First there was the “impact factor.” Then came the “h-index.” Now, for those who believe that scientific prowess can be measured by statistical metrics, comes the Acuna-Allesina-Kording formula.
A study of the flow of manuscript submissions reveals a highly structured and efficient network of scientific journals where peer-review plays a critical role in the improvement and slotting of papers.
“All these papers were deliberately bad. They were created with the purpose of exposing exploitative publishing practices. That is, the works collected here were sting operations on predatory journals.” So says the introduction to the book Stinging the Predators: A collection of papers that should never have been published, assembled by Zen Faulkes.
"Open Data Excuse" Bingo
We might want to use it in a paper People may misinterpret the data Thieves will use it There's no API
I don't mind, but someone else might Lawyers want a custom License It's too complicated We will get too many enquiries
It's too big Terrorists will use it Poor Quality There's already a project to...
What if we want to sell it later It's not very interesting Data Protection We'll get spam
For open data teams; print out a copy and put it on your office wall. Cross out each excuse people give you. There are no prizes, but you can tweet "bingo! #openDataExcuses" if you think it might make you feel better
Generate your own bingo grids at http://data.dev8d.org/devbingo/
This is a brief list of recommendations for authors of scientific papers who make their work available online. It focuses in particular on producing high-quality PDF files with LaTeX and covers some other technical and typographic pitfalls.