Lightnews — Scholar-powered news

Pavithran Narayanan @npavi.bsky.social · 2d

"All solutions need not scale to inspire and instruct"! 💯

Prachee Avasthi @pracheeac.bsky.social · 4d

New Blog Post:
Scholarly Communication Is a Research Problem. This Means You.

pracheeac.substack.com/p/scholarly-...

Scholarly Communication Is a Research Problem. This Means You.

Scholarly Communication Is a Research Problem.

pracheeac.substack.com

Pavithran Narayanan @npavi.bsky.social · 10d

💯!

Jonny Coates @jacoates.bsky.social · 10d

I think experiments are brilliant (whether I agree with them or not) and I still give talks about PRC but the coordinated effort to make that the dominant model is where I find problems. It shuts down other experiments which is the opposite of what's really needed right not, imo.

Pavithran Narayanan @npavi.bsky.social · 10d

Oh yes, @prereview.bsky.social is amazing!

1

Pavithran Narayanan @npavi.bsky.social · 10d

I don't know about vested interests but I think one of the stumbling blocks in P-R-C is due to our lack of clarity & consensus about the "C". We don't know what & how we are going to curate and what that product of curation is gonna look like.

But, yes, transparent, honest, inclusive discussion ✅!

Pavithran Narayanan @npavi.bsky.social · 10d

Yes, so then do we also need to define what *changes* are? Should they only be changes in response to peer review or editorial assessment?

I get your point about preprints just getting "branded" analogous to a journal!

1

Pavithran Narayanan @npavi.bsky.social · 10d

For point no. 1, I think we then need to define what constitutes a change! Will it be any kind of a change or those resulting only from peer review/editorial assessment? How will it differ from preprint versioning (which will have a separate DOI ayway)?

Pavithran Narayanan @npavi.bsky.social · 10d

I understand that all info could be displayed alongside a preprint. But, don't you think a reviewed preprint, displayed along with review reports (with or without an editorial assessment) & hosted on a different platform could have a separate DOI? "Reviewed preprint" could be a formal category!

1

Pavithran Narayanan @npavi.bsky.social · 10d

I think it's best to have just 1 identifier if there's no particular necessity for the same object to have multiple ones of the same kind. You rightly refer to versioning & the same may apply to any change an object goes through (like withdrawal or retraction)!

Pavithran Narayanan @npavi.bsky.social · 12d

Oh, I just read through that part & it sounds crazy! I've always remained sceptical of researcher surveys as I don't know if they actually know what they want...!

1

Pavithran Narayanan @npavi.bsky.social · 12d

(2/2) Formalizing "Reviewed Preprints" as a category will have important implications for the P-R-C model & to meaningfully take forward the work undertaken by preprint reviewing platforms like @reviewcommons.org @prereview.bsky.social @peercommunityin.bsky.social @elife.bsky.social, etc.! #PRC

2 1

Pavithran Narayanan @npavi.bsky.social · 12d

(1/2) For the 2nd question, I feel we need an entirely different assignment type like "Reviewed Preprint" or "Assessed Preprint" (for reviewed preprints with editorial assessment)! @ludowaltman.bsky.social @andre-brasil.bsky.social @rorinstitute.bsky.social @crossref.bsky.social @elife.bsky.social

Ludo Waltman @ludowaltman.bsky.social · 13d

We need good practices for DOI registration for publish-review-curate platforms like @metaror.bsky.social and others.

@andre-brasil.bsky.social and I wrote a blog post about this: doi.org/10.64000/76j...

Together with @crossref.bsky.social we hope to receive input from the community on this issue!

Innovation in scientific publishing and its implications for Crossref DOI registration practices - Request for input - Crossref

Lots of exciting innovations are being made in scientific publishing, often raising fundamental questions about established publishing practices. In this guest post, Ludo Waltman and André Brasil disc...

doi.org

2 1 1

Pavithran Narayanan @npavi.bsky.social · 12d

@ludowaltman.bsky.social @andre-brasil.bsky.social & @crossref.bsky.social are requesting input on #DOI registration for P-R-C model!

Ludo Waltman @ludowaltman.bsky.social · 13d

We need good practices for DOI registration for publish-review-curate platforms like @metaror.bsky.social and others.

