[open-science] open-science Digest, Vol 1039, Issue 1
Peter Suber
peter.suber at gmail.com
Fri Dec 1 18:54:21 UTC 2017
Hi Chris,
Thanks for following up. (Waving back.) Yes, these conference proceedings
will be in DASH, our DSpace repository. But because we're still
implementing the program, we don't yet have a link to share. Stay tuned.
Meantime, another reader of this listserv asked for more details, which I
sent by email. But having written them up, I'll post them here as well:
Conferences organized by Harvard people and held at Harvard may now deposit
any or all conference proceedings in DASH, Harvard’s open-access
repository, at no charge. This is an option and in no sense mandatory. To
take advantage of the option, conference organizers should do the following:
* Provide metadata for each deposit.
* Get ORCIDs for each depositing author.
* Get authors to sign a form granting Harvard permission to make the work
OA through DASH, on terms not more restrictive than the DASH terms of use.
As with the alumni deposit program, we will not accept “dark deposits”
under this program.
* Get authors to sign our assistance authorization form.
* Upload the deposits to the Office for Scholarly Communication.
* Note that authors/presenters need not be Harvard affiliates.
Best,
Peter
Peter Suber
bit.ly/petersuber
On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 7:41 AM, Christopher Erdmann <
christopher_erdmann at ncsu.edu> wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> The conferences are being hosted on the DSpace repository, right? If so,
> is there a link to a hosted conference series that you can send us?
>
> Hope you are well, waving from North Carolina,
> Chris
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 7:00 AM, <open-science-request at lists.okfn.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Send open-science mailing list submissions to
>> open-science at lists.okfn.org
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> open-science-request at lists.okfn.org
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>> open-science-owner at lists.okfn.org
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of open-science digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>> 1. Re: open-science Digest, Vol 1037, Issue 1 (Peter Suber)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2017 13:54:55 -0500
>> From: Peter Suber <peter.suber at gmail.com>
>> To: Christopher Erdmann <christopher_erdmann at ncsu.edu>
>> Cc: open-science <open-science at lists.okfn.org>
>> Subject: Re: [open-science] open-science Digest, Vol 1037, Issue 1
>> Message-ID:
>> <CAB0+At69T7uEZ0-j4PM9HVvBO14cij0JaHzADsmUHYeL_vUH6Q at mail.
>> gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> The Harvard Office for Scholarly Communication just launched a program to
>> distribute the proceedings of Harvard-hosted conferences through the
>> Harvard open-access repository. There is no charge for this service. The
>> program is so new that we haven't even posted an FAQ about it, though
>> we're
>> working on one. Meantime, if anyone wants to learn more details, please
>> just drop me a line.
>>
>> Best,
>> Peter
>>
>> Peter Suber
>> bit.ly/petersuber
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 1:44 PM, Christopher Erdmann <
>> christopher_erdmann at ncsu.edu> wrote:
>>
>> > Thomas, I can sympathize with you. I have repeatedly fielded this
>> question
>> > over the years from researchers hoping to reduce the cost of publishing
>> > conference proceedings, trying to find a faster OA option with more
>> dynamic
>> > functionality. I've often shown researchers OCS (
>> > https://pkpservices.sfu.ca/content/conference-hosting) but they tend to
>> > be disinterested, sometimes based on the functionality or whether it is
>> > indexed in the service they used often. I know in one case, a few years
>> > ago, a group of researchers was quoted roughly $10K to produce a
>> conference
>> > proceedings OA, including a number of services in the deal. This was a
>> > trusted, non-profit publisher in the community, and the researchers were
>> > hoping to avoid using them based on some of the factors I listed above.
>> In
>> > some cases, some of the researchers I've worked with have been fine with
>> > using Zenodo to publish their conference material in a community, but
>> they
>> > seem to be more concerned about archiving their work, and also citing
>> it.
