24小时热门版块排行榜    

查看: 390  |  回复: 2
当前主题已经存档。

xwnippon

至尊木虫 (职业作家)


[资源] 【2009-03-18】ISPR/KGCM 2009

Only 8% members of the Scientific Research Society agreed that "peer review
works well as it is". (Chubin and Hackett, 1990; p.192).

"A recent U.S. Supreme Court decision and an analysis of the peer review
system substantiate complaints about this fundamental aspect of scientific
research." (Horrobin, 2001)

Horrobin concludes that peer review "is a non-validated charade whose
processes generate results little better than does chance." (Horrobin, 2001).
This has been statistically proven and reported by an increasing number of
journal editors.

But, "Peer Review is one of the sacred pillars of the scientific edifice"
(Goodstein, 2000), it is a necessary condition in quality assurance for
Scientific/Engineering publications, and "Peer Review is central to the
organization of modern science
…why not apply scientific [and engineering] methods to the peer review
process" (Horrobin, 2001).

This is the purpose of the International Symposium on Peer Reviewing: ISPR
(http://www.ICTconfer.org/ispr) being organized in the context of The 3rd
International Conference on Knowledge Generation, Communication and
Management: KGCM 2009 (http://www.ICTconfer.org/kgcm), which will be held on July
10-13, 2009, in Orlando, Florida, USA.

-------------------------------------------------------
Deadlines for ISPR 2009 and KGCM 2009

March 18th, 2009, for papers/abstracts submissions and Invited Sessions
Proposals
April 13th, 2009: Authors Notification
May 27th, 2009: Camera ready, final version
-------------------------------------------------------

Pre-Conference and Post-conference VIRTUAL sessions (via electronic forums)
will be held for each session included in the conference program, so
sessions' papers can be read before the conference, and authors presenting at the
same session can interact during one week before the conferences, and after
it is over. Authors can also participate in peer-to-peer reviewing in
virtual sessions.

All Submitted papers will be reviewed using a double-blind (at least three
reviewers), non-blind, and participative peer review. Accepted papers of
registered authors will be published in the printed copy and the CD versions
of the Proceedings. The proceedings will also be published via web for Full
Open Access.

All attendees of the last KGCM 2008 conference, and its collocated ones,
were asked to be surveyed online. Those who filled the survey form (602
attendees) rated the conferences with an average of 8.42 on a scale of 10. More
specifically, 58.7% rated them in the range of 8-10, while just 7 attendees
(1.16%) rated them below 5. More details regarding this and other questions
can be found at: http://www.iiis.org/iiis/StatisticsandOpinions/WMSCI2008/

Authors of accepted papers who registered in the conference will have
access to the reviews made to their submission so they can accordingly improve
the final version of their papers. Non-registered authors will not have
access to the reviews of their respective submissions.

All accepted papers where at least one author is registered in the
conference will be included in the hard copy and the CD versions of the conference
proceedings.

For Invited Sessions Proposals, please go to the conference web site. The
best paper of each invited session will also be published in JSCI at no
additional cost for the author Invited session organizers will be co-editors of
the proceedings volume where their session's papers are to be included, and
they will be guest editors of the Journal issue where the best paper
presented at their invited session has been included.

Awards will be granted to the best paper of those presented at each
session. The best 10%-20% of the papers presented at the conference will be
selected from these session's best papers, and will also be published in Volume 7
of JSCI Journal (http://www.j-sci.com/Journal/SCI/), with no additional
cost for their authors. Libraries of journal author's organizations will
receive complimentary subscriptions to at least one volume (6 issues).

Best regards,

ISPR/KGCM 2009 Organizing committee

Chubin, D. R. and Hackett E. J., 1990, Peerless Science, Peer Review and
U.S. Science Policy; New York, State University of New York Press.

