Difference between revisions of "User:Econterms/Lightning talk"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(→Tracking relations between scientific works, such as disputes: another HIV paper) |
|||
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
* [http://acawiki.org/A_diffusible_lymphokine_produced_by_CD8%2B_T_lymphocytes Claim about immune response to HIV] ; [http://acawiki.org/Efficient_lysis_of_human_immunodeficiency_virus_type_1-infected_cells_by_cytotoxic_T_lymphocytes Later paper with different view] |
* [http://acawiki.org/A_diffusible_lymphokine_produced_by_CD8%2B_T_lymphocytes Claim about immune response to HIV] ; [http://acawiki.org/Efficient_lysis_of_human_immunodeficiency_virus_type_1-infected_cells_by_cytotoxic_T_lymphocytes Later paper with different view] |
||
− | * AcaWiki has 1100 academic summaries. |
+ | * AcaWiki has 1100 academic summaries. Our prototype is there. |
* See first two examples |
* See first two examples |
||
* Substantive comment is formalized: A disputes B (using Semantic MediaWiki) |
* Substantive comment is formalized: A disputes B (using Semantic MediaWiki) |
Revision as of 14:38, 1 June 2014
Tracking relations between scientific works, such as disputes
- Prof. Yang tells Lane and me that students have trouble interpreting a dynamic immunology literature which includes published papers whose findings are wrong or irrelevant.
- We are imagining a wiki platform that made the state of research in a science more clear.
- Here's a feature it could have.
Examples:
- On how much government debt stifles economic growth
- Claim about immune response to HIV ; Later paper with different view
- AcaWiki has 1100 academic summaries. Our prototype is there.
- See first two examples
- Substantive comment is formalized: A disputes B (using Semantic MediaWiki)
- note: the platform doesn't generally resolve claims or disputes ; it's finding a shallower kind of Truth -- that a dispute exists
- Similarly could incorporate other relations between scientific works: A cites B ; A is an important predecessor to B ; A and B use the same data set or the same clinical trial information ; A reproduced or could not reproduce result from B
- Could scale this up with big lists of relevant papers and works from many places including PubMed, SSRN, and Wikidata
- The list is not an innovation but the relations between the works can be useful if they are formalized a bit
- Trees of relationships can then be made visible ; could give a picture of a dynamic literature across fields, journals, and languages
- Could be useful for:
- students of this research or
- researchers not at a "central" place that is well-connected to the latest news (global South?)
- somebody with some other expertise (or technology or skill) that helps to address a particular issue
- Opportunities are rare if subfield has knowledge & institiutional barriers around it.
- ===> A good site could save time for scientists and bring in more scientists ===> speed science along
- Report on disputes between papers on this site
- who is qualified to make commentary & identify disputes on such a wiki? (to be worked out)
We need more people and ideas of what a wiki with scientific lit should have. It needs to spark critical mass (fun, addictive?)
Sources:
- developed with Lane Rasberry (WM NYC), Otto Yang (UCLA medicine), others
- drawing from Yaron Koren's discoursedb.org ; Retraction Watch blog; many other sites