Specific Proposal for Synergies Network

Tim Brody - Eprints - Southampton U.

Specific Proposal forSynergies Network

To maximize the visibility and impact of Canadian SS/H Research:• Support the creation and start-up of a network of University OAI

Archives for all University research output (pre-refereeing preprints and refereed postprints)

• This will not only maximize Canadian SS/H research impact (the primary goal) but it will also allow Canadian Refereed Journals to (1) go inline, (2) cut their costs, (3) ensure their future, and (4) increase their own visibility and impact, by (5) offloading all of their online archiving, distribution and access onto the Synergies Network. (If/when they wish to (6) convert to becoming open-access journals, (7) providing peer-review only, they are perfectly positioned to do so)

• In doing this Canada will also set a model for and lead the world in the movement toward open access to refereed research.

Tim Brody - Eprints.org - Southampton University

The Research-Impact Cycle

Self-archiving research output

maximizes research access

maximizing (and accelerating) research impact

(hence also research productivity and research progress and their rewards)

L im ited A ccess: L im ited R esearch Im pact

Refereed “Post-Print” Accepted, Certified, Published by Journal

Impact cycle begins:Research is done

Researchers write pre-refereeing

“Pre-Print”

Submitted to Journal

Pre-Print reviewed by Peer Experts – “Peer-Review”

Pre-Print revised by article’s Authors

Researchers can access the Post-Print if their university has a subscription to the Journal

12-1

8 M

on

ths

New impact cycles: New research builds on existing research


Institutional OAI Archive Growth

How OAI Archives for institutional research output have been growing

– and how to accelerate their growth

(Data collected and analysed by Tim Brody, doctoral candidate, Electronics and Computer Science,

Southampton University)


Growth in number of papers openly accessible in OAI Archives

(nearly 1,400,000 records, but not all are full-text)

Cumulative and Monthly Papersin all OAI Archives

0

200000

400000

600000

800000

1000000

1200000

1400000

1600000

janv-

99

avr-9

9

juil-9

9

oct-9

9

janv-

00

avr-0

0

juil-0

0

oct-0

0

janv-

01

avr-0

1

juil-0

1

oct-0

1

janv-

02

avr-0

2

juil-0

2

oct-0

2

janv-

03

Cu

mu

lati

ve R

eco

rds

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

300000

350000

400000

Rec

ord

s

Cumulative Record Count Total New Records per Month


Growth in number of OAI Archives (now 140+ Archives, but the average number of papers per Archive (9000) needs to grow faster!)

Number of Archives and Mean Number of Papers Per Archive (all OAI Archives)

0100020003000400050006000700080009000

10000

janv-

99

avr-9

9

juil-9

9

oct-9

9

janv-

00

avr-0

0

juil-0

0

oct-0

0

janv-

01

avr-0

1

juil-0

1

oct-0

1

janv-

02

avr-0

2

juil-0

2

oct-0

2

janv-

03

Mea

n R

eco

rds

per

Arc

hiv

e

020406080100120140160

Arc

hiv

es

Cumulative Mean Records per Archive Cumulative Archives to Date


The Eprints.org subset of OAI Archives(about 1/2 of all current OAI Archives, 70/140)

illustrating the growth in institutions’ self-archived research output: drop in average size when new

institutional archives began to be created

Cumulative Number of Eprints.org Archives (all) and Mean Number of Papers Per Archive

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

avr-9

8

avr-9

9

avr-0

0

avr-0

1

avr-0

2

Mea

n R

eco

rds

per

Arc

hiv

e

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Arc

hiv

es

Mean Records per Archive Cumulative Archives to Date


New Eprints.org Archives per month(minus 3 pre-OAI legacy

Eprints.org Archives) New EPrints Archives per Month

0

2

4

6

8

10

12ja

nv-0

1

mar

s-01

mai

-01

juil-

01

sept

-01

nov-

01

janv

-02

mar

s-02

mai

-02

juil-

02

sept

-02

nov-

02

janv

-03

New

EP

rints

Arc

hive

s in

Per

iod


Growth of papers in Eprints.org Archives (excluding the 3 biggest

Archives)8000+ papers to dateCumulative and Monthly Papers in

EPrints.org Archives (minus top 3)

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

Cu

mu

lati

ve R

eco

rds

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

Rec

ord

s

Cumulative Record Count Total New Records per Month


Growth in number of Eprints.org Archives (c. 70)

(again, average number of papers per Archive [c. 120] needs to grow faster!)

