ACRL Policy Statement on Open Access to Scholarship by Academic Librarians, Draft Revision Feedback – ACRL Insider

“The ACRL Research and Scholarly Environment Committee (ReSEC) is seeking community input on proposed revisions to the ACRL Policy Statement on Open Access to Scholarship by Academic Librarians, approved by the ACRL Board of Directors during the 2016 ALA Annual Conference….

Please review the draft revision (PDF) on the ACRL website and send your feedback by July 1, 2018 to Steven Harris (….”

Reducing Bias in Scientific Publication through an Open Access Repository

Abstract:  Heuristics (or intuitions), while quite often helpful, can lead to mistakes when they are not fit for a particular environment. As a result, heuristics can be detrimental to a scientific endeavor, where the researcher is expected to remain as accurate, impartial, and logical as possible. This tendency of individuals to use faulty intuitions is one of the main reasons for the existence of a peer-review process in academe. Due to the current system of journal publication and peerreview, however, there is a high potential for bias in scientific publishing. Researchers may be risk averse, attempting to research that which they think will receive funding and get published. “Salami-slicing” works to increase one’s publication count, only publishing novel and positive results, and overselling the impacts of results have all become common practices to get ahead. Referees in the journal peer-review process may also be biased in their assessments of what research meets their standards. Journals that do not accept replication studies, articles that go against the prevailing paradigm, or experiments that do not meet the .05 statistical significance cut-off inadvertently skew the scientific knowledgebase. Possible solutions to the biases in the current system of journal publishing and peer-review will be considered, particularly the acceptance of a centralized open access repository. If researchers utilize one repository that collects all research and publishes before the review process, biases concerning publication may be avoided entirely and the quality of research may be assessed after the fact. Instead of one bias that is enforced, postpublication review may allow for a proliferation of paradigms to emerge. One commonly used and agreed upon centralized open access repository would also allow for new journals to arise that are more domain-specific. Such a solution would increase the speed of discovery, innovation, and greatly facilitate scientific advancement.

Agile Knowledge Engineering and Semantic Web (AKSW) — Agile Knowledge Engineering and Semantic Web (AKSW)

“The Research Group Agile Knowledge Engineering and Semantic Web (AKSW) is hosted by the Chair of Business Information Systems (BIS) of the Institute of Computer Science (IfI) / University of Leipzig as well as the Institute for Applied Informatics (InfAI).


  • Development of methods, tools and applications for adaptive Knowledge Engineering in the context of the Semantic Web
  • Research of underlying Semantic Web technologies and development of fundamental Semantic Web tools and applications
  • Maturation of strategies for fruitfully combining the Social Web paradigms with semantic knowledge representation techniques

AKSW is committed to the free softwareopen sourceopen access and open knowledge movements.”


“This semantic wiki at OpenResearch aims at making the world of science more visible and accessible. Information about scientific events, research projects, publishers, journals etc. is scattered around on the Web. For researchers (especially young ones without decades of experience) it is often difficult to find the relevant venues, people or tools. Also research is increasingly dynamic and multi-disciplinary, so the boundaries between communities blur and new research directions emerge. With this semantic Wiki, we aim to make information about scientific events, research groups, tools, journals etc. more accessible. OpenResearch is not restricted to any field of science….”

EUREKA by ScienceMatters

“EUREKA is a scientific review and rating platform fuelled by the EUREKA token. Blockchain has the capacity to open science and make research findings immutable, transparent and decentralised. EUREKA revolutionises the scientific publishing and reviewing process by making it more efficient and fair using the EUREKA token to compensate all parties involved. Scientific discoveries can now be openly rated and rewarded based on the quality of the research….

Scientific observations are timestamped, hashed and recorded on the Ethereum blockchain. This gives the author or inventor immediate ownership rights, and ensures scientists’ and researchers’ discoveries are tamper-proof….

Scientific observations undergo crowdsourced, peer-to-peer reviews which are transmitted and recorded on the EUREKA platform. The EUREKA platform will make use of crowdsourced wisdom and reviewers to get fast, accurate evaluations of the work, instead of being restricted to one or two reviewers, as is common practice….

The EUREKA platform’s crowdsourced scoring of scientific work will provide researchers as well as publishers with a new metric that can be used to evaluate submissions more swiftly. Preprints or observations with ratings and reviews will be archived through the EUREKA decentralised and distributed system. In cases where the author wants to publish in a traditional journal, the scores can be transferred to the journals. The test scores are also available to funders, universities and prize or awards committees….”

Open Access Key

“The Open Access Key, or OAK for short, is a unique, new financial platform to manage, consolidate and process publication fees incurred in Open Access Publishing. It has been designed to reduce your time, effort and expenditure and to connect individual authors to their universities, researcher funders and learned societies.

OAK is a global company delivering its services to authors, institutions and publishers around the world. It has been designed using the latest web and business softwares by a technology team based in Norway and Denmark. We built the platform engaging advice and guidance from all participants in OA Publishing. OAK is a system which meets and will continue to meet the needs of all involved….”

Open Access Policy Adopted by IU Bloomington Faculty | Indiana University Libraries

“In 2017, the Bloomington Faculty Council unanimously approved an Open Access policy that ensures that faculty scholarship will be accessible and available to the public for future generations. Adopting such a policy reduces barriers to research and learning by making research available on the public internet to be downloaded and shared freely, making it possible for scholarship to be more widely read and cited than literature that appears in closed-access, licensed journal databases. The policy can be found at IUB’s VPFAA site and an FAQ has been posted to our website. The Scholarly Communication staff will be available to help authors deposit their work in IUScholarWorks Open, our repository for the Open Access policy.. Faculty members may also contact us to opt-out of the policy or opt-out themselves using the same repository. Resources are available for faculty who are interested in learning more about the impact and implementation of the policy. Please direct questions to or the Office of the Vice Provost for Faculty and Academic Affairs.”

KU Leuven supports a fair approach to scholarly publishing – Open Access Belgium

“KU Leuven launches the KU Leuven Fund for Fair Open Access, enabling the publication of scholarly books and articles in a way that is cost-effective, puts academics back in charge and benefits the public at large. For many years now, opposition against a commercial approach towards scholarly publishing has been growing stronger and stronger. The for-profit model leads to publications which are prohibitively expensive, either for the reader or for the researcher, and typically puts commercial partners in control of the dissemination of scholarly work since researchers have to transfer critical aspects of their author’s rights in order to get published. Alternatives such as Green Open Access (whereby researchers make an archival copy of their publication freely available to all), in most fields, do not challenge the traditional commercial publication model enough. Therefore, another alternative is on the rise, namely Fair Open Access. Publications in Fair Open Access are immediately freely available to all, are produced according to cost-effective (rather than commercial) principles and guarantee full control of researchers over the entire publication process. KU Leuven has been supporting Green Open Access for many years already, and now intensifies its efforts to maximize scholarly exchange, collaboration and innovation by creating the KU Leuven Fund for Fair Open Access, administered by KU Leuven Libraries. This fund provides financial support for the production costs of books published by Leuven University Press as well as articles in selected journals, on the condition that these journals are published according to the Fair Open Access model and maintain the highest academic standards. More information and application forms can be found here.”