Dan S. Wallach
Abstract
A proposal for a new cost-free open-access publication model for computer science papers.
- Abbott, A. et al. Metrics: Do metrics matter? Nature 465 (June 2010), 860--862; http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100616/full/465860a.html.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Birman, K. and Schneider, F.B. Program committee overload in systems. Commun. ACM 52, 5 (May 2009), 34--37; http://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2009/5/24644-program-committee-overload-in-systems/fulltext. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Crowcroft, J., Keshav, S., and McKeown, N. Scaling the academic publication process to Internet scale. In Workshop on Organizing Workshops, Conferences, and Symposia for Computer Science (WOWCS '08), (San Francisco, CA, Apr. 2008); http://www.usenix.org/events/wowcs08/tech/full_papers/crowcroft/crowcrofthtml/, also reprinted in Commun. ACM 52, 1 (Jan. 2009). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Fortnow, L. Time for computer science to grow up. Commun. ACM 52, 8 (Aug. 2009); http://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2009/8/34492-viewpoint-time-for-computer-science-to-grow-up/fulltext. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Halpern, J. Private communication, August 2011.Google Scholar
- Halpern, J.Y. and Lagoze, C. The computing research repository: Promoting the rapid dissemination and archiving of computer science research. In Proceedings of the Fourth ACM International Conference on Digital Libraries (Berkeley, CA, Aug. 1999); http://arxiv.org/ftp/cs/papers/9812/9812020.pdf. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jagadish, H.V. The conference reviewing crisis and a proposed solution. SIGMOD Record 37, 3 (2008), 40--45; http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1462582. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Korth, H.F. et al. Paper and proposal reviews: Is the process flawed? ACM SIGMOD Record 37, 3 (2008):36--39, 2008; http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1462571.1462581. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Vardi, M.Y. Revisiting the publication culture in computing research. Commun. ACM 53, 5 (Mar. 2010), http://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2010/3/76297-revisiting-the-publication-culture-in-computing-research/fulltext. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Rebooting the CS publication process
Recommendations
Citation success of different publication types: a case study on all references in psychology publications from the German-speaking countries (D---A---CH---L---L) in 2009, 2010, and 2011
Scientometric data on the citation success of different publication types and publication genres in psychology publications are presented. Data refer to references that are cited in these scientific publications and that are documented in PSYNDEX, the ...
Researchers' risk-smoothing publication strategies: Is productivity the enemy of impact?
In the quest for balance between research productivity and impact, researchers in science and engineering are often encouraged to adopt a play-it-safe research and publication strategy that allows them to maintain high publication productivity and ...
Funding Data from Publication Acknowledgments: Coverage, Uses, and Limitations
This article contributes to the development of methods for analysing research funding systems by exploring the robustness and comparability of emerging approaches to generate funding landscapes useful for policy making. We use a novel data set of ...
Reviews
Ned Chapin
This paper presents CSPub, Wallach's "proposal for a new cost-free open-access publication model for computer science papers" that could facilitate the work done by authors and reviewers. In explaining his proposal, the author briefly covers how affected groups could benefit from some varieties of his proposal, giving most attention to the academic environment and to academic-oriented conferences and journals. The major affected groups covered are overloaded reviewers, authors of resubmitted papers, authors of conference and journal papers, and authors of short incremental work and technical reports. Wallach characterizes CSPub as a mashup of technical archiving services, review management software, and conference submission processes. In his proposal, any submission handled by CSPub would be open for anyone to see, together with the reviewer feedback. This could aid anti-plagiarism efforts and spam identification. Popular CSPub-received submissions might be picked up for journal publication, which could help reduce journal latency. Several relevant points are not addressed in this proposal: Should there, or could there, be multiple entities doing the CSPub process concurrently__?__ When, specifically, does "publication" occur for submissions handled by any CSPub entity, and is it the same for all CSPub entities__?__ Is the key determinant for the effectiveness of any CSPub version--a free, built-in comprehensive search process--open to anyone__?__ How well does such a search process cover the in-process and finished submissions handled by other CSPub entities; prior, similar computer science materials, including those of inactive publishers, non-CSPub entities, and CSPub entities; and all CS publications or materials created prior to the initial implementation of CSPub__?__ How well does the search process handle nomenclature changes and additions__?__ For example, in the early years of CS work, we often worked with and on software, but we did not use the term "software" even when the work we did involved machine language executable code. The author briefly notes some possible negative consequences of CSPub, such as altered ownership of submission content, reduced subscriptions to journals, reduced revenues from digital libraries, and reduced conference registrations. Given the increasing number of computer science papers being authored, CSPub merits the attention of personnel in all of the potentially affected groups. Online Computing Reviews Service
Access critical reviews of Computing literature here
Become a reviewer for Computing Reviews.
Comments