[Academia] Fwd: la (r)evolución blockchain: Ciencia Abierta que revolucionará el modelo de publicación y la bibliometría por citas
Juan Manuel Mancilla Díaz
jmmd en unam.mx
Vie Dic 8 18:45:30 CST 2017
Envío la siguiente información que podría ser de su interés
Saludos,
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: SCIELO MEXICO <scielo en dgb.unam.mx>
Date: 2017-12-08 17:57 GMT-06:00
Subject: la (r)evolución blockchain: Ciencia Abierta que revolucionará el
modelo de publicación y la bibliometría por citas
To: "scielo en dgb.unam.mx" <scielo en dgb.unam.mx>
La tecnología de las criptodivisas -a la bitcoin- que está revolucionando
el mundo financiero se aplica a la investigación y difusión científicas,
¿Qué significa todo esto y cuáles serían sus repercusiones?
Seguramente, esta nota deja más dudas que aclaraciones, pero hay que
empezar a seguir el tema:
- El informe publicado por Digital Science (Blockchain for Research:
Perspectives on a New Paradigm for Scholarly Communication
<https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.5607778>) explora el impacto que la
tecnología podría tener en la comunicación e investigación académicas.
- La tecnología *Blockchain* tiene el potencial de transformar la
investigación y, en particular, la comunicación académica. Permite que los
datos se almacenen en una base de datos abierta y descentralizada, sin
ninguna autoridad central. A medida que la tecnología avanza, podrían
resolverse algunos de los desafíos a los que se enfrenta la investigación
(transparencia, accesibilidad, reproducibilidad y asignación de créditos).
- Actualmente, existen cientos de iniciativas de "blockchain", entre las
cuales destacan Bitcoin o criptomoneda digital.
- El "*Blockchain for Science*", creado por un grupo de expertos
dirigidos por el Dr. Soenke Bartling, tiene como objetivo 'abrir la ciencia
y la creación de conocimiento mediante la (r)evolución blockchain'.
- Según Bartling, el uso de blockchain en la investigación permitirá
significativos avances para los investigadores al superar el trabajo por
separado y en sistemas desconectados. Permitirá que mayores segmentos del
ciclo de la investigación se abran a la auto-corrección, y tiene el
potencial para abordar la crisis de reproducibilidad y credibilidad que
actualmente afecta a la ciencia, así como en la reducción de gastos
generales.
- Apuntan en este sentido cualidades como : aceleramiento del flujo de
trabajo y reducción del error; permitir a los investigadores publicar un
texto o archivo con ideas, resultados o simplemente datos; registro de
diseños de estudio utilizando el blockchain; aplicación de la metología
blockchain para los protocolos de investigación antes de recopilar datos;
automatización del procesamiento y análisis de datos; mejoramiento de la
revisión por pares ya que estarían dispoibles el blockchain y datos
subyacentes a los resultados de la investigación.
- Además, el blockchain podría subvertir los modelos comerciales
actuales de diseminación de los artículos de investigación: tanto el modelo
de suscripción y el de acceso abierto. El modelo de blockchain podría ser
sustentable mediante micropagos en una cadena de bloques.
- La (r)evolución blockchain impactaría también en la medición del
impacto y reconocimiento a los investigadores, ya que se haría factible
rastrear automáticamente toda la actividad de un investigador cada vez que
crea datos, realiza análisis estadísticos, escribe un artículo o revisa un
manuscrito. Se crearían así métricas más sofisticadas y confiables. Apunta
hacia esto el manifiesto "Hacia la ciencia abierta: el caso de un sistema
autónomo descentralizado de *aprobación*" (Towards Open Science: The
Case for a Decentralized Autonomous Endorsement System
<https://zenodo.org/record/60054#.WhwGNrQ-dmA> ), publicado de forma
anónima. Este sistema de aprobación académica (AES) se basaría en puntos de
validación académica (AEP), que se podrían utilizar para recompensar un
trabajo digno de validación. Cualquier resultado o contribución de la
investigación (difundido como blogposts, conjuntos de datos, software,
etc.) podría en teoría registrarse y aprobarse instantáneamente. Esta
evaluación sería significativamente más rápida que el tiempo que demoran
las métricas basadas en citas recibidas
************************************************************
**************************************
Publicado en *Research Information*
<https://www.researchinformation.info/news/analysis-opinion/what-blockchain-research>
What is blockchain for research?
28 November 2017
inShare3
*Jon Treadway (pictured) and Joris Van Rossum* explain Digital Science's
new report, Blockchain for Research: Perspectives on a New Paradigm for
Scholarly Communication, exploring the impact the technology could have on
scholarly communication and research
Digital Science has recently published a new report,Blockchain for
Research: Perspectives on a New Paradigm for Scholarly Communication
<https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.5607778>. The report explores the
potential impact blockchain could have on scholarly communication and
research.
Blockchain technology has the potential to transform research, and in
particular scholarly communication. It allows data to be stored in an open,
decentralised database, without any central authority. As the technology
progresses and is adopted, some of the familiar challenges facing research
– transparency, accessibility, reproducibility and assignment of credit –
may become solvable.
There are hundreds of blockchain initiatives, but the best known is the
digital cryptocurrency, or crypto asset, Bitcoin. Financial transactions
are conducted using bitcoins and broadcast to the peer-to-peer network. A
ledger of all historic transactions is created and shared. Ethereum is
another well-known example - it is broader than a financial transaction
system and runs smart contracts that are safeguarded from any other
third-party interference. Developers are able to build applications on top
of the infrastructure.