Cumulative Number of Eprints.org Archives and Mean Number of Papers Per Archive (- top 3)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

mar

s-01

mai-

01

juil-0

1

sept

-01

nov-0

1

janv-

02

mar

s-02

mai-

02

juil-0

2

sept

-02

nov-0

2

Mea

n R

eco

rds

per

Arc

hiv

e

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Arc

hiv

es

Mean Records per Archive Cumulative Archives to Date


Universities (and their research funders) need to adopt a systematic policy to self-archive all their refereed research output

Size of EPrints Archives

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

1-10

21-3

0

41-5

0

61-7

0

91-1

00

111-

120

231-

240

261-

270

351-

360

431-

440

>50

1

Size of Archive

Num

ber

of A

rchi

ves


Where the work needs to be done to accelerate growth per Archive:

These curves must become convex upward: Institutional self-archiving policies are needed

Latency of Record Additions to New EPrints Archives

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Latency (30 Day Periods)

New

Rec

ords

05101520253035404550

Mea

n

New Records in Latency Period Mean New Records per Archive


Even the fastest-growing archive, the Physics ArXiv, is still only growing linearly (since 1991):

1 8

15

22

29

0100020003000400050006000700080009000

10000

Number of

Self-Archivings Per Month

Years (starting 1991)

Physics ArXiv Growth1991-2030

Linear GrowthSigmoid Growth

At that rate, it would still take a decade before we reach the

first year that all physics papers for that year are openly

accesible


The Golden Road to Open Access: Reciprocity

TO

MAXIMIZE IMPACT

MAXIMIZE ACCESS

(1) Draft university policy for the self-archiving of all university research output (preprint and postprint):

http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lac/archpol.html




(2) Proposal for a UK national policy of university self-archiving for all

refereed research output for research assessment

http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Temp/Ariadne-RAE.doc

as a model for the rest of the world










(3) Template and demo for a standardized university online-CV with

harvestable performance indicators and links to the institutional Eprint

Archivehttp://paracite.eprints.org/cgi-bin/rae_front.cgi

http://paracite.eprints.org/cgi-bin/rae_front.cgi


(4) ____: A scientometric and webmetric search engine that can

calculate traditional and new measures of research impact, _____ a tool for finding and linking citations on the

web http://citebase.eprints.org/help/

http://opcit.eprints.org/evaluation/Citebase-evaluation/evaluation-report.html

http://paracite.eprints.org/

http://citebase.eprints.org/help/






http://paracite.eprints.org/


(5) The crucial role of reciprocity in open access: “Self-archive unto others

as ye would have them self-archive unto you.”

http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Temp/unto-others.doc

http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Temp/self-archiving.ppt













(6) RoMEO Project (Loughborough)(Rights MEtadata for Open archiving)

Proportion of journals formally supporting self-archiving (already 50%) continues to grow

Journals % Publishers %

Totals so far: 7,169 (100%) 83 (100%)

Formally supporting self-archiving ofEITHER preprint,

post-printor both:

3,501 49.3% 33 39.7%

-- both: 1,209 16.8% 20 24%

-- pre: 2,195 30.6% 7 8.4%

-- post: 136 1.9% 7 8.4%

Not yet formally supportingself-archiving:

3,629 50.6% 49 59%

http://www.lboro.ac.uk/departments/ls/disresearch/romeo


(7) The BOAI Self-Archiving FAQ

http://www.eprints.org/self-faq/

http://www.soros.org/openaccess/

ŹBudapest Open Access Initiative





““Skywriting”: All research, accessible to all potential users, anywhere, anytimeSkywriting”: All research, accessible to all potential users, anywhere, anytime““Skywriting”: All research, accessible to all potential users, anywhere, anytimeSkywriting”: All research, accessible to all potential users, anywhere, anytime

New impact cycles: New research builds on existing research

Researchers can access the Post-Print if their university has a subscription to the Journal

Refereed “Post-Print” Accepted, Certified, Published by Journal

Impact cycle begins:Research is done

Researchers write pre-refereeing

“Pre-Print”

Submitted to Journal

Pre-Print reviewed by Peer Experts – “Peer-Review”

Pre-Print revised by article’s Authors

M axim ized R esearch A ccess and Im pact Through S e lf-A rch iv ing

Pre-Print self-archived to

University’s Eprint Website

Post-Print self-archived to

University’s Eprint Website

12-1

8 M

on

ths

New impact cycles:Self-archived researchimpact is greater (and

faster) because access is maximized (and

accelerated)


“Online or Invisible?” (Lawrence 2001)

“average of 336% more citations to online articles compared to offline articles published in the same venue”

