论文标题
原理：分散的同行评审生态系统
PRINCIPIA: a Decentralized Peer-Review Ecosystem
论文作者
论文摘要
同行评审是现代科学努力的基石。但是，越来越多的共识是，当前同行审查系统的几个局限性，从缺乏激励措施到审阅者到缺乏透明度，风险破坏其收益。在这里，我们介绍了有关科学输出的同行（例如，论文，赠款建议或专利）的PECER-REVIEW框架（http://www.principia.network/）框架。该框架允许科学生态系统的主要参与者（包括现有发布小组）通过建立一个自由市场来创建和管理同行评审的期刊，以供评论和出版物。 Princionia的裁判根据他们的努力和评论的质量透明地奖励。 Practia自然还可以通过不依赖第三方的固有声誉系统来识别用户和期刊的声望。 Princionia重新衡量研究人员与出版商之间的权力，刺激裁判员的宝贵评估，有利于期刊之间的公平竞争，并降低访问研究成果和发布的成本。
Peer review is a cornerstone of modern scientific endeavor. However, there is growing consensus that several limitations of the current peer review system, from lack of incentives to reviewers to lack of transparency, risks to undermine its benefits. Here, we introduce the PRINCIPIA (http://www.principia.network/) framework for peer-review of scientific outputs (e.g., papers, grant proposals or patents). The framework allows key players of the scientific ecosystem -- including existing publishing groups -- to create and manage peer-reviewed journals, by building a free market for reviews and publications. PRINCIPIA's referees are transparently rewarded according to their efforts and the quality of their reviews. PRINCIPIA also naturally allows to recognize the prestige of users and journals, with an intrinsic reputation system that does not depend on third-parties. PRINCIPIA re-balances the power between researchers and publishers, stimulates valuable assessments from referees, favors a fair competition between journals, and reduces the costs to access research output and to publish.
