Difference between revisions of "User:Econterms/Lightning talk"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(text of talk) |
(organized) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
= Tracking relations between scientific works, such as disputes = |
= Tracking relations between scientific works, such as disputes = |
||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| + | * Here's a feature it could have. |
||
Examples: |
Examples: |
||
* [http://acawiki.org/Does_High_Public_Debt_Consistently_Stifle_Economic_Growth%3F_A_Critique_of_Reinhart_and_Rogoff On how much government debt stifles economic growth] |
* [http://acawiki.org/Does_High_Public_Debt_Consistently_Stifle_Economic_Growth%3F_A_Critique_of_Reinhart_and_Rogoff On how much government debt stifles economic growth] |
||
* [http://acawiki.org/A_diffusible_lymphokine_produced_by_CD8%2B_T_lymphocytes Claim about immune response to HIV] |
* [http://acawiki.org/A_diffusible_lymphokine_produced_by_CD8%2B_T_lymphocytes Claim about immune response to HIV] |
||
| ⚫ | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| − | * |
+ | * AcaWiki has 1100 academic summaries. |
| − | * See first two examples |
+ | * See first two examples |
| − | * Substantive comment is formalized: A disputes B |
+ | * Substantive comment is formalized: A disputes B (using Semantic MediaWiki) |
* 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 |
* 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 |
||
* note that the platform doesn't generally resolve claims or disputes ; it's finding a shallower kind of Truth |
* note that the platform doesn't generally resolve claims or disputes ; it's finding a shallower kind of Truth |
||
| Line 22: | Line 20: | ||
* Trees of relationships can then be made visible ; could give a '''picture of a literature''' |
* Trees of relationships can then be made visible ; could give a '''picture of a literature''' |
||
* Useful for: |
* Useful for: |
||
| − | # |
+ | # students of this research or |
| − | # researchers not at a "central" place |
+ | # researchers not at a "central" place that is well-connected to the latest news (global South?) |
| − | # somebody coming in from some other expertise who doesn't actually understand it all but has a technology or a skill that helps to address the specific question of fact. That happens all the time but it happens less if each subfield has knowledge barriers around it. |
+ | # somebody coming in from some other expertise who doesn't actually understand it all but has a technology or a skill that helps to address the specific question of fact. That happens all the time but it happens less if each subfield has knowledge barriers around it. |
| + | ===> If the site were good it could save time for scientists and bring in more scientists |
||
| ⚫ | |||
| − | * on such a wiki, who is qualified to make commentary & identify disputes? |
+ | * on such a wiki, who is qualified to make commentary & identify disputes? (don't have consensus) |
| ⚫ | |||
| + | Sources: |
||
* developed with Lane Rasberry (WM NYC), Otto Yang (UCLA medicine), others |
* developed with Lane Rasberry (WM NYC), Otto Yang (UCLA medicine), others |
||
| − | * |
+ | * drawing from Yaron Koren's discoursedb.org ; Retraction Watch blog; other sites |
| − | |||
| ⚫ | |||
Revision as of 13:43, 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 the science more clear.
- Here's a feature it could have.
Examples:
- AcaWiki has 1100 academic summaries.
- See first two examples
- Substantive comment is formalized: A disputes B (using Semantic MediaWiki)
- 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
- note that the platform doesn't generally resolve claims or disputes ; it's finding a shallower kind of Truth
- 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 literature
- Useful for:
- students of this research or
- researchers not at a "central" place that is well-connected to the latest news (global South?)
- somebody coming in from some other expertise who doesn't actually understand it all but has a technology or a skill that helps to address the specific question of fact. That happens all the time but it happens less if each subfield has knowledge barriers around it.
===> If the site were good it could save time for scientists and bring in more scientists
- Report on disputes between papers on this site
- on such a wiki, who is qualified to make commentary & identify disputes? (don't have consensus)
- would like to work with more people and get more ideas of what a platform like that should have in it
Sources:
- developed with Lane Rasberry (WM NYC), Otto Yang (UCLA medicine), others
- drawing from Yaron Koren's discoursedb.org ; Retraction Watch blog; other sites