You are allowed to have a nuanced opinion about AI

To accelerate the understanding of Parkinson’s disease, improve treatment, and, ultimately, find a cure, two prominent funders in the field have recently expanded their requirements for grantees to…

The Open Research Funders Group (ORFG) is pleased to welcome The Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research (MJFF) as its newest contributing member.

Tools for reliably estimating what artificial intelligence is being used for are still lacking.

About Guest Posts The openRxiv blog includes occasional guest posts on different aspects of science communication and open research. This allows us to provide space for new perspectives from groups pi...

In this preprint the authors propose a shift in what counts in the biomedical sciences: researchers should be recognized for what they choose to share on their own terms and timeline (for example as p...

OR: the Halo theory of science

A STAT analysis of vaccine recommendations in 38 countries suggests the U.S. is now an outlier.

Part 4 of a 5-part series on the politics of preservation and power.

This article offers a reasoned call for urgent reform of the academic journal publishing system. It focuses on the ethical flaws of the current for-profit model. This model enables the transfer of public funds into the profit margins of private companies that add no meaningful value to research and even limit access to knowledge. The article describes how feedback loops in metrics used in the evaluation of scientific publishing exacerbate structural inequalities and make it difficult to break out of the system. Moreover, the opportunity for easy profit attracts dishonest actors and fuels the rise of predatory journals, which in turn corrodes public trust in science. Without systemic reforms, the current system could also undermine artificial intelligence–driven research outcomes by enabling models to be trained on a growing number of substandard scientific publications. The article concludes with ten specific proposals for action, aimed at stimulating further discussion within and beyond academia.

Have the interests of commercial publishers now become antithetical to the pursuit of knowledge?

By Richard Sever, PhD. Chief Science & Strategy Officer, openRxiv Preprints speed up science by enabling researchers to disseminate reports of new findings immediately. They also represent a simple wa...

MODERATOR:  Jonathan Schultz American Heart Association Editor-in-Chief, Science Editor SPEAKERS: Michele Avissar-Whiting Howard Hughes Medical Institute Chhavi Chauhan American Society for Investigat...

The layoffs jeopardize this resource, which has served more than 4,000 labs for about three decades.

As the journal Nature moves to publish peer review reports for accepted papers, Bodo Stern argues this partial openness falls short of true transparency.

Instructions in preprints from 14 universities highlight controversy on AI in peer review

Home page for the paper ‘The Strain on Scientific Publishing’ by Mark A Hanson, Dan Brockington, Paolo Crosetto and Pablo Gomez Barreiro