Pieknieweski’s Blog: Autopsy Of A Deep Learning Paper . “I read a lot of deep learning papers, typically a few/week. I’ve read probably several thousands of papers. My general problem with papers in machine learning or deep learning is that often they sit in some strange no man’s land between science and engineering, I call it ‘academic engineering’. Let me describe what I mean…”
Washington Post: Russia is building a new Napster — but for academic research. “What will future historians see as the major Russian contribution to early 21st-century Internet culture? It might not be troll farms and other strategies for poisoning public conversation — but rather, the democratization of access to scientific and scholarly knowledge. Over the last decade, Russian academics and activists have built free, remarkably comprehensive online archives of scholarly works. What Napster was to music, the Russian shadow libraries are to knowledge.”
Inside Higher Education: New Tool for Open-Access Research. “Get the Research will connect the public with 20 million open-access scholarly articles. The site will be built by Impactstory — the nonprofit behind browser extension tool Unpaywall — in conjunction with the Internet Archive and the British Library.” I’ve signed up to try to get early access.
LSE Impact Blog: The academic papers researchers regard as significant are not those that are highly cited . “For many years, academia has relied on citation count as the main way to measure the impact or importance of research, informing metrics such as the Impact Factor and the h-index. But how well do these metrics actually align with researchers’ subjective evaluation of impact and significance? Rachel Borchardt and Matthew R. Hartings report on a study that compares researchers’ perceptions of significance, importance, and what is highly cited with actual citation data. The results reveal a strikingly large discrepancy between perceptions of impact and the metric we currently use to measure it.”
Research Remix (what a great blog name!): Where’s Waldo With Public Access Links. “Was digging into some publisher pages today, and I noticed a trend. Links to Public Access author manuscripts that CHORUS says are publicly available thanks to funder mandates are often very difficult to actually find on publisher pages. Want to see what I mean?”
EurekAlert: PLOS announces new website for peer reviewers . “The Reviewer Center is designed to support reviewers working on manuscripts submitted to PLOS journals, with information and resources freely available to anyone–those interested in learning more about how peer review works, those looking for instructional resources, and those reviewing for other journals and publishers. All content is provided under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license, meaning it is free and open for anyone to access, regardless of whether they review for PLOS.”
Syracuse University News: Acuna and Team Create Tool to Detect Academic Fraud in Research Papers. “For academic journal editors and research integrity officers at post-secondary institutions, detecting the re-use of images and illustrations in academic papers can be a time-consuming, if not impossible, task. While resources for detecting similarities and plagiarism in text submissions have been in use for several years, up until now there has been no technological solution that could be applied to finding duplicate images across research literature. That may soon change, thanks to work done by School of Information Studies (iSchool) Assistant Professor Daniel Acuna.”