>> >
>> > There are a number of options out there, from OCS, Pensoft Arpha to IOP,
>> > Springer. Truthfully, it would be a great project to gather information
>> on
>> > OA conference publication solutions, costs, indexing, it is an area
>> that is
>> > maybe not given enough attention. It might also be another opportunity
>> to
>> > engage with the research community on OA.
>> >
>> > - Chris
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 7:00 AM, <open-science-request at lists.okfn.org>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> Send open-science mailing list submissions to
>> >> open-science at lists.okfn.org
>> >>
>> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> >> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
>> >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> >> open-science-request at lists.okfn.org
>> >>
>> >> You can reach the person managing the list at
>> >> open-science-owner at lists.okfn.org
>> >>
>> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> >> than "Re: Contents of open-science digest..."
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Today's Topics:
>> >>
>> >> 1. Re: Going open access - conference proceedings (Ingo Keck)
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>
>> >> Message: 1
>> >> Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2017 14:46:41 +0100
>> >> From: Ingo Keck <ingokeck at ingokeck.de>
>> >> To: open-science at lists.okfn.org
>> >> Subject: Re: [open-science] Going open access - conference proceedings
>> >> Message-ID: <4C0B49DF-B659-40C7-AE53-B432A104A625 at ingokeck.de>
>> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>> >>
>> >> Thomas Kluyver <takowl at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> [...]
>> >> > I've been asked to help organise a small engineering conference next
>> >> > September.
>> >>
>> >> Small like 20 people workshop? Or more like 200 people kind of small?
>> >>
>> >> [...]
>> >> > We floated the idea of open access at this year's conference, but
>> there
>> >> > were reservations about the recognition of such papers by
>> universities,
>> >> > grant agencies, etc. Engineering seems to use conference publications
>> >> as a
>> >> > major part of evaluating research, whereas the academic fields I'm
>> more
>> >> > familiar with focus on journal papers. If people don't get a well
>> >> respected
>> >> > publication out of it, they may not be able to justify coming to the
>> >> > conference, and it's so small already that it can't survive many
>> people
>> >> > dropping out.
>> >>
>> >> Let me tell you my experience as academic in computer science (CS) in
>> >> Spain and Germany:
>> >>
>> >> The most important venues for CS are conferences. Typically you need to
>> >> submit a full paper up to 8 pages and, unlike as with journals, you
>> only
>> >> get one shot in the peer review process, because there is no time for a
>> >> long review process: Either it is accepted with small changes or it is
>> >> rejected straight away, and the field moves to fast so that the next
>> time
>> >> the conference comes around your article is probably outdated.
>> >> Conference-hopping is also difficult with conferences because the
>> >> submission window is small and you are not supposed to submit the same
>> work
>> >> at the same time to different venues.
>> >>
>> >> Acceptance rates are somewhere between 10%-50% and the two most common
>> >> proceedings-publishers in my experience (don?t know about your
>> engineers)
>> >> are IEEE and Springer with Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS).
>> LNCS
>> >> is seen as books and does not have an impact factor (IF).
>> >>
>> >> Typically publishers ask you to submit print-ready PDF for the single
>> >> articles _and_ the proceeding and there is not really any service apart
>> >> from providing LaTeX Templates and sometimes free access to a
>> conference
>> >> review system.
>> >>
>> >> The recent movement to evaluate scientists based on their impact factor
>> >> has been particularly harsh for computer scientists, removing the
>> value of
>> >> their past publications and forcing them to publish in other fields,
>> many
>> >> flogging towards medicine with their high IF journals.
>> >>
>> >> Regarding Open Access, all that has been accomplished regarding the
>> green
>> >> way OA mostly ignored the conference proceedings. For example the LNCS
>> >> series has an ISSN, but is seen as books by Springer. Publishers say
>> the
>> >> articles are book chapters and do not allow self-publication of the
>> >> preprints or prefer to not answer the question at all and keep us
>> authors
>> >> in a limbo of insecurity.
