Arxiv+ ?
On Thursday, Sergey Frolov has given a talk at Quantum Transport group meeting. Second half of his talk was not scientific. Rather, it was about the imperfections of modern science. I must say I initially disliked this part and even showed my dislike to the speaker. Well, there are many traditions/rules/rites in science that are obviously bad, irrational and harmful for science. Is there a point to criticize those or complain about? One could also complain about the fact that scientists must consume food and get rid of waste thereafter, thus being distracted from the research process. The efficiency of such complains would be rather low. It seems so much more efficient to regard the imperfections as external boundary conditions and silently adjust to them.
Of course, these external boundary conditions become more and stringent and one can already forsee science being totally and irreversibly replaced by priopity programs, topsectoren, european flagships and valorisation efforts. It’s too sad to forsee, this is why Sergey’s talk was so irritating. No hables de la soga en casa del ahorcado.
He even dared to criticise the back-bone of modern natural science communication, the Arxiv, calling this awing oblation effort an anachronistic mailing list and a usenet message board. I was disgusted and decided to talk to him afterwards.
This have changed my attitude. It appeared Sergey didn’t just complain: he has certain ideas and suggestions, and I must admit some of them sound quite appealing. Let me explain the Arxiv+ idea, due to Reinier Heeres an him, in a way I understand it.
A concise definition would be: a tailored collaborative framework build on the top of the Arxiv. Let’s have a large research group, an institution, a formal or informal research network of medium-to-large size. They set up a site that provides Arxiv browsing with a set of additional features: those may include annotations, comments, reminders, google-like likes/dislikes, pools, surveys, highlights… add it yourself.
Sergey has skifully provoked me to list the features I would personally like (at the level of Quantum Transport group or our institute). Here it is:
- Function for a user to tag the articles with tags like ‘spin-orbit’, ‘theory’, ‘citing QT’,’useful review’. Tag list is better supplied by admin, while the users can request an addition to tag list.
- Function to add a short comment (signed, dated) to the article like ‘I use Eq. 7 to fit my data, but do not understand its derivation, Vincent, 24-7-2013’ , ‘Cited this in my arXiv:/0789.9087, Sergey, 15-2-2012’.
- Function to do a convenient tag search like I want to see the list of all tagged with ‘spin-orbit’ and ‘nano-tube’ published in 2010-2013 in ETH.
- Naturally, tags and comments related to an article should appear whenever you navigate to the article starting from an arxiv+ window: that may be technically challenging since requires interception of http requests, yet the system would be very confusing otherwise.
- News feature: newly tagged articles, new comments upon arriving to arxiv+.
All this would be useful only if there is a substantial user activity like 5-10 tags/comments per day.
At later stage, one could consider
- Function to upload and link to an article raw data/ technical notes/ref.reports/master/PhD theses (local storage should be arranged, requires a permission settings feature), extremely useful on a long time-scale.
- Function to make user-specific collections with user-specific comments (if this function is provided from the beginning, no collective effort would ever emerge)
- A convenient interface to journal version.
Do you have a feature idea? Please do not hesitate to comment on this or write to Sergey directly.
