[open-science] Examples of scientific progress from text mining. Was: Re: text-mining licence exemplar

[Robert Muetzelfeldt]

Can we please try to keep threads reasonably focussed? This is a 
perfectly reasonable thing to be asking, but it should have its own thread.

Cheers,
Robert



On 06/06/12 15:29, Miller, Andrew (ELS-OXF) wrote:
> Hi
>
> On text-mining theme more generally: could someone please point me to
> reliable examples of scientific progress made via text-mining of
> open-access STM corpus?
>
> Andrew
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: open-science-bounces at lists.okfn.org
> [mailto:open-science-bounces at lists.okfn.org] On Behalf Of
> anthony at beckhome.info
> Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2012 3:23 PM
> To: hpiwowar at gmail.com
> Cc: Mike Taylor; open-science at lists.okfn.org
> Subject: Re: [open-science] text-mining licence exemplar
>
> The editor will take this up with T&F. My aim is for mining in
> perpetuity
> and not the 6 month deal. But, I'm interested in seeing how they
> respond.
>
> In respect of NC - I would never go anywhere near an NC licence.
> Segments
> everything and not open. Much happier with a CC-BY :-)
>
> A
>
>> Rockefellar University Press also has a propriety period and then
> opens up
>> the content.
>>
>> RUP goes further than free/gratis: it makes the content available
> under a
>> CC-BY-SA-NC license.
>> Details<http://www.rupress.org/site/subscriptions/terms.xhtml>
>> .
>>
>> Agreed that this approach is more valuable for text-mining than a 6
> month
>> window of availability. I'd recommend this model... with CC-BY instead
> of
>> CC-BY-SA-NC :)
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> Heather
>>
>> --
>> Heather Piwowar
>>
>> DataONE postdoc with NESCent and Dryad
>>    studying research data sharing and reuse
>>    remotely from Dept of Zoology, UBC, Vancouver Canada
>> http://researchremix.org
>> @researchremix<http://twitter.com/#!/researchremix>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 1:50 PM, Ross Mounce<ross.mounce at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>>>> Can you shame them at least into doing the opposite? NON-open for
> six
>>>>> months, then release under CC BY after that embargo elapses?
>>>>>
>>>>> -- Mike.
>>> For text-mining purposes this would make more sense - it's a good
>>> proposal. Some journals currently operate like this e.g. The
>>> Biological Bulletin http://www.biolbull.org/site/misc/about.xhtml
>>>
>>> which is free (gratis) to access after 1 year.
>>>
>>> Initial free (gratis) access, reverting to subscription access after
> a
>>> given time, to me sounds like a purely promotional activity with no
>>> real helpful research purpose, especially WRT text-mining.
>>>
>>>
>>> Ross
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> open-science mailing list
>>> open-science at lists.okfn.org
>>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
>>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> open-science mailing list
> open-science at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
> Elsevier Limited. Registered Office: The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, Oxford, OX5 1GB, United Kingdom, Registration No. 1982084 (England and Wales).
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> open-science mailing list
> open-science at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
>

-- 
-----


The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.