24小时热门版块排行榜    

查看: 386  |  回复: 2
当前主题已经存档。
当前只显示满足指定条件的回帖,点击这里查看本话题的所有回帖

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

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
查看全部 3 个回答
☆ 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] 应该是93bebmhtak前后十一个字符比较关键 +22 Lanmanbaby 2026-08-09 36/1800 2026-08-12 22:50 by sdfapple719
[基金申请] 不应该看fileCode +5 且听虎啸 2026-08-12 6/300 2026-08-12 16:26 by Tide man
[基金申请] 综述论文作为代表作会不会影响评审专家的印象分? +11 yufeiwaner 2026-08-09 13/650 2026-08-12 08:17 by yufeiwaner
[基金申请] 是这周出结果还是下周出结果? +3 yuleib84 2026-08-11 3/150 2026-08-11 21:53 by jnhyjjm
[基金申请] 有时候,自然基金真的不能太认真 (我的申报经验) +3 majunge000 2026-08-11 4/200 2026-08-11 20:13 by lch2012
[基金申请] 帮忙看看fileCode +7 wwncly 2026-08-10 13/650 2026-08-11 19:36 by 冰心玉壶晴
[基金申请] 什么时候出结果,有咨询渠道??? +3 Tide man 2026-08-11 3/150 2026-08-11 17:54 by kudofaye
[基金申请] 分享一下我之前已中青C的计划书的filecode +3 布布和一二 2026-08-11 4/200 2026-08-11 15:20 by aasahr
[基金申请] 听说今天filecode变了 +26 布布和一二 2026-08-06 49/2450 2026-08-11 13:18 by WH3796
[基金申请] 静等基金结果 +5 gjjjzhong 2026-08-10 16/800 2026-08-10 17:19 by Tide man
[基金申请] 2026国自然放榜时间 +9 布布和一二 2026-08-08 9/450 2026-08-10 11:22 by xxxx2020
[基金申请] 面上项目filecode邪修 +5 西山十月 2026-08-09 7/350 2026-08-10 07:32 by 仁砚薪传
[基金申请] filecode与中标关系的预测 +5 布布和一二 2026-08-07 5/250 2026-08-09 16:15 by 袁向阳007
[基金申请] 关于filecode,很负责任的告诉大家 +6 爱看书的可乐 2026-08-08 7/350 2026-08-08 22:13 by a_niu
[基金申请] 国基金的申报应该改成非等额制,评价高的钱多评价低的钱少,但是增加资助率 +7 a089 2026-08-07 7/350 2026-08-08 18:05 by gltch
[基金申请] 化学口download_prp&fileCode的固定段好像这几天一直没变,有变的大神么? +3 Tide man 2026-08-07 4/200 2026-08-07 22:39 by Tide man
[基金申请] 固定端突然变了,今天 +6 archvillain 2026-08-06 10/500 2026-08-07 16:03 by 医学老男孩
[基金申请] filecode变化情况 +6 布布和一二 2026-08-07 22/1100 2026-08-07 14:45 by 且听虎啸
[基金申请] filecode +14 等待解的谜 2026-08-06 19/950 2026-08-07 12:20 by wlwhappy
[基金申请] filecode +8 布布和一二 2026-08-06 11/550 2026-08-06 20:41 by tangpu318
信息提示
请填处理意见