Peter is writing up a 1FTE grant proposal for someone to work\non the question how automatic agents and, more interestingly, the blogosphere are changing, no improving, the\ndissemination of scientific literature. He wants our input. To make his work easy, I’ll tag this item pmrgrantproposal\nand would ask everyone to do the same (Peter unfortunately did not suggest a tag himself). Here are pointers to\nblog items I wrote, related to the four themes Peter identifies.
I do not feel much like pointing to bad scientific articles, but want to point to the enormous amount of literature\nbeing discussed in Chemical blogspace:\n60 active chemical blogs discussed just over 1300 peer-reviewed papers from\n213 scientific journals in less than 10 months. The top 5 journals have 133, 78, 68, 57 and 48 papers discussed in\n22, 24, 10, 11 and 18 different blogs respectively. (Peter, if you need more in depth statistics, just let me\nknow…)
\n\nTwo examples where I discuss not-bad-at-all scientific literature:
\n\n\n\nI regularly blog about the chemoinformatics research I do in my blog. A few examples from the last half year:
\n\n", "summary": "Peter is writing up a 1FTE grant proposal for someone to work on the question how automatic agents and, more interestingly, the blogosphere are changing, no improving, the dissemination of scientific literature. He wants our input. To make his work easy, I’ll tag this item pmrgrantproposal and would ask everyone to do the same (Peter unfortunately did not suggest a tag himself). Here are pointers to blog items I wrote, related to the four themes Peter identifies.", "date_published": "2007-10-01T00:00:00+00:00", "date_modified": "2025-03-02T00:00:00+00:00", "tags": ["publishing","pmrgrantproposal","cb"], "authors": [ { "name": "Egon Willighagen", "url": "https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7542-0286" } ] } ] }