Coordination Tech in Science: Letters, Journals, and Whatever Comes Next | shishyko!

supercritical | shishyko!

Supercritical is a newsletter about what happens when systems produce faster than they can coordinate. AI is making the generation of knowledge abundant, but generation was never the whole system. Validation, dissemination, credit, trust: these were bundled into institutions designed for scarcity, and this legacy architecture is now the primary bottleneck. If we fail to redesign it, progress will be sawtooth rather than smooth. Using the crisis in modern science as an early warning, this newsletter imagines the capabilities and infrastructure that come next, including provenance, trust-graded disclosure, and new protocols of coordination.

Sensemaking Networks: Project Introduction - Cosmik Labs

Incorporating science social media into the scientific process

A budding discipline around how science gets read and judged - Aris

Scholarly publishing spent thirty years arguing about access. It has barely begun arguing about what readers do with the paper once they have it. At Aris we call that second argument scholarly interface design. Mike Morrison's community calls it ScienceUX. Either way it is becoming a field, and here is why it is worth your attention.

Sensemaking Networks: Transforming Social Media into a Sensemaking Layer for Science | Ronen Tamari

Sensemaking Networks is a project aiming to address three interrelated limitations of the current science publishing and communication infrastructure: (1) poor reach and feedback, (2) knowledge fragmentation, and (3) rigid formats. To address these issues, Sensemaking Networks combine two promising trends in science publishing and communication: science social media and semantic nanopublishing. While science social media significantly impacts scientific processes and public engagement, it lacks formal recognition and accessibility. On the other hand, nanopublications offer the benefits of formal scientific publishing and machine-readable knowledge representation. Their integration represents a promising direction that could serve as a transformative sensemaking layer for science, enhancing the collective synthesis, dissemination, and evaluation of research.

Joanna Russ- SF and Technology as Mystification

Talk about technology, long familiar to science-fiction readers and writers, is getting popular in Academia too. Particularly interesting to humanists is the connection between technology and whatever their own particular subject happens to be; I've attended three such formal symposia in the last five years, six including SF conventions, and including informal discussions among students, in writing classes, SF classes, and elsewhere, somewhere between fifty and sixty.

Sensemaking and Science Publishing | Ronen Tamari

Sensemaking as a new framework for understanding why science publishing/peer review is broken, and how to fix it

Inventing New Nature

Defining the Protocol Institute's research mission

A protocol for attributable modular research contribution - Matsuthoughts

I wrote this essay in response to Seemay Chou's call for essays on systemic bottlenecks to science. Structural change in scholarly communication practices i…

Empowering science communities with open, democratic, researcher-owned infrastructure.

We’re building communities and tech for publishing, curating, sharing, and discussing research online using ATProto and other decentralized protocols.

Empowering science communities with open, democratic, researcher-owned infrastructure.

We’re building communities and tech for publishing, curating, sharing, and discussing research online using ATProto and other decentralized protocols.

Reinventing Discovery: The New Era of Networked Science

In Reinventing Discovery, Michael Nielsen argues that w…

Science Communication as a Collective Intelligence Endeavor: A Manifesto and Examples for Implementation

Effective science communication is challenging when scientific messages are informed by a continually updating evidence base and must often compete against misinformation. We argue that we need a new program of science communication as collective intelligence—a collaborative approach, supported by technology. This would have four key advantages over the typical model where scientists communicate as individuals: scientific messages would be informed by (a) a wider base of aggregated knowledge, (b) contributions from a diverse scientific community, (c) participatory input from stakeholders, and (d) better responsiveness to ongoing changes in the state of knowledge.