@andre-brasil.bsky.social and I wrote a blog post about this: doi.org/10.64000/76j...

Together with @crossref.bsky.social we hope to receive input from the community on this issue!

Innovation in scientific publishing and its implications for Crossref DOI registration practices - Request for input - Crossref

Lots of exciting innovations are being made in scientific publishing, often raising fundamental questions about established publishing practices. In this guest post, Ludo Waltman and André Brasil disc...

doi.org

1

Pavithran Narayanan @npavi.bsky.social · 12d

Speaks for the impact that @biorxivpreprint.bsky.social & @medrxivpreprint.bsky.social have come to have on the field!

And the exemplary work led by @richardsever.bsky.social @johninglis.bsky.social - both very much deserving of The Royal Society Research Culture Award 2025!

Samuel Moore @samuelmoore.org · 12d

Yeah, I think it does that too. One person I spoke to made it seem like it is now an expectation in his (biomedical) field to preprint, but in the same way that it's an expectation that journal brand is important.

2

Pavithran Narayanan @npavi.bsky.social · 12d

Preprints need not work against journals, but preprints needn't also be dependent on journals - it'll take quite some time for people to just preprint their work & opt for preprint reviewing (we've just gotten out of not Googling the IF of bioRxiv!!! 😄)!

1

Pavithran Narayanan @npavi.bsky.social · 12d

This is interesting - it'll make institutions take more (almost complete) responsibility for integrity issues but they may also want to invest significant money (& possibly human resource) to make these checks available for everyone!

Richard Sever @richardsever.bsky.social · 12d

We'll probably also see orgs like HHMI push things like data checks upstream, in-house (many institutions, including CSHL, require faculty to run plagiarism and image checks before submitting papers). I'm a bit conflicted about this because of COIs, some bad acts better exposed publicly, etc. 2/n

Pavithran Narayanan @npavi.bsky.social · 12d

"To immediately cap APCs risks turning publishers focused on quality into those that may need to focus on quantity..." - APCs have already made publishers focus on quantity (with or without focus on quality)! Sounds ironic!

1

Pavithran Narayanan @npavi.bsky.social · 12d

Okay, thanks!

1

Pavithran Narayanan @npavi.bsky.social · 12d

Being planned as a hybrid event?

1

Pavithran Narayanan @npavi.bsky.social · 14d

Yes, and I think many funders now actibely mandating preprints has the potential to positively influence the research community towards embracing preprintsand preprint review!

1

Pavithran Narayanan @npavi.bsky.social · 14d

James Butcher, in one of his newsletters, wrote: "many funders believe that they should be able to dictate how and where the work they pay for is published. That’s a dangerous, if increasingly well-trodden, path, in my opinion".

Funders seem to be changing the course of publishing quite swiftly!

1 3

Pavithran Narayanan @npavi.bsky.social · 16d

😅😅😅

1

Pavithran Narayanan @npavi.bsky.social · 16d

Nailed it! But unfortunately for us, #platinum & #diamond are the same (but #green has a chance)!!! 🥲🥲😅 #OpenAccess

1 1

Pavithran Narayanan @npavi.bsky.social · 19d

Digressing slightly here: I don't personally agree with the term "free" (for all types of OA & especially for 💎 OA) as it's technically incorrect & nothing is actually *free*! The definition should reflect that all operational & publication costs borne by some one!

1

Pavithran Narayanan @npavi.bsky.social · Aug 27

Very much befitting - many congratulations @richardsever.bsky.social & @johninglis.bsky.social! 👏👏👏

Richard Sever @richardsever.bsky.social · Aug 27

Very honored to receive the Royal Society Research Culture Award - this represents the work of a great team who've worked non-stop since we launched bioRxiv in 2013 royalsociety.org/news/2025/08... www.cshl.edu/inglis-and-s...

Invisibility cloak pioneer Sir John Pendry awarded Royal Society’s top prize | Royal Society

The Royal Society announces the medals and awards recipients 2025

royalsociety.org

1 3

Pavithran Narayanan @npavi.bsky.social · Aug 27

I may probably lean more towards making preprint peer review work better & widespread. Won't reviewers choosing & gravitating towards a paper be far more better than papers of all *qualities* coming to them? The former would be more spontaneous & organic, I guess!

1