Idea #2: A re-thinking of Journal Publication

What is the problem?

To anyone who has published any academic papers before, the conventional publication process can be cumbersome, if not just downright inefficient and limits the pace of proliferation of knowledge. Typically, a submitted draft takes several months to review (or a full year if the first attempt fails with the first journal). Not only that, there’s no guarantee that the person (or few people) who review the paper actually is the most qualified (or even interested) on the specific topic. The limited number of reviewers also makes the reviewing process inherently subjective. There is also a lack of feedback system once the paper is published. Of course one can always email the chief author, but we lack a place where comments/thoughts about a specific paper can be efficiently aggregated. New ideas feed on other ideas to nourish; the delay, the cost involved ($112/page for authors in Applied Physics Letter!), the lack of feedback, the inadequacy of presenting idea with images and text all points to the opportunity to improve the centuries-old mode for distributing academic findings.

What is the idea?

This idea involves the use of web-based wiki software and dynamic databases to setup a non-profit online social network that allows researchers to publish their findings in a timely manner. The first part of the idea would be to build a basic social network (think Facebook for researchers) where members can list their past publications, current research interests, add others’ publication to their favorite list, comment on others’ papers. Users can also subscribe a RSS feed related to a topic of their interest (think syndication instead of publishing). A mechanism can also be built in that allows certain users with authority in a certain field (say he/she has published in the same journal before) to rate another paper. If one views journal publication’s primary function to be a filter for “better” content, this web-based model can potentially expose a single paper to many more reviewers and hence arguably provide a better filter.

The second part of the idea involves a total rethinking of the typical journal publication process. Instead of submitting for private review, researchers can now submit their first draft to this web-based portal (bearing in mind that the findings can be presented with a much richer media, such as videos, presentation slides, compared to conventional journals). In other words, the findings are published immediately after the findings are made. The traditional review process will now be replaced by the open rating system. As comments and ratings come in, the authors can choose to edit or add sections to their paper. This editing process can be tracked very effectively with wiki software and the changes made are also viewable by public.

How will the world improve with this idea?

My hope is that the proliferation of new knowledge will not be bogged down by bureaucratic inefficiencies. This non-profit online portal should instigate researchers to make public their findings in a timely fashion, while still keeping the function of giving credit to the researchers who carried out the work. Ideally, this portal should also make its dead simple for researchers to exchange ideas, comments regarding each other’s works, and provide a means to aggregate those ongoing discussions so others can also reap fruits from them.

Why do you think the adoption of this idea may begin within 5 years?

The technical barrier to entry is almost zero. Wiki software and other web programming platforms such as Ruby on Rails are open source and fairly easy to build. The main barrier lies with the users’ willingness to forego the current method of journal publication. Pre-Wikipedia years might be a harder time to put forward this idea. However, now that online social networks and user-generated/aggregated/edited content are such common place, it should be easier to convince researchers about the benefits of this “new” publication process. Prestige is another key motivation for researchers who value getting published in “good” journals. Hopefully, a vibrant and active community could also serve the same function (think top contributors in Digg.com). That said, there is still common ground for both traditional journals and such online portal to co-exist; after all, there are undeniable benefits to the end users if the editorial staff of a journal really deliver on its “filtering” and “editing” function.

What market trend or social trend will increase the need of this idea?

The trend towards digitizing content; towards users-generated content; with users having a larger say in how and what content/knowledge is being presented to them; the proliferation of internet; the decentralization of content distribution; the rise of Creative Commons all points to the eventual adoption of a web-based, users-modulated portal for the publication and distribution of scientific knowledge.

What do you think?

Idea #1: Mapnified World!

I have had this idea for the longest time. Here's the question that led me to this idea: "Where would you go to find out what's the location of Cory Hall (a building in UC Berkeley) on campus?". I think most people (and I've asked this question to over 50 people) would say that they'd go to the campus map on the school website. That, to me, is an indication that as useful as Google Map or one of those "universal" map might be, there's always niches that they can never address efficiently simply because the underlying map they provide is centrally-controlled.

So here's the idea: what if I give users the same kind of functionality (ie. zoom in/out, dragging map, putting markers etc) except that I allow them to do it on their own map. Now, this immediately opens the door for many other applications (only limited by the imagination of the users).

Some of the possible use i could think of:

1. “Middle Earth” map for Lord of the Ring fans
2. Maps for video game (eg, RPG games…any more?)
3. Historical map (eg. D-Day Normany Map for veterans to post their heroic acts that very day)
4. Shopping mall
5. Campuses
6. Tourist attractions (eg. Disneyland map)
7. Astronomy map (eg. Milky way map where scholars can update the name and location of new stars found everyday)

In addition, (if you look through my prototype), I'm also proposing a hierarchy of maps. You can think of it as having multiple layers at the same location. This in essence will overcome the 2D limitation of a regular map.

Well, while I was originally all excited about this user-generated content idea for maps, I realize there's a significant drawback. These days, user-generated content (be it text, pictures, videos, blogs etc) is all the rage; and this explosion of media content from the users is facilitated by the combination of increasing reduction in the cost of production as well as distribution of these media. Contrast that with maps; distribution is almost zero-cost, but the entry barrier on the production still remains really high. In other words, it's not easy at all for ordinary men like you and me to create a good, accurate and hence useful maps. This led me to the "insight" that it is the "collection" of the underlying maps that holds most value in the value chain. Google Map is not revolutionary because of all those funky AJAXified functions that you can use, rather it is the fact that they're pretty much the first one who manage to come up with a world map that can be detail to the street level (in the U.S. at least) and make it easily navigatable on a browser. Indeed, "Data is the new Intel Inside" and I believe there's tremendous value in a central repository of the world's floor plans.

So here's a summary of the value proposition:
1. More granular local search
2. Overcome 2D limitation
3. Central repository of every floor plan of every building in the world!
4. Integration with mobile application

What do you think?

Why I start this blog?

The reason is pretty simple; day-dreaming is my hobby. I tend to view things in terms of their possibilities and potentials first, before the limitations dawn on me. This is often an overly-optimistic view of the world, and quite naturally unrealistic. So the ideas I present here might make absolutely no sense at times, but that's the nature of creativity. Fair enough, most of these ideas might probably turn out to be what they rightfully should be, wild ideas with no real contribution to the world. But if I really keep doing this every week, I'd be extremely satisfied if even one of them happen to have real value for the world. And if I don't have the smarts and perseverance to realize these ideas, I hope that some of you will. That's really the main reason why I set up this blog. Let's bounce ideas off each other, and hopefully, one of us might just be able to turn one of these wacky thoughts into reality!

My fav Albert Einstein quote:
"Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world."

Disclaimer: Everything I write in this blog is under the Creative Commons Attrition 2.5 license. In other words, You are free:

* to copy, distribute, display, and perform the work
* to make derivative works
* to make commercial use of the work

But under the following conditions:

* You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor.
* For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work.
* Any of these conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder.