Scientists: how many peer reviews were you asked to do in the past month? Comment below๐with your average/typical for academic year. ๐ Hurry before our poll closes in 2 days! #letsdothis#peerreview ๐
Inspiring initiatives to modernize and increase transparency of scientific peer review. Here at Sciprocity we are building tools to improve peer review by facilitating finding the right reviewers and providing constructive feedback to reviewers!
https://t.co/KPRbyaQXq3
Scientific advisors often ask trainees to co-review papers as an important part of training. But their names are often not listed, and they do not get credit for providing this essential validation of publications. Sciprocity is here to help! https://t.co/cQmkcpLM5c
Excited to announce that I will be pitching my company @sciprocity at SF's @getguilded Serendipity conference this Friday! Shark Tank meets speed dating?? Let's roll! ๐คฃ๐๐๐ช https://t.co/PY1ruu46Lm
@cdomni Thanks for retweeting! We're really looking to dig into how often scientists are asked by editors (or their bosses) to do a review. We want to show that this happens frequently enough and has some true pain points associated with it. ๐โโ๏ธ
We are building a service that might help with this! We crawl bioRxiv to train our reviewer recommendation algorithm, and in the process can recommend new preprints to the right scientists and editors, even the buzz-less ones :)
How about those preprints that don't make a lot of noise on Twitter, not bc they're any less worthy of attention, but bc their authors (or authors' friends) are not on Twitter to advocate for them. This can be a v dangerous trend - journals better stay away from Twitter bubbles.
@takaki_komiyama @AkramiLab We are building a service that might help with this! We crawl bioRxiv to train our reviewer recommendation algorithm, and in the process can recommend new preprints to the right scientists and editors, even the buzz-less ones :)
This is a good mail day. ๐ Sciprocity stickers! HMU so I can send you one! And finally a registered customer with the @uspto patent office! Adding 'inventor' to my resumรฉ. Just sent off the last notarized step yesterday. ๐๐ฅ๐๐ผ
@ClairAIA@MeganMilstein@2point19@psl Initially recommendations will be based on published work. What would be the best sources to train our engine for your field?
Question: How do we improve the quality of scientific credentialing (peer review, academic publishing) while improving access to scientific experts for every day people and businesses? @sciprocity@2point19@psl#FFAFounderChallenge
Great dataset of highly cited scientists. Interesting how a good number of people manage to cite themselves >40% of the time: https://t.co/QE0jPbSlqD pretty few female names on top if you order the table by self-cites
Building a company isn't just about building a product or getting the best numbers. A culture of respect, gratitude, and mindfulness will retain and attract the best talent. #ceonotes
@tristajaye I just had a conversation with my first hire today about how I would be sending him a contract with terms, including his pay rate (on deferral - pre-everything! ๐) and an equity package. This was our first discussion about this and it's a no-brainer. #buildcultureearly
Obviously, quality peer review is seriously lacking. Our smart recommendation engine and reviewer feedback metrics will help cut down on junk science like this.
Sciprocity uses feedback following scientific review to 1) provide scientists with credentials for providing timely high quality reviews, and 2) fine-tune a smart recommendation service for curators of science to find the right reviewers at the right time for each microdomain.
pulling from a more diverse and quantifiably high quality pool than is provided by the current system, which is highly subjective. My co-founders, @neurosutras and @jjsso0, and I are excited to bring our vision to fruition in the near future! Stay tuned @sciprocity! /2