Guest Post — Your Next Reader Is a Machine, and We Are Ready
Machine readers replacing human readers can sound like a threat. Today’s post argues that our community is well prepared to face these challenges and seize the opportunities.
Machine readers replacing human readers can sound like a threat. Today’s post argues that our community is well prepared to face these challenges and seize the opportunities.
Today’s guest post asks: Do trust markers and other systematic fraud-prevention practices exclude unaffiliated authors from contributing to the scholarly record?
Today’s post features conversations with society publishing leaders resisting the proposed OMB rule change for federal research funding.
Today’s guest post introduces the YCR-index as an alternative to measuring value with raw citation counts.
Building robust citation and attribution into generative AI systems are foundational to usage, credit and trust. We need to expect more from AI.
Federated identity should be a natural fit for library access. So why isn’t it?
AI scholarly search tools often miss important literature due to incomplete metadata. Better full-text-derived metadata could significantly improve discovery.
For scholarly publishers, the user has changed faster than the systems designed to serve them, and the gap between the two is where most of the difficult work is happening.
Today, we feature a friendly debate on the question: which parts of the research lifecycle should be more automated, and which require more of a human touch — and why?
The threat of zero-click search makes organizational brand more important than ever and presents a huge opportunity.
Today’s Mental Health Awareness Monday reflects on the need for validation in publishing careers, and how we might reduce unnecessary pressure on performance while preserving rigor.
The new STM Trends 2030 was released, symbolizing a world full of opportunities but also with dangers lying just below the surface for scholarly publishing.
In this post, Robert attempts to embrace a gloomy optimism as he muses on the state of publishing at scholarly societies.
In 2018 at SSP New Directions, Neil Blair Christensen and Angela Cochran participated in an Oxford debate on the use of AI in Peer Review. Today, they revisit their main points and reflect on where they think we are today and will likely be in another 8 years.
As AI-driven search reduces friction in information-seeking, what happens to serendipity, frustration, and “night science”?