User:Daniel Mietchen/Talks/DINI-Helmholtz Workshop on author identification/Notes

Thoughts on author identification
Items marked in bold have not been discussed in detail by previous discussants.


 * Easily expandable open standard (plugin architecture).
 * Use of author identification in non-traditional publishing settings
 * Altmetrics


 * Highlight the contributions of reviewers; works best for public peer review
 * Grants - would be important (e.g. to find collaborators, and to avoid reinventions of the wheel) to be able to find not just approved grants but also proposals that are under review or have been rejected; requires openness.
 * Hans Pfeiffenberger already mentioned the Royal Society's report on science as a public enterprise
 * If it isn't accessible, it can't be verified, so we can either trust it or not.
 * So reproducibility requires (1) permanent archiving, (2) openness.


 * Contributors: to open notebooks or citizen science projects
 * Could be young scientists


 * Impact of author identification on newcomers to a field
 * "Researchers of Tomorrow" study
 * "I have X Karma points at Stack Overflow"
 * "I wrote Y% of the current version of the [insert venue of your choice] article on Z"
 * e.g. Topic Pages, or Wikigenes
 * "I coded/maintain module A of software package B"


 * What about inherited authorship in reuse scenarios?
 * Reuse stats at article and file level
 * Same can be done for users or institutions too


 * Role of bots or authors of software or infrastructure?
 * Integration of author (etc.) identification schemes with workflows (of authors, reviewers, publishers, funders, institutions etc.)
 * Nanopublications
 * Plagiarism
 * VIAF and PND and other authority control systems implemented on Wikipedia
 * Authority control integration proposal