceed 5 million. DOAJ added a net 1,272 journals (3.5 / day) and showed even stronger growth in article searchability; a DOAJ milestone of 3 million searchable articles in likely to come in 2018. The Directory of Open Access Books nearly doubled in size and now has more than 10,000 books from 247 publishers. Bielefeld Academic Search Engine, the best surrogate for overall growth, continues to amaze with over 120 million documents, growth of 17.3 million in 2017, a 17% growth rate on a very substantial base; a 20% growth in content providers is an indication of the overall growth of the repository movement. arXiv’s growth rate was 10% while newcomer arXiv clones socRxiv grew by 187% and bioRxiv by 151%. REPEC grew by 13%, SCOAP3 by 32%. Internet Archive grew by 31 billion web pages, 4 million texts, 2.4 million images, 800,000 movies, and 600,000 audio recordings. Following are selected details indicating the content numbers at the end of 2017, 2017 growth by number, percentage, and where warranted, by day.”

Full data can be downloaded from here: https://dataverse.scholarsportal.info/dataverse/dgoa

“Let the community decide”? The vision and reality of soundness-only peer review in open-access mega-journals

Purpose

My roundup of developments in 2017 that caught my eye.

In my final blog post of the year, I’m going to talk about some of the developments in librarianship and the related domains that caught my eye. Of course, this is by necessity going to be personal and idiosyncratic from my point of view
“Obi-Wan: Anakin, Chancellor Palpatine is evil!
Anakin Skywalker: From my point of view, the Jedi are evil!” – Revenge of the Sith (2005) Continue reading “My roundup of developments in 2017 that caught my eye.”

Proudly powered by WordPress | Theme: Baskerville 2 by Anders Noren.

Up ↑