Google Scholar now shows number of articles that should be OA and whether they are actually available
That's the first meaningful update to Google Scholar I've seen in years.
@jboy it's super inaccurate (shows a LOT of unfunded projects as funded because the paper mentions a funder by name, and then dings people for not having those articles open) and actually pretty harmful (giving labor to google to correct bad data/algo)
@jboy I'm all for carrots + sticks to encourage openness in all facets of research, but this ain't it.
@VickyRampin yeah, mostly I was just surprised to see a new feature in Google Scholar, because my impression has long been that it's a side project by Googlers accidentally turned academic infrastructure. This makes it seem like they're trying to use it for some good old crowd-serfing.
Who should be doing this? Lens.org? OpenCitations? Crossref?
BASE could do this, but chooses to only to Open Access articles. I think there is a similar group in the UK.
With all the lover for Open Access, but by limiting yourself that way you marginalize yourself. Would be better to do all and then give Open Access a higher ranking.
@jboy in my opinion, ORCID
@VickyRampin curious whether you have an opinion about who should be doing what Publons does?
@jboy in an ideal world we don't need a publons.
my ideal scholarly communications publishing system is overlay journals (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overlay_journal). authors post their articles in a repository and then "journals" are compilations of these already-open-articles organized on a theme or niche, with the peer review available (why it was selected for "journal" and the review of the article itself)
@VickyRampin it seems that the value people get out of Publons is (1) tracking reviewing work, and (2) seeing what becomes of reviewed papers. I like the idea of tackling the issue at a more systemic level!
Welcome to post.lurk.org, an instance for discussions around cultural freedom, experimental, new media art, net and computational culture, and things like that.