Re: Peer review under scrutiny from Royal Society

From: Eberhard R. Hilf <hilf_at_PHYSNET.PHYSIK.UNI-OLDENBURG.DE>
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2003 18:42:59 +0100

Dear Colleagues,
distribute first, and quality filters then opens the multitude of
vetting, quality control, open (signed by referee annotations)
and blind refereeing.

Thus the question should not be restricted to 'what is to do to
improve the one channel of blind refereeing' but to which set of
services could be envisaged to be useful, making use of that the
content is already known to the experts via the web.

Clearly, each paper on the web should have a note (metadata) on the
status and level of quality filters it passed.

See, e.g. talks at Cern 01 LIBER Conference,
and at Long Island University

Yours Eberhard
Received on Tue Feb 04 2003 - 17:42:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Dec 10 2010 - 19:46:51 GMT