1. Scientific Communication and Open Commentary Research project for ECCO. Clément Vidal Université Paris 1-Sorbonne ENS Ulm / EHESS / Paris V / Paris VI / ENS Cachan. (last year)

[...] there must be a scientific approach to the problem of organizing scientific activity -that is, a new metasystem transition: scientific control of the system of science. [...] there must be a scientific approach to the problem of organizing scientific activity -that is, a new metasystem transition: scientific control of the system of science. (Turchin 1977, p244)

Outline 1.1 Introduction 1.2 What is open commentary, and why is it efficient? 1.3 OC and Open Peer Commentary (OPC) 1.4 OC generalized 1.5 Other complementary propositions

1.1 Introduction Electronic media allows : easy storage easy storage easy access easy access free when (if) the open access will be achieved, i.e. the encyclopedism approach of the Global Brain, (Heylighen 2004). free when (if) the open access will be achieved, i.e. the encyclopedism approach of the Global Brain, (Heylighen 2004). Beyond those usefuleness, I believe that electronic communication can allow more evaluations and feedback. Beyond those usefuleness, I believe that electronic communication can allow more evaluations and feedback.

1.2 What is open commentary, and why is it efficient ? An enhanced « letters to the editor » function. Origins, Current Anthropology (1960). Such an article is then sent to 50 commentators specially selected to contribute their ampliative and critical perspectives. Their commentaries are then published together with the original article and the author's response. The result has been a unique and extraordinarily effective form of scientific communication that [...] generates the information, immediacy, and stimulation of a research conference coupled with the rigor and discipline of the refereed formal written medium. (Harnad 1978)

1.3 OC and Open Peer Commentary (OPC). Open Peer Commentary (Current Anthropology, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Psycoloquy) + more rigorous - slower; huge work of the editor Open Commentary (British Medical Journal, Canadian Medical Association Journal, The Lancet) + faster (almost instantly), more commentaries - less organized Distinction in (Vidal 2005)

1.4 OC generalized Very few journals use OC or OPC. Project : Use the information technologies to develop the possibility of commentaries for every article, and every book. (books particulary for social science; see (Shatz 2004, chapter 4) for a discussion.)

Problematic What’s the best way to : precisely relate a commentary to any part of a document ? (technical aspect) find the relevant persons to make commentaries ? –easy with Marko Rodriguez's Hyper-Cortex. motivate researchers to produce commentaries ? –Which recognition for the commentaries produced ? moderate the commentaries ?

1.5 Other complementary propositions Bibliography sharing, and sharing of personal collection of books with their comments. –Thus, implement the idea : « you should read this document » with the collaborative filtering tool (Heylighen 1999, 4.1). Review articles constantly updated, acting as hubs for access to scientific domains. (with disagreements clearly stated, and different possible solutions exposed).

Bibliography (1) 1. First project. Harnad, S., (1978) Editorial. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. Heylighen, F. (1999) Collective Intelligence and its Implementation on the Web: algorithms to develop a collective mental map. Computational and Mathematical Theory of Organizations 5(3), Heylighen F. (2004): "Conceptions of a Global Brain: an historical review", Technological Forecasting and Social Change [submitted ]. Rodriguez, M.A. (2005-6) The Hyper-Cortex of Human Collective-Intelligence Systems (ECCO Working Paper ) Shatz, D., (2004) Peer Review. A Critical Inquiry. Rowman & Littlefield. Turchin,V. (1977) The phenomenon of science. A cybernetic approach to human evolution, Columbia University Press Vidal, C. (2005) Le commentaire ouvert.