Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

The future of the science publishing ego-system Jan Velterop – LIBER 2013 – June 26 – München.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "The future of the science publishing ego-system Jan Velterop – LIBER 2013 – June 26 – München."— Presentation transcript:

1 The future of the science publishing ego-system Jan Velterop – LIBER 2013 – June 26 – München

2 The future of the science publishing ego-system

3 Ego-system? Advertising scientific prowess

4 Publish or Perish

5 Read or Rot


7 Changes to the Current Publishing System Increasing Open Access — new models Separation of Peer Review and Publishing Changes to Peer Review — more open More arXiv-oids “Extrajournaleous” articles User-defined formats Et cetera, et cetera

8 User-defined Formats

9 Image courtesy of Kaveh Bazargan

10 Image courtesy of Kaveh Bazargan

11 Image courtesy of Kaveh Bazargan

12 Changes to journals or articles are not addressing the core of the problem However

13 Scholarly Articles Growth

14 Last 12 months 989195 new abstracts in PubMed 525,600 minutes i.e. a new article every half minute

15 15 Datarrhoea Publicatarrh Datarrhoea Publicatarrh


17 17

18 18

19 19

20 20

21 21

22 22

23 23

24 24

25 25

26 26

27 27

28 28 Not just the difficulty, mind, but the impossibility

29 29 search: ‘diagnostic imaging’ AND ‘cardiovascular system’: limited to: human studies, core clinical journals, Medline: 195 106 159 661

30 30 Assume you read: 5 papers/hour 8 hours/day 5 days/week 50 weeks/year 10 000 papers/year.

31 31 Reading all existing papers: 11 years and 124 days. Meanwhile 82142 more papers added: another eight years and 78 days. Before catching up, you need to read 408049 papers devoting 40 years and 295 days to it. You would finish just in time to retire. Being an expert in echocardiography

32 32 Speed of new relevant articles appearing Speed of being able to read articles

33 Read it all? — Signal to noise low!

34 34 The fire of peer review? Or of marketing? Top journal Bottom dweller Filter, Distill?

35 35 How are we filtering or choosing anyway? 35

36 36 Lens, Focus


38 38 Or maybe something more sophisticated?

39 39 hologramknowlogram?

40 40 Semantic triples Subject Predicate Object

41 41 ACVR1Fibrodisplasia is associated with Semantic triples

42 Jan Velterop Johannes Velterop JJM Velterop J Velterop 燕 德维尔村 presented vertoonde zeigte présentait 显示 these slides deze dia’s diese Transparantien cettes diapositives 这些幻灯片 Concept ‘Triples’ are language independent

43 The entities have URIs. This allows for disambiguation of synonyms & homonyms, so that the conceptual content of an assertion can be reflected, irrespective of the actual words used.





48 48 3a6c5bd1-29b0-4946-b1a4-74e909a0cdf4 41c76d76-d676-4e95-9dc0-12b10ebe9257 ceeee1f7-203b-445b-9860-e9acffd46fa6 ACVR1 is associated with Fibrodysplasia Ossificans Progressiva

49 1,2 ction>1,2 124009


51 51

52 52

53 detail

54 54 Fibrodysplasia Ossificans Progressiva ACVR1 is associated with This ‘assertion‘ – triple – can also be enhanced with meta-information, such as provenance And then it becomes a ‘nanopublication’

55 Nanopublication? Triple with attribution, provenance

56 A nanopublication is a single, machine-readable, citable scientific assertion along with associated provenance. Nano refers just to its smallness Publication refers to its cite-ability; a nanopublication is the smallest possible textual publication that may be scientifically meaningful Definition

57 Publishers can extract and expose the nanopublications contained in their publications They conceptually ‘ link ’ data and literature, and foster citation of the literature

58 58 Challenge: to convert literature to nano-publications On-the-fly

59 Why nanopublications and not just triples?

60 60 Nanopublications come with the idea that their authors/providers may gain credit for the use of these assertions by others Because we don’t just live in a knowledge economy, but also in an acknowledge economy (the ‘ego-system’)

61 Nanopublications can be cited and thus may credit authors, journals, databases, publishers And they are ‘ linked ’ – at least ‘ linkable ’ (URIs) – combatting the fragmentation of information that ’ s the bane of science

62 Nanopublications, even very large collections of nanopublications, do not – cannot – reflect full scientific reality in all its nuances But they help give direction, overview, hypothesis creation, etc. Caveat

63 63

64 64

65 65 protein A protein X 65 Reasoning

66 Triples (including nanopublications) can also be used to reason – ‘ in silico ’ – and therefore on a much larger scale protein A protein X

67 The upshot: "Faced with information overload, we have no alternative but pattern recognition.” Marshall McLuhan

68 Example The ‘nanopublication’ approach is being taken by the Innovative Medicine Initiative project Open PHACTS, aimed at significantly speeding up drug discovery


70 70 Documents Free semantic scientific PDF viewer The semantic approach is also being taken by this Open PHACTS exemplar:



73 Semantic Concept Tagging Target Disease Drug Company MicroRNA Pathway Context & More The semantic approach is being taken by this Pharma intelligence service, too: Thousands of: Patents Scientific Papers Newsfeeds Blogs Clinical Databases & More in


75 75 Supporting scientific information with ‘infotisement’, making annoying advertising into useful added information Even advertising can use this approach Even infotising can use this approach


77 E.g. associating ATPase p97 — when mentioned in the text of an article — with DBeQ



80 Scientific publications remain important For the record (Minutes of Science) But perhaps not for reading And perhaps not in journals But to provide the raw material for knowledge pattern recognition

81 81 Thank you!

Download ppt "The future of the science publishing ego-system Jan Velterop – LIBER 2013 – June 26 – München."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google