>> >>
>> >> Personally, most people I was working with had access to Springer, but
>> >> IEEE always meant going hunting for the pdf somewhere, either directly
>> with
>> >> the authors or via colleagues that had a private membership at IEEE.
>> >>
>> >> > Has anyone dealt with a similar situation before? Are there open
>> access
>> >> > publishers that are well respected in the engineering world?
>> >>
>> >> Apart from maybe IEEE with its focus on America (north+south), well
>> >> respected seems to be a relict from the past in my experience. Famous
>> CS
>> >> conferences like the NIPS now publish open access themselves (
>> >> https://papers.nips.cc).
>> >>
>> >> > Also, can anyone give me an idea of how much more open access
>> >> proceedings
>> >> > are likely to cost? I've never approached publishing from this angle
>> >> > before. I'm familiar with APCs over 1000 for single articles - is it
>> >> simply
>> >> > multiplied by the number of papers in the proceedings?
>> >>
>> >> I recently started my own commercial Open Science publisher (
>> >> https://moringa.pub/) after the experience I had at OK IRL working
>> with
>> >> established academic publishers.
>> >>
>> >> We did not have proceedings in mind when we started, but were recently
>> >> contacted by a local university inquiring about it. So I just happened
>> to
>> >> write an offer to that university a few weeks ago, providing everything
>> >> like the review system, supporting the review process and online OA
>> >> publishing. I would be happy to make you an offer as well if you send
>> me
>> >> more details what you need via email. ;-)
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> From publisher side I can tell you that you will not find APC?s below
>> ca
>> >> 100 EUR per article because that is, including taxes, roughly the bare
>> cost
>> >> of publishing an article. If someone charges less they get money or
>> >> resources somewhere else. Springer for example takes 38 EUR + tax per
>> page
>> >> for full OA (golden way), so that would be around 280 EUR incl. tax
>> for an
>> >> 6 pages article (http://www.springer.com/de/it
>> >> -informatik/lncs/open-access-publishing-in-computer-proceedings).
>> >>
>> >> If you need a famous publisher?s name you can also go the way to just
>> >> publish the complete book with that OA publisher and put the articles
>> >> themselves into the OA repository of your university or any other
>> >> trustworthy organisation. OA books usually start around 5kEUR, de
>> Gruyter
>> >> for example takes 10kEUR (https://www.degruyter.com/page/1436). Maybe
>> >> your university already has contracts established with publishers, it
>> may
>> >> be worth asking there as well. Maybe they even publish themselves (many
>> >> university libraries do)!
>> >>
>> >> Whatever you do, stay clean of non-open licenses like cc-by-nc-nd!
>> >>
>> >> We use cc-by-sa to encourage re-use under the same free conditions,
>> other
>> >> prefer cc-by.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Anyway, your situation got me thinking about my experiences with
>> >> workshops/conferences. Usually people were more interested in the
>> quality
>> >> of the networking and the presentations than the publisher of the
>> >> proceedings. Maybe you could sweeten the deal to publish OA with
>> inviting
>> >> some famous names for keynotes, trying to ?relight the interest? in the
>> >> conference? Just an idea, though...
>> >>
>> >> Hth, Ingo.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ------------------------------
>> >>
>> >> Subject: Digest Footer
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> open-science mailing list
>> >> open-science at lists.okfn.org
>> >> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
>> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-science
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ------------------------------
>> >>
>> >> End of open-science Digest, Vol 1037, Issue 1
>> >> *********************************************
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > open-science mailing list
>> > open-science at lists.okfn.org
>> > https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-science
>> >
>> >
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-science/attachments/
>> 20171130/758425e6/attachment-0001.html>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Subject: Digest Footer
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> open-science mailing list
>> open-science at lists.okfn.org
>> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-science
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> End of open-science Digest, Vol 1039, Issue 1
>> *********************************************
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> open-science mailing list
> open-science at lists.okfn.org
> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-science
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-science/attachments/20171201/ba3871fc/attachment-0003.html>
More information about the open-science
mailing list