‘Blockchain for Science <http://www.blockchainforscience.com/>’, a think
tank founded by Dr. Soenke Bartling, aims to ‘open up science and knowledge
creation by means of the blockchain (r)evolution’. The organisation
maintains a living document collecting ideas on how blockchain could open
up science and knowledge creation.
According to Bartling, the use of blockchain in research instead of working
on separate, disconnected systems would bring significant advantages to
researchers. It would make larger parts of the research cycle open to
self-correction, and could be a new potential to addressing the
reproducibility and credibility crisis as well as reducing overhead. The
team proposes an array of applications for the blockchain within science,
including:
- Automatically uploading, time-stamping and where necessary, encrypting
research data;
- Speeding up the research workflow and reducing error;
- Providing a notarisation function by allowing researchers to post a
text or file with ideas, results or simply data;
- Registering study designs using the blockchain;
- Smart contracts could be used so that research protocols are set in
‘blockchain stone’ before data is collected, and processing and analysis
would be automated; and
- The peer review process could greatly improve through the blockchain
and data underlying the published results could be made available.
Bartling argues that the blockchain 'bears the unique chance to realign
science’s incentive structures with honesty, effectiveness, collaboration
and true inventiveness'.
The blockchain could change the business model underlying the dissemination
of research articles. The subscription model and open access, the current
dominant business models, each come with disadvantages. Access and usage
could be granted with micropayments on a blockchain, and this would be a
different, and possibly sustainable model.
Research on the blockchain could also have an impact on the way researchers
build their reputation. Whenever a researcher creates data, performs
statistical analysis, writes an article or reviews a manuscript, it could
be automatically tracked and recorded. This would allow for more
sophisticated and reliable metrics. A reform of academic endorsement is
proposed in the manifesto ‘Towards Open Science: The Case for a
Decentralized Autonomous Endorsement System
<https://zenodo.org/record/60054#.WhwGNrQ-dmA>’, published anonymously. An
academic endorsement system (AES) is put forward built on the blockchain,
based on academic endorsement points (AEP), which can be used to reward
work worthy of validation. Researchers whose output is endorsed to a high
degree obtain more points, and thus greater influence in the community. Any
research output or contribution – blogposts, data sets, software etc –
could in theory be be recorded and endorsed instantaneously. Significantly
faster than the time it takes for citation metrics to accrue, at least. But
this is just one of the possibilities.
Research appears to be highly amenable to the blockchain but any new
technology is susceptible to hype and overstatement of its potential
impact. In the article ‘Do you really need a blockchain for that’
<https://coincenter.org/entry/do-you-really-need-a-blockchain-for-that>, a
checklist is presented to determine whether a blockchain really is a
solution, or whether improvements could be achieved without it.
So will research and scholarly communication eventually take place on the
blockchain?
In light of its potential to solve challenges in the current ecosystem, it
is tempting to predict that scholarly communication and other research
activities will eventually take place on the blockchain.
However, science has evolved over hundreds of years, and with its history
comes a significant amount of legacy in technology, systems, organisation
as well as culture. This legacy makes any change difficult, despite the
challenges associated with the current system.
Moreover, there is an aspect of blockchain that makes a transition to this
technology even more challenging. Adopting a blockchain for research
successfully implies that it is adopted widely, and this requires a
fundamental transformation at the level of funders, institutions,
publishers, as well as researchers themselves, which increases the level of
change required.
The likelihood and success of a blockchain for scholarly communication also
depends on its level of implementation. For example, information stored on
the blockchain could be restricted to traditional researcher roles,
publications and use of content (e.g. authorship of scientific articles,
usage and citations). But it could also reward unconventional roles and
affect wider aspects of the research workflow including peer review,
publication of datasets, hypotheses, etc., which would increase the level
of complexity. The blockchain, however, could have an even broader scope,
transcending scholarly communication. Lab equipment and resources could be
shared amongst research groups using the blockchain, with aspects such as
credit or financial compensation being managed through the platform.
Funding could also take place using a blockchain, and spending could be
tracked and made transparent.
Whether scholarly communication takes place on a blockchain will also
depend on developments in adjacent fields. In education, for example,
blockchain developments are moving at a faster pace. Blockcerts
<https://www.blockcerts.org/>, developed by MIT’s Media Lab
<http://learn.media.mit.edu/> and Learning Machine
<http://www.learningmachine.com/>, is an open initiative that has
introduced verifiable blockchain-based certificates for academic
credentials (amongst others).
Another example is Sony, which announced
<https://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Press/201708/17-071E/index.html>in the
summer of 2017 that it has finished developing a digital system for storing
and managing educational records on the blockchain Obviously there is an
overlap between an educational record and the academic record of a
scientist, so it is possible that developments in education may speed up
the development of a blockchain in research as well.
*Jon Treadway is chief operating officer at Digital Science; Joris Van
Rossum is Digital Science’s director of special projects*
------------ próxima parte ------------
Se ha borrado un adjunto en formato HTML...
URL: <http://tlali.iztacala.unam.mx/pipermail/academia/attachments/20171208/b52380de/attachment-0001.html>
Más información sobre la lista de distribución Academia