AcaWiki - User contributions [en]

User talk:Greg

2011-10-14T04:58:38Z

Greg: Blanked the page

User talk:Greg Grossmeier

2011-10-14T04:58:26Z

Greg: Blanked the page

AcaWiki:Top 100 Papers

2011-06-17T01:26:19Z

Greg: Undo revision 5525 by Greg (talk)

We are driving towards gathering summaries of the Top 100 academic papers in the world. This is a large effort to increase the number of our papers, get more students, more researchers, and academics to know about the project and share their specific knowledge. We need your specific expertise to make this project sucessful.

{{RightTOC}}

== HOWTO ==

The [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28656 original idea came from the community].

To make this work we need to:

* (DONE) Create a list of the Top 20 Domains
* [[Help:Editing|Help edit this wiki]] (its open for you to help with!)
* Create sources per domain where to pull from.
** https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28656 has a solid listing to convert here
* Develop leaders per domain
* Get at least 5 papers per domain
** Think that another paper is more important than the 5 already listed? [[Special:AddData/Summary|Summarize it]] and add it to the list!

== Collaboration and Communication ==

''Please join us in spreading the news about this drive, and join us in chat as well!''

* Public Social Networks
* Our Communication Channels

== Top 100 Papers ==

=== Anthropology ===

==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Arts and Literarure ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Astronomy ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Biology ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Business ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Chemistry ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Clinical Research ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Computer Science ===
==== Sources ====

* Stack Exchange: [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?]
** NB: User contributions on Stack Exchange are licensed under [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ cc-wiki] with [http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/attribution-required/ attribution required]

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

'''On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem'''

: The 1936 paper that arguably started computer science itself:

: Alan Turing, "[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=16882511564349146333 On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem]", Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society s2-42, 230–265, 1937. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230 doi: 10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230]

: In just 36 pages, Turing formulates (but does not name) the Turing Machine, recasts Gödel's famous First Incompleteness Theorem in terms of computation, describes the concept of universality, and in the appendix shows that computability by Turing machines is equivalent to computability by λ-definable functions (as studied by Church and Kleene).

: cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1170#1170 attribution]

'''A mathematical theory of communication'''

: "[http://guohanwei.51.net/code/A%20Mathematical%20Theory%20of%20Communication.pdf A mathematical theory of communication]" by Claude Shannon, classics of information theory. Very readable. ([http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/ms/what/shannonday/shannon1948.pdf Alternative link].)

: cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1172#1172 attribution]

'''Quantum Mechanical Computers'''

: [http://www.springerlink.com/content/p1x27746x51x52mm/ Quantum Mechanical Computers (PDF) by Richard Feynman].

: He introduces the idea of quantum computation, describes quantum circuits, explains how classical circuits can be simulated by quantum circuits, and shows how quantum circuits can compute functions without lots of garbage qubits (using uncomputation).

: He then shows how any classical circuit can be encoded into a time-independent Hamiltonian! His proof goes through for quantum circuits too, therefore showing that time evolving Hamiltonians is BQP-hard! His Hamiltonian construction is also used in the proof of the quantum version of the Cook-Levin theorem, proved by Kitaev, which shows that k-local Hamiltonian is QMA-complete.

: cc-by-sa [attribution http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1177#1177]

'''On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems'''

: Kurt Gödel's [http://www.csee.wvu.edu/~xinl/library/papers/math/Godel.pdf On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems].

: cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/2218#2218 attribution]

'''Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style?'''

: "[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.72.2622&rep=rep1&type=pdf Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? A Functional Style and Its Algebra of Programs]" by John Backus. This is the 1977 ACM Turing Award Lecture in which Backus introduces functional programming to the world. ACM honored Backus with this award for his seminal work on FORTRAN and for being the B in BNF notation used for describing programming language syntax. I found this work to be really inspiring. It caused me to look at computers and programming languages in a whole new way.

: It also represents the kind of paper I wish there were more of. It exposes the inspiration and thought processing behind a nest of ideas without the rigorous but limiting tone of a research paper. It is a shame that researchers have to wait for an opportunity like the ACM Turing Award to be able to express themselves in this mode. Of course, few researchers can write like John Backus. This papers clarity of vision amazes me.

: cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/6785#6785 attribution]

=== Economics ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Education ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Engineering ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Geosciences ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Health ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Mathematics ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Medicine ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Neuroscience ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Philosophy ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Physics ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Psychology ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Sociology ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

[[Category:Activity]]

Template:RightTOC

2011-06-17T01:24:24Z

Greg:

{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" style="clear: {{{clear|right}}}; margin-bottom: .5em; float: right; padding: .5em 0 .8em 1.4em; background: none; width: {{{width|{{{1|auto}}}}}};"
| __TOC__
|}<noinclude>
Copied from [[Wikipedia]] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:TOCright]
</noinclude>

Template:RightTOC

2011-06-17T01:23:56Z

Greg: Undo revision 5527 by Greg (talk)

{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" style="clear: {{{clear|right}}}; margin-bottom: .5em; float: right; padding: .5em 0 .8em 1.4em; background: none; width: {{{width|{{{1|auto}}}}}}; class="toclimit-{{{1|{{{limit|3}}}}}}""
| __TOC__
|}<noinclude>
Copied from [[Wikipedia]] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:TOCright]
</noinclude>

Template:RightTOC

2011-06-17T01:23:38Z

Greg: Undo revision 5528 by Greg (talk)

{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" style="clear: {{{clear|right}}}; margin-bottom: .5em; float: right; padding: .5em 0 .8em 1.4em; background: none; width: {{{width|{{{1|auto}}}}}};" class="toclimit-{{{1|{{{limit|3}}}}}}"
| __TOC__
|}<noinclude>
Copied from [[Wikipedia]] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:TOCright]
</noinclude>

Template:RightTOC

2011-06-17T01:22:59Z

Greg:

{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" style="clear: {{{clear|right}}}; margin-bottom: .5em; float: right; padding: .5em 0 .8em 1.4em; background: none; width: {{{width|{{{1|{{{limit|3}}}}}}}}};"
| __TOC__
|}<noinclude>
Copied from [[Wikipedia]] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:TOCright]
</noinclude>

Template:RightTOC

2011-06-17T01:20:45Z

Greg:

{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" style="clear: {{{clear|right}}}; margin-bottom: .5em; float: right; padding: .5em 0 .8em 1.4em; background: none; width: {{{width|{{{1|auto}}}}}};" class="toclimit-{{{1|{{{limit|3}}}}}}"
| __TOC__
|}<noinclude>
Copied from [[Wikipedia]] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:TOCright]
</noinclude>

Template:RightTOC

2011-06-17T01:19:55Z

Greg: toc depth limit to 3

{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" style="clear: {{{clear|right}}}; margin-bottom: .5em; float: right; padding: .5em 0 .8em 1.4em; background: none; width: {{{width|{{{1|auto}}}}}}; class="toclimit-{{{1|{{{limit|3}}}}}}""
| __TOC__
|}<noinclude>
Copied from [[Wikipedia]] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:TOCright]
</noinclude>

AcaWiki:Top 100 Papers

2011-06-17T01:19:33Z

Greg: Undo revision 5521 by Greg (talk)

We are driving towards gathering summaries of the Top 100 academic papers in the world. This is a large effort to increase the number of our papers, get more students, more researchers, and academics to know about the project and share their specific knowledge. We need your specific expertise to make this project sucessful.

{{RightTOC}}

== HOWTO ==

The [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28656 original idea came from the community].

To make this work we need to:

* (DONE) Create a list of the Top 20 Domains
* [[Help:Editing|Help edit this wiