@FediTips I'm asking because the current state feels pretty wrong: public money is used to fund research, some researchers to all the hard work. Then once all the work is completely done the copyright of the publication is transferred to a publisher and people even pay for that (not the publisher pays, the research team!). Then people have to pay the publisher to access the outcome of the publicly funded research.

Everybody in science knows the problem.

@t0k @FediTips the #IPFS people and community was very active the last time trump took over.

But most scientific papers are hosted on mjltiple services anyway and uniquely identifiable by their DOI(if i remember correctly)

One commercial place having many of them is ResearchGate, which in theory has most of tjeir Company in Germany, although US owned.

@t0k @FediTips

Not exactly what you are looking for, but I think you might find some of this discussion interesting : https://mathoverflow.net/questions/394101/peer-review-2-0

@t0k @FediTips I think bonfire is trying to do this: https://bonfirenetworks.org/open_science/

Also: blogging

@t0k @FediTips i recently also thought about a fedi system for providing research in a semantic data structure.

One problem in research is that, while we produce more research than ever, the format (papers, theses etc) are cumbersome in themselves.

If citations, experiment-data and conclusions in a paper were also represented in an accompanying semantic statement structure, they would be more easily analyzable.

The semantic web already provides some data structures there. If those could be combined with activitypub, we might get a really powerful way to make research more applicable.

Also checking citations would be easier if the citation in the semantic structure worked as a reference to what it cites.
That would allow easier consistency checking and eliminate sloppy secondary and tertiary citations.

We could also use this to run analyses for gaps in our knowledge if we had structured data as input