Why Thousands of AI Researchers Are Boycotting the New Nature Journal
Academics share machine-learning research freely. Taxpayers should not have to pay twice to read our findings.
Send us a link
Academics share machine-learning research freely. Taxpayers should not have to pay twice to read our findings.
The assumption that the publication of an article in a high-impact factor, indexed journal somehow adds value to international science is a collective illusion - one that is unfortunately shared by funding agencies, institutions and researchers. This illusion - which serves as an excuse to delegate the evaluation of science to for-profit companies and anonymous reviewers for the sake of false objectivity - costs taxpayers dearly.
A unique WWII-era programme in the US, allowed US publishers to reprint exact copies of German-owned science books, to explore how copyrights affect follow-on science. This artificial removal of copyright barriers led to a 25% decline in prices and a 67% increase in citations.
Objections to the Creative Commons attribution licence are straw men raised by parties who want open access to be as closed as possible, warns John Wilbanks.
Ethical, organizational and economic strengths and weaknesses of funder open access platforms: opportunities and threats presented by funder open access platforms in the ongoing transition to open access.
The AI field is increasingly turning to conference publications and free, open-review websites while shunning traditional outlets - sentiments dramatically expressed in a growing boycott of a high-profile AI journal.
Institutions, research funding bodies and publishers must all work together to change the system in the interest of advancing research, says Steven Inchcoombe.
Just as the peer review system of journal publication is itself an ever-evolving construction, so too are the unspoken rules that govern which scientists share what.
Catherine Winchester was hired to ferret out errors and establish routines that promote rigorous research.
Springer Nature, the publisher of science magazines Nature and Scientific American, cancelled its 3.2 billion euro (2.8 billion pound) stock market flotation planned for Wednesday on weak investor demand, dealing a heavy blow to Germany's vibrant IPO season.
Over the past few years, Nature has published editorials extolling the virtues of replication, concluding in one that “We welcome, and will be glad to help disseminate, results that explore the validity of key publications, including our own.” Mante Nieuwland, of the Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, and colleagues were encouraged by that message and submitted one such replication attempt to Nature Neuroscience. In a three-part guest post, Nieuwland will describe what happened when they did and discusses whether reality lives up to the rhetoric.
An increasing number of universities are ending, or threatening to end, bundled journal subscriptions with major publishers.
Springer Nature, the publisher of science magazines Nature and Scientific American, cancelled its 3.2 billion euro stock market flotation planned for Wednesday on weak investor demand, dealing a heavy blow to Germany's vibrant IPO season.
In the digital era, each publisher has established its own content platform, to the detriment of the researcher experience. Discovery is fragmented, leading to substantial library investment in order to provide single-index whole-collection search.
Magdalena Skipper, who is currently editor-in-chief of the open-access journal Nature Communications, will become the eighth editor of Nature. She will take over from Philip Campbell, who will move to the newly created post of editor in chief at publisher Springer Nature on 1 July.
More than two thousand researchers have signed a petition to boycott a new Nature journal over the fact it will be available only by subscription.
First female editor in Nature's nearly 150 year history.
Sneha Kulkarni from Editage takes a look at the ever-increasing global scientific output, and asks questions about quantity versus quality.
The financial pressure that publishers impose on libraries is a worldwide concern. Gold open-access publishing with an expensive article-processing charge paid by the authors is often presented as an ideal solution to this problem. However, such a system threatens less-funded departments and even article quality.
When one of the first online science journals went under, its papers all disappeared. Enter: Portico, the Wayback Machine for scholarly publications.
PLOS ONE has created a Physical Sciences and Engineering team as part of a wider effort to better serve our communities through subject-specific in-house editorial groups.
It is clear that APCs cover both the direct processing costs and the indirect costs of running the entire publishing business. Therefore, the term APC is itself misleading.
Springer Nature and ResearchGate, along with Cambridge University Press and Thieme, will work together on the sharing of articles on the scholarly collaboration platform in a way that protects the rights of authors and publishers.
Wiley Editorial on the changing landscape of publishing suggests that OA and traditional outlets will continue to coexist successfully for some time to come.
Why Jupyter succeed where Mathematica failed? The obvious contrast is between the proprietary world of Wolfram and the open-source model of the software ecosystem that Jupyter mobilizes.
Despite a mixed record for German stock market flotations in 2018, Springer Nature, the world's largest publisher of English-language research journals, has announced it is taking the plunge.
Opinion pieces challenges the dichotomy that use of social media for public engagement with science and working to change policy and remove systemic barriers to inclusion are mutually exclusive.
A short list of seven functionalities that academic publishers looking to modernize their operations might invest in; from unencumbered access and improved social components, to dynamic data visualisations and more precise hyperlinking.
Publication will highlight pioneering work of scientists searching for cures to diseases like HIV and malaria and solutions to climate change.
Using WoS as a universalistic tool for research assessment can disadvantage science published in journals with adequate editorial standards and scientific merit.