Syracuse University: ORI Grant Funds Automated Tool to Detect Potential Fraud in Scientific Papers

Syracuse University: ORI Grant Funds Automated Tool to Detect Potential Fraud in Scientific Papers. “The Office of Research Integrity in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has awarded funding to a School of Information Studies (iSchool) professor to further automate the detection of fraudulent material in scientific papers. A grant of $149,310 has been awarded to Daniel Acuna, assistant professor. His project aims to advance the detection process by developing tools and systems, including scalable software and infrastructure and statistical feedback, to be used by integrity investigators. The award was presented for his project, “Methods and Tools for Scalable Figure Reuse Detection with Statistical Certainty Reporting.” Acuna plans to develop a data-searching tool that will boost the scale at which articles are automatically searched to detect figure reuse, thus finding cases of potential inauthenticity and inappropriate reuses much more quickly and across broader repositories of information. “

Nature: Dutch publishing giant cuts off researchers in Germany and Sweden

Nature: Dutch publishing giant cuts off researchers in Germany and Sweden. “Elsevier last week stopped thousands of scientists in Germany from reading its recent journal articles, as a row escalates over the cost of a nationwide open-access agreement. The move comes just two weeks after researchers in Sweden lost access to the most recent Elsevier research papers, when negotiations on its contract broke down over the same issue.”

Pieknieweski’s Blog: Autopsy Of A Deep Learning Paper

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…”

Science Business: Free access to research papers by 2020? ‘Impossible without radical steps’, says EU official

Science Business: Free access to research papers by 2020? ‘Impossible without radical steps’, says EU official. “A senior European Commission official called for ‘radical steps’ to speed up making publicly funded research in Europe freely available to readers, rather than locked behind publishers’ paywalls. ‘We are today at 20 per cent full open access,’ said Robert-Jan Smits, former director-general for research and innovation at the Commission. ‘Fifteen years ago, we were at 15 per cent open access,’ and in 2016 the EU set a target that all publicly research be open, free, to readers by 2020.”

Washington Post: Russia is building a new Napster — but for academic research

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.”

EurekAlert: PLOS announces new website for peer reviewers

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.”

Twitter for Scientists: an Idea Whose Time Has Finally Come? (Chronicle of Higher Education)

Chronicle of Higher Education: Twitter for Scientists: an Idea Whose Time Has Finally Come?. “There’s abundant evidence that widely sharing a research finding in just one or two simple sentences greatly increases its use and effectiveness. But, ugh, that usually means Twitter — in the eyes of many, a low-attention-span cesspool of trolls, political partisans, and amateur comedians known more for braggadocio and snark than reason and facts. Now, with federal backing, there’s another option.”