In the shift beyond content licensing and towards supporting researcher workflow, Elsevier has few competitors. A key question is whether Digital Science and SpringerNature should be understood strategically as one company, or two. Who owns Digital Science?
What uses for artificial intelligence (AI) might we expect outside of the publication workflow? Some answers to this question can be found through the lenses of sustainability, justice, and resilience.
[…] research, ranging from the use of AI by authors in parts of the research to complete automation of the research workflow. The Phantom Menace: Automated AI Scientists and Hidden Pitfalls “AI scientist” systems, which autonomously generate hypotheses, execute experiments, and […]
[…] conference content ends up in a journal within 2 years. The lowest hanging fruit here is connecting your conference content workflow to journal submissions, not only to capture as much of the 40% in society titles specifically, but also to […]
[…] with many business leaders, publishers face increasingly more uncertain environments, with constantly evolving policies and best practices, and largely people-driven workflows, leading to higher employee turnover, and burned-out authors, reviewers, and staff. It seems that in the future of peer […]
[…] Approach (MECA) – what problems would be solved if we followed this new set of recommendations? Tony Alves: Two specific workflows precipitated the formation of MECA, focused on reducing the effort of authors during the submission process, and allowing reviewers […]
[…] of the process. So, your view is that creating a taxonomy doesn’t necessarily imply a value judgement over whether one workflow is better or has more integrity than another. Lois: Correct! What’s best for one journal, publisher, or field is […]
[…] of your authors and readers! Last but not least, I’ve used journal publishing as my example here, as it’s the workflow that I’m most familiar with. But all forms of peer review should be similarly transparent in terms of their […]
[…] the new market entrants’ approach. As Roger Schonfeld has noted, competition for content is moving steadily upstream in the research workflow. In this context, it is striking to note how few publishers have sought to develop their own preprint servers, […]
[…] strategy needs to address all three of these key elements in the same way. In recent years, some publishers and workflow providers have attempted to move towards a model that separates content distribution from the business issues of pricing and […]
[…] AI in the Editorial and Peer Review Process Currently, AI tools are being used in various stages of the publishing workflow, including in peer review, where several tools are emerging. These tools help save both manual and cognitive effort through […]
[…] fall into four categories: Tools to identify bad content, or sometimes assure good content Tools to identify bad actors AI-assisted workflow tools to make life easier/quicker for editors and reviewers Platforms that integrate workflows and tools The tools space is […]
[…] technology that meets people where they are while enabling them to move towards better ways of working. Design from a workflow-first position. Build tools that conform to how people work. Understand the value of open source. Collaboration and transparency breed […]
[…] of flowchart diagrams. For those who are used to working with COPE guidance these should be encouragingly familiar. There are workflow documents for each of the four areas and these will be available in the coming weeks. Who are these […]
[…] for journals can absolutely apply to video content. Workflows: Hybrid events require more complex workflows than traditional in-person conferences. The workflow is highly dependent on the format of the event. If a lot of pre-recording is involved, especially with author […]