19 FEB 2015 by ideonexus
All Art is Plagiarism
Any text is woven entirely with citations, references, echoes, cultural languages, which cut across it through and through in a vast stereophony. The citations that go to make up a text are anonymous, untraceable, and yet already read; they are quotations without inverted commas. The kernel, the soul — let us go further and say the substance, the bulk, the actual and valuable material of all human utterances — is plagiarism. For substantially all ideas are secondhand, consciously and unco...12 JUN 2012 by ideonexus
Journal Papers Don't Trigger Revolutions
It appears that the extremely important papers that trigger a revolution may not receive a proportionately large number of citations. The normal procedures of referencing are not used for folklore. A real scientific revolution, like any other revolution, is news. The Origin of Species sold out as fast as it could be printed and was denounced from the pulpit almost immediately. Sea-floor spreading has been explained, perhaps not well, in leading newspapers, magazines, books, and most recently ...Folksonomies: science popularization
Folksonomies: science popularization
Science that makes the news does.
17 JAN 2011 by ideonexus
Notes from the "Fun With Citations" Session
No direct quote for this meme.These are general notes summarizing comments from audience members and speakers for this session:
- Taking pdfs extracting text and semantically marking them up, hyperlinking reference lists to their source articles.
- Mendeley http://www.mendeley.com/
- http://www.mendeley.com/research-papers/computer-and-information-science/
- Citations have no meaning the way we use them now.
- Most papers aren’t cited, long tail graph (zitiny ziphian curve graph?)
- Citation Graph, collaborative filtering,.
- Citations need context. How will that happen? Need to know why something was cited (ie. Disagreement).
- We don’t disagree with papers, we disagree with claims made in papers. Why can’t a citation point at a place in the article?
- Question: Is reference extraction beyond the scope of any non-commercial company? Mendeley is a company.
- Answer: There’s no single source of open bibliographic data.
- Sage, SocialSciences,Crossref, webofscience, google scholar, etc – how useful are these sites. They provide metrics and recommendations, but not much more than going directly to the journal.
- Social Networking in article recommendations, connect content to people, conversations around papers, systems don’t encourage conversations, people don’t want to participate.
- Criticism of Mendeley: algorithms shoudl be open, academics should be able to define their own algorithms
- Mendeley's plan is to extract reference data and make it publicly available and machine readable.
- Criticism: academics need an open bibliographic data set.
- Need to explain type of citation: positive vs. negative citations, valence terms, sentiment analysis/machine vs. human curated
- Ontologies don't capture all reasons someone is citing something (ie. "Cited because I work for this journal." "Cited because Darwin will make you think I'm smart." "Cited because teacher required five citations.")
- References are separated into their own section, removing them from the text. Unlike links, which are immediate.
- Peer Review: example of a reviewer rejecting a paper because it didn't cite his own paper.
- People need to make use of the REL attribute in HREF tags.
- Citations can be used in a tribal sens, citing people in our camp and excluding others.
- Description of citations as "frozen footprints in the snow"
- Why do we need 1,000 citation styles?
- Librarian: Questions about citations styles from students are constant and frustrating.
- Orchid: cross-company effort to standardize citations.
- Let people write citations however they want, but add an identifying number.
- Mendeley is developing an open-source citation style editor.
02 JAN 2011 by ideonexus
Page Rank Algorithm and the Kleinberg's HITS algorithm
The most famous quality measure is PageRank [221], discussed earlier, which builds on the intuition that a page which is cited by many other pages is likely to be of significant quality. The insight of PageRank is that the obvious way to subvert that model is to set up a load of dummy pages to cite the page which one wanted to boost. But if a page is cited by many other pages which themselves have a high PageRank, then it is likely to be of high quality. The PageRank method has another intuit...The page rank algorithm is very similar to an algorithm for ranking research papers by counting the number of other papers referencing them.