STM Plants a Flag About Responsible Use of Research Content in GenAI
A new STM Association paper seeks to foster a discussion about how GenAI systems can reliably incorporate scholarly research.
A new STM Association paper seeks to foster a discussion about how GenAI systems can reliably incorporate scholarly research.
Today’s guest post offers a review of a panel of publishers and editors discussing the pros and cons of using Generative AI, along with ethical and policy implications.
Today’s guest blogger identifies signals of how fractured the scholarly research ecosystem has become, and how the value publishers provide is increasingly questioned, dismissed, or overlooked by key stakeholders.
Today’s guest post demonstrates how publishers can reduce their carbon footprint and be leaders in environmental sustainability.
Today’s guest bloggers assert that the future of the scholarly publishing depends on mastering science communication with the same rigor that global consumer brands apply to marketing.
Today’s post calls for community feedback on STM’s latest recommendations for alt-text metadata to support images in accessible scholarly publishing.
Today’s guest post is the first in a two-part series — we begin by facing up to the fact that AI will not become the content windfall the way many in the publishing industry hope.
Today’s guest blogger reflect on their panel discussion about policies and realities of AI in scholarly communications at COPE’s Publication Integrity Week event last month.
AI is presenting new challenges while also giving us tools to innovate in ways. The most successful publishers will be those willing to challenge the status quo.
At the STM innovation and Integrity days in London last week, it’s clear that research integrity has become an increasingly pressing issue. Many publishers are reporting significant increases in submissions of questionable legitimacy. perhaps now is the time for a new alliance between publishers, funders, institutions and researchers to protect the integrity of the scholarly record, before it’s too late.
Today’s guest bloggers describe the efforts taken in organizing a sustainable 2025 conference of the European Association for Science Editors.
Today’s guest post summarizes the discussion in the recent EASE / STM / webinar, exploring the digital carbon footprint of scholarly publishing.
A review of 12 major publishers finds that they display an average of 6 journal-level impact metrics on their platforms. The Journal Impact Factor is the only metric displayed on all 12.
In honor of International OA Week, The Scholarly Kitchen Chefs ponder the theme: Who owns our knowledge?
If science is to be both honest and healthy, we must accept that statistically non-significant results are part of reality. The SAMPL guidelines, if adopted widely by scholarly publishers and journal editors, hold a solution for authors who worry their results are not “significant.”