This link has been bookmarked by 16 people . It was first bookmarked on 05 Feb 2009, by Jack Park.
-
Michel BauwensWe intend for the peer-review web to do for scientific publishing what the world wide web has done for media publishing. As it becomes increasingly practical to evaluate researchers based on the reviews of their peers, the need for centralized big-name jo
-
mary thebergeA tool that enables peers to review and sign each others' works
-
Mike ChelenGPeerReview is a command-line tool that makes it simple to write a review of someone's work and digitally sign them together.
-
Ricky RobinsonA tool for digitally signing peer reviews.
-
dreaming spiresWe intend for the peer-review web to do for scientific publishing what the world wide web has done for media publishing.
-
Marc LijourGPeerReview is a command-line tool that makes it simple to write a review of someone's work and digitally sign them together.
-
Neil SaundersGPeerReview is a command-line tool that makes it simple to write a review of someone's work and digitally sign them together.
-
Jack Park(from slashdot) "PGP and GnuPG have been utilizing webs of trust to establish authenticity without a centralized certificate authority for a while. Now, a new tool seeks to extend the concept to include scientific publications. The idea is that researchers can review and sign each others' works with varying levels of endorsement, and display the signed reviews with their vitas. This creates a decentralized social network linking researchers, papers, and reviews that, in theory, represents the scientific community. It meshes seamlessly with traditional publication venues. One can publish a paper with an established journal, and still try to get more out of the paper by asking colleagues to review the work. The hope is that this will eventually provide an alternative method for researchers to establish credibility."
Would you like to comment?
Join Diigo for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.