Personal tools
You are here: Home Liquid Documents

Liquid documents, by topic area, produced by LiquidPub Project research

Documents in this list have not yet reached a stable or mature configuration and are still evolving. Nevertheless, they are opened and hosted here to promote the early dissemination of ideas and maybe obtain early feedback and comments.

Members of the LP team should use the following procedure to put documents here.

LP deliverables

D1.2v1. Design of the SKO structural model and evolution UNITN, IIIA-CSIC, CNRS.

This deliverable introduces Scientific Knowledge Objects (SKOs) and their associated structures as a response to the needs of a collaborative platform for the creation, dissemination and publication of Complex Artifacts and also as an option to the current scientific publication practice based on the notion of papers or articles. The approach presented is based on three Organization levels (Data, Knowledge and Collection) and also three states (Gas, Liquid, Solid) that regulate the properties and operations allowed at each level. The deliverable also introduces the restrictions and special considerations that would be necessary for the creation of a reputation module to on top of this approach. Finally it also presents work on typing and patterning of scientific publications, with the objective of introducing semantics and useful operations to them.

D5.1v1. Design of the Liquid Publications Integrated Platform UNITN, IIIA-CSIC, SPRINGER, CNRS.

This deliverable describes the architecture of the LiquidPub Integrated Platform. This platform aims at providing the tools  and  infrastructure  for  supporting  the  novel  models  for  scientific  knowledge  creation,  dissemination  and evaluation we envision in this project. We illustrate the requirements for such a platform by describing the features we plan to provide with a snapshot of our ongoing prototype. We then derive an architecture for supporting those requirements, grouping the services provided by the platform in architectural components.

D6.2. Report on Communication, Dissemination and Validation Activities CNRS, IIIA-CSIC, SPRINGER, UNIFR, UNITN.

In what follows, we provide a detailed description of the dissemination activities we have set up in our first year. We have listed our dissemination activities along five axes: (a) contacts with private  and  institutional  partners  that  may  contribute  to  the  implementation of  the  project;  (b)  inbound discussions and brainstorming around the core concepts of LiquidPub; (c) outbound dissemination activities for a larger audience; (d) participation to high-level scientific conferences and  publications,  web-publications  and  for  a;  (e)  LiquidPub  portal,  Web  site,  and  open  source access to contributions. Our activities of dissemination have covered different media, such as online  conferences,  videos,  newspapers,  academic  journals,  blogs,  small  workshops,  large  conferences, thus providing us with a broader vision of the potential impact of the LiquidPub project.

Peer Review Analysis

Is peer review any good? A quantitative analysis of peer review (Preliminary Draft)

Fabio Casati, Maurizio Marchese, Azzurra Ragone, Matteo Turrini
(This is a short and limited version of D3.1v1)
In this paper we focus on the analysis of peer reviews and reviewers behaviour in conference review processes. We report on the development, definition and rationale of a theoretical model for peer review processes to support the identification of appropriate metrics to assess the processes main properties. We then apply the proposed model and analysis framework to data sets about reviews of conference papers. We discuss in details results, implications and their eventual use toward improving the analyzed peer review processes. Conclusions and plans for future work close the paper.

Peer review and quality promotion in science

Joseph Rushton Wakeling, Matúš Medo, Matteo Turrini, Aliaksandr Birukou, Jim Law, Maurizio Marchese, Yi-Cheng Zhang and the LiquidPub-PEER Community
(Liquid Document derived from WP3's part of D1.1/D3.1)
This article is an attempt to put into practice some of the ideas that have been floating around about Liquid Documents. The review of peer review that formed parts of D1.1 and D3.1 has been transferred to a public code-hosting repository. Anyone can obtain the source and propose revisions; the bug-tracking system can be used as a form of live review and feedback. The aim is to present a continually-updated, complete as possible an overview of the state of peer review research and practice.

Liquid Journals

Liquid Journals: Knowledge Dissemination in the Web Era Marcos Baez, Fabio Casati.

In this position paper we redefine the notion of “scientific journal” to update it to the age of the Web. We explore the historical reasons behind the current journal model, we show that this model is essentially the same today, even if the Web has made dissemination essentially free. We propose a notion of liquid and personal journals that evolve continuously in time and that are targeted to serve individuals or communities of arbitrarily small or large scales. The liquid journals provide “interesting” content, in the form of “scientific contributions” that are “related” to a certain paper, topic, or area, and that are posted (on their web site, repositories, traditional journals) by “inspiring” researchers. As such, the liquid journal separates the notion of “publishing” (which can be achieved by just posting content on the Web) from the appearance of contributions into the journals, which are essentially collections of content. In this paper we describe the notion of liquid journals, we define the notions of scientific contribution, of “interesting”, “related”, and “inspiring”, we show how it can be implemented, and we demonstrate the value to individuals and communities.

Liquid Journals: Overcoming Information Overload in the Scientific Community. Marcos Baez, Aliaksandr Birukou, Fabio Casati, Maurizio Marchese, Daniil Mirylenka

In this paper we present a dissemination model that extends from the notion of scientific journal to overcome the problem of information overload in the scientific community. We focus on the issues related to having access to interesting scientific content, and to narrowing down the discovery process only to known sources (venues, authors) when dealing with vasts amounts of information. In this paper we present the liquid journal model, concepts, methods, and the supporting platform.

Publishing Industry and Business Models

Towards an Open/Web 2.0 Scientific Publishing Industry? Preliminary Findings and Open Issues  Roberta Cuel, Diego Ponte, Alessandro Rossi.

The collaborative and open way of generating, organizing, and managing knowledge has been growingly seen as an essential activity to foster innovation, economic growth and social development. Interestingly enough, while this model is being applied in several social as well as business sectors, the scientific publishing industry – which is devoted to the production, evaluation and diffusion of scientific knowledge – does not seem to have been much affected by this collaborative revolution. The goal of this paper is that of exploring the current configuration of the scientific publishing industry in order to understand whether and to what extent innovative technologies and open paradigms might change its current configuration. We outline (a) the certification abilities of publishers and (b) the need for reputation of authors as two “soft” drivers of the market that need to be taken into consideration if we want to estimate the impact of the collaborative revolution within the scientific community and, ultimately, in the innovative practices and business models of the scientific publishing industry.

Communities

Liquid Pub: Modeling, Managing and Analyzing Scientific Communities  Cristhian Parra, Fabio Casati.

In this paper we analyze the problems and challenges in defining and developing a model for scientific communities. We stress the importance of having such communities for providing better search capability and fairer evaluation methods. Finally, we outline some concepts and research directions towards the definition of a conceptual model to support the definition, discovery, maintenance and use of such communities.

Liquid Pub: Scientific Communities Model  Cristhian Parra, Fabio Casati.

This documents provide the formal definition of the model for Scientific Communities, including the physical database model. It describes the concepts of each element in the model and it provides different views of the physical model corresponding to the different elements in our proposal.