7. References

1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 0 Boldt, A., 2010. Extending ArXiv.org to Achieve Open Peer Review and Publishing. ArXiv10116590 Cs.

2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 0 Bosch, S., Albee, B., Romaine, S., 2019. Deal or No Deal | Periodicals Price Survey 2019 [WWW Document]. Libr. J. URL https://www.libraryjournal.com?detailStory=Deal-or-No-Deal-Periodicals-Price-Survey-2019 (accessed 8.21.19).

3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 0 Brembs, B., 2019. Reliable novelty: New should not trump true. PLOS Biol. 17, e3000117. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3000117

4 Leave a comment on paragraph 4 0 COAR, 2017. Next ​​Generation​​ Repositories: Behaviours​​ and ​​Technical​​ Recommendations​​ of ​​the ​​COAR Next​​ Generation​​ Repositories​​ Working​​ Group. URL https://www.coar-repositories.org/files/NGR-Final-Formatted-Report-cc.pdf (accessed 8.21.19).

5 Leave a comment on paragraph 5 0 Eisen, M., 2018. APPRAISE (A Post-Publication Review and Assessment In Science Experiment). ASAPbio. URL https://asapbio.org/eisen-appraise (accessed 2.13.19).

6 Leave a comment on paragraph 6 0 European Commission, 2019. Future of scholarly publishing and scholarly communication : report of the Expert Group to the European Commission. Directorate-General for Research and Innovation (European Commission), Brussels, BE.

7 Leave a comment on paragraph 7 0 Fecher, B., Friesike, S., Wagner, G.G., 2017a. A nod to public open access infrastructures. Science 356, 1242–1242. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaf6401

8 Leave a comment on paragraph 8 0 Fecher, B., publishing, 2017\textbarAcademic, Access, O., Comments, O. science\textbar10, et al., 2017b. Rather than simply moving from “paying to read” to “paying to publish”, it’s time for a European Open Access Platform.

9 Leave a comment on paragraph 9 0 Ginsparg, P., Luce, R., Van de Sompel, H., 1999. Call for participation in the UPS initiative aimed at the further promotion of author self-archived solutions.

10 Leave a comment on paragraph 10 0 Ginsparg, P., 2016. Preprint Déjà Vu. EMBO J. 35, 2620–2625. https://doi.org/10.15252/embj.201695531

11 Leave a comment on paragraph 11 0 Ginsparg, P., 1997. Winners and Losers in the Global Research Village, in: Pioneering New Serials Frontiers: From Petroglyphs to Cyberserials : Proceedings of the North American Serials Interest Group, Inc., 11th Annual Conference, June 20-23, 1996, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque. Psychology Press.

12 Leave a comment on paragraph 12 0 Ginsparg, P., 1994. First Steps Towards Electronic Research Communication. Comput Phys 8, 390–396. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4823313

13 Leave a comment on paragraph 13 0 Gowers, T., 2015. Discrete Analysis — an arXiv overlay journal. Gowerss Weblog. URL https://gowers.wordpress.com/2015/09/10/discrete-analysis-an-arxiv-overlay-journal/ (accessed 2.13.19).

14 Leave a comment on paragraph 14 0 Hindle, S., Saderi, D., 2018. Preprint Journal Clubs: building a community of PREreviewers. ASAPbio. URL https://asapbio.org/prereviewers (accessed 2.13.19).

15 Leave a comment on paragraph 15 0 Khoo, S., 2019. Article Processing Charge Hyperinflation and Price Insensitivity: An Open Access Sequel to the Serials Crisis. Liber Q. 29, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.18352/lq.10280

16 Leave a comment on paragraph 16 0 Moyle, M., Lewis, A., 2008. RIOJA (Repository Interface to Overlaid Journal Archives) project: final report (Report). UCL (University College London), London, UK.

17 Leave a comment on paragraph 17 0 Perakakis, P., Taylor, M., Mazza, M., Trachana, V., 2010. Natural selection of academic papers. Scientometrics 85, 553–559. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0253-1

18 Leave a comment on paragraph 18 0 Priem, J., Hemminger, B.H., 2012. Decoupling the scholarly journal. Front. Comput. Neurosci. 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fncom.2012.00019

19 Leave a comment on paragraph 19 0 Pulverer, B., 2018. Preprint QC. ASAPbio. URL https://asapbio.org/pulverer-qc (accessed 2.13.19).

20 Leave a comment on paragraph 20 0 Ross-Hellauer, T., 2017. What is open peer review? A systematic review. F1000Research 6, 588. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.11369.2

21 Leave a comment on paragraph 21 0 Ross-Hellauer, T., Fecher, B., 2017. Journal flipping or a public open access infrastructure? What kind of open access future do we want? [WWW Document]. Impact Soc. Sci. Blog. URL http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/ (accessed 5.17.18).

22 Leave a comment on paragraph 22 0 Smith, A.P., 2000. The journal as an overlay on preprint databases. Learn. Publ. 13, 43–48. https://doi.org/10.1087/09531510050145542

23 Leave a comment on paragraph 23 0 Smith, J.W.T., 1999. The deconstructed journal — a new model for academic publishing. Learn. Publ. 12, 79–91. https://doi.org/10.1087/09531519950145896

24 Leave a comment on paragraph 24 0 Stern, B.M., O’Shea, E.K., 2019. A proposal for the future of scientific publishing in the life sciences. PLOS Biol. 17, e3000116. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3000116

25 Leave a comment on paragraph 25 0 Tennant, J.P., 2018. The state of the art in peer review. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 365. https://doi.org/10.1093/femsle/fny204

26 Leave a comment on paragraph 26 0 Tennant, J.P., Dugan, J.M., Graziotin, D., Jacques, D.C., Waldner, F., Mietchen, D., Elkhatib, Y., B. Collister, L., Pikas, C.K., Crick, T., Masuzzo, P., Caravaggi, A., Berg, D.R., Niemeyer, K.E., Ross-Hellauer, T., Mannheimer, S., Rigling, L., Katz, D.S., Greshake Tzovaras, B., Pacheco-Mendoza, J., Fatima, N., Poblet, M., Isaakidis, M., Irawan, D.E., Renaut, S., Madan, C.R., Matthias, L., Nørgaard Kjær, J., O’Donnell, D.P., Neylon, C., Kearns, S., Selvaraju, M., Colomb, J., 2017. A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review. F1000Research 6, 1151. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.12037.3

27 Leave a comment on paragraph 27 0 Van de Sompel, H., Payette, S., Erickson, J., Lagoze, C., Warner, S., 2004. Rethinking Scholarly Communication: Building the System that Scholars Deserve. -Lib Mag. 10. https://doi.org/10.1045/september2004-vandesompel

28 Leave a comment on paragraph 28 0 Wang, L., Zhan, Y., 2019. A conceptual peer review model for arXiv and other preprint databases. Learn. Publ. 0. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1229

Page 8

Source: https://comments.coar-repositories.org/7-references/