Lawrence, S. (2001) Free online availability substantially increases a paper's impact Nature 411 (6837): 521.

http://www.neci.nec.com/~lawrence/papers/online-nature01/

http://www.neci.nec.com/~lawrence/papers/online-nature01/


Research Assessment, Research Funding, and Citation Impact

“Correlation between RAE ratings and mean departmental citations +0.91 (1996) +0.86+0.86 (2001) (Psychology)”

“RAE and citation counting measure broadly the same thing”

“Citation counting is both more cost-effective and more transparent”

(Eysenck & Smith 2002)

http://psyserver.pc.rhbnc.ac.uk/citations.pdf

http://psyserver.pc.rhbnc.ac.uk/citations.pdf


The objective of open-access is:

• not to quarrel with or to replace journals (at all). _______________________________________________

1. not to resolve the budgetary problems of libraries (and yet…)

2. not to provide access to teachers - students - the general public - (and yet…)

3. not to provide access to the Developing World (and yet…)


The objective of open-access is:

to maximize research impact

by maximizing research access


Research Impact

I. measures the size of a research contribution to further research

II. generates further research funding

III. contributes to the research productivity and financial support of the researcher’s institution

IV. advances the researcher’s career

V. promotes research progress


Some old and new scientometric (“publish or perish”) indices of

research impact

• quality-level and citation-counts of the journal in which the article appears

• citation-counts for the article• citation-counts for the researcher• co-citations, co-text (cited with whom/what else?)• citation-counts for the preprint • usage-measures (“hits,” webmetrics)• time-course analyses, early predictors, etc. etc.


Time-Course of Citations (red) and Usage (hits, green)

Witten, Edward (1998) Anti De Sitter Space And Holography ADV.THEOR.MATH.PHYS 2 : 253


The Usage/Citation Correlation (hep, astro, cond, quantum; math, comp)

All r=.27, n=219328Q1 (lo) r=.26, n=54832

Q2 r=.18, n=54832

Q3 r=.28, n=54832

Q4 (hi) r=.34, n=54832

hep r=.33, n=74020 Q1 (lo) r=.23, n=18505

Q2 r=.23, n=18505

Q3 r=.30, n=18505

Q4 (hi) r=.50, n=18505

(correlation is highest for high-citation papers/authors)

LIMITED ACCESS

LIMITED IMPACT

MAXIMAL IMPACT

OPEN ACCESS

LIMITED ACCESS

LIMITED IMPACT


http://www.eprints.org/self-faq/Harnad, S. (1990) Scholarly Skywriting and the Prepublication

Continuum of Scientific Inquiry. Psychological Science 1: 342 - 343 (reprinted in Current Contents 45: 9-13, November 11 1991). http://cogprints.soton.ac.uk/documents/disk0/00/00/15/81/

Harnad, S. (1994) A Subversive Proposal. In: Ann Okerson & James O'Donnell (Eds.) Scholarly Journals at the Crossroads: A Subversive Proposal for Electronic Publishing. Washington, DC., Association of Research Libraries, June 1995. http://www.arl.org/scomm/subversive/toc.html

Harnad, S. (2001) For Whom the Gate Tolls? How and Why to Free the Refereed Research Literature Online Through Author/Institution Self-Archiving, Now. http://cogprints.soton.ac.uk/documents/disk0/00/00/16/39/

Harnad, S. (2001) Research access, impact and assessment.Times Higher Education Supplement 1487: p. 16. http://www.cogsci.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Tp/thes1.html

http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/intpub.html



http://cogprints.soton.ac.uk/documents/disk0/00/00/15/81/

http://www.arl.org/scomm/subversive/toc.html

http://cogprints.soton.ac.uk/documents/disk0/00/00/16/39/

http://www.cogsci.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Tp/thes1.html

http://www.cogsci.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Tp/thes1.html




Specific Proposal forSynergies Network

To maximize the visibility and impact of Canadian SS/H Research:• Support the creation and start-up of a network of University OAI

Archives for all University research output (pre-refereeing preprints and refereed postprints)

• This will not only maximize Canadian SS/H research impact (the primary goal) but it will also allow Canadian Refereed Journals to (1) go inline, (2) cut their costs, (3) ensure their future, and (4) increase their own visibility and impact, by (5) offloading all of their online archiving, distribution and access onto the Synergies Network. (If/when they wish to (6) convert to becoming open-access journals, (7) providing peer-review only, they are perfectly positioned to do so)

• In doing this Canada will also set a model for and lead the world in the movement toward open access to refereed research.

Specific Proposal for Synergies Network

Documents

Transcript of Specific Proposal for Synergies Network