Horrobin, D., 2001, "Something Rotten at the Core of Science?" Trends in
Pharmacological Sciences, Vol. 22, No. 2, February 2001. Also at
http://www.whale.to/vaccine/sci.html and
http://post.queensu.ca/~forsdyke/peerrev4.htm (both pages were accessed on
February 1, 2009)

Goodstein, D., 2000, "How Science Works", U.S. Federal Judiciary Reference
Manual on Evidence, pp. 66-72 (referenced in Hoorobin, 2000)
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

lihongwei9912

铜虫 (初入文坛)


感谢楼主发布信息

感谢楼主,
2楼2009-03-11 10:35:53
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

visitor958

至尊木虫 (文坛精英)


有趣的是,这个会议的总主席Dr. Nagib Callaos http://www.iiis2009.org/wmsci/website/default.asp?vc=18

就是最早接收机器论文的会议主席。。。
http://www.univs.cn/newweb/news/news/sports/2005-05-12/52923.html

到这里讨论一下:
http://muchong.com/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=1211112&fpage=1
引用回帖:
Originally posted by xwnippon at 2009-2-24 09:47:
Only 8% members of the Scientific Research Society agreed that "peer review
works well as it is". (Chubin and Hackett, 1990; p.192).

"A recent U.S. Supreme Court decision and an ...

3楼2009-03-11 15:52:04
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
相关版块跳转 我要订阅楼主 xwnippon 的主题更新
☆ 无星级 ★ 一星级 ★★★ 三星级 ★★★★★ 五星级
普通表情 高级回复 (可上传附件)
最具人气热帖推荐 [查看全部] 作者 回/看 最后发表
[基金申请] 中青基了要发朋友圈吗? +3 349506619 2026-08-28 3/150 2026-08-29 10:49 by 木风9012
[考博] 售SCI一区T0P文章,我:8.O.55.1.O54,科目全,可伽急 +3 ASdOkHsho7FD 2026-08-28 5/250 2026-08-29 09:49 by G6APbkg8SA6w
[教师之家] 售SCI一区T0P文章,我:8.O.55.1.O54,科目全,可伽急 +3 ASdOkHsho7FD 2026-08-28 4/200 2026-08-29 09:48 by G6APbkg8SA6w
[考研] 售一区SCI文章T0P,我:8O.551.O54,科目全,可十急 +3 ASdOkHsho7FD 2026-08-28 5/250 2026-08-29 09:39 by G6APbkg8SA6w
[基金申请] 2026年叶企孙基金 +4 bud_bud 2026-08-27 7/350 2026-08-29 07:23 by foolishmani
[博后之家] 售SCI文章,我:8O.5.5.1O.54,科目全,可十急 +3 ASdOkHsho7FD 2026-08-28 4/200 2026-08-29 05:45 by gy1nBQXYQJqL
[基金申请] 为什么资助数各大高校都创新高,自己申请怎么就这么难 +12 Kittylucky 2026-08-27 13/650 2026-08-29 00:04 by superceng
[基金申请] 系统查不到 +11 董八千 2026-08-26 11/550 2026-08-28 18:06 by Leogzhya
[基金申请] 有没有仍没收到信息的 +3 德尚中行 2026-08-27 3/150 2026-08-28 15:24 by rongshuxia
[基金申请] 基金不中,共勉 +11 eulota 2026-08-26 11/550 2026-08-28 14:22 by 火星超人xi
[基金申请] 基金系统什么内容也没有 30+4 winsaint 2026-08-27 9/450 2026-08-28 11:06 by maolC
[基金申请] 申请删除本帖 +6 lyz123lyz 2026-08-27 7/350 2026-08-27 17:31 by 宁静致远sy
[基金申请] 看板上这么多中的,有点像50人群里49个人都是骗子的那种感觉…… +5 a089 2026-08-26 6/300 2026-08-27 14:05 by jonewore
[基金申请] 为什么 国际(地区)合作与交流项目 没有放榜? 10+3 majunge000 2026-08-26 11/550 2026-08-27 08:42 by 北京莱茵编辑
[基金申请] 2026年8月25日国自然放榜前突然收到列入评审专家邮件,有关系吗? +25 木水思豆 2026-08-25 28/1400 2026-08-26 14:53 by draco1987
[基金申请] 出来了 +9 trojank 2026-08-26 9/450 2026-08-26 14:25 by 宝贝虫子
[基金申请] 系统进不去 +4 yanglien 2026-08-26 5/250 2026-08-26 11:10 by wenfengw83
[基金申请] 今天务委会开完了,明天出结果吗 +19 angus9576 2026-08-25 23/1150 2026-08-26 10:03 by zp519
[基金申请] 某些机构,以效率低为荣,以效率低作为存在感 +9 yuleib84 2026-08-25 10/500 2026-08-25 17:14 by alexon
[基金申请] 没有任何消息-是不是就凉了 +9 图啦图啦 2026-08-24 10/500 2026-08-25 11:59 by 南海小哥
信息提示
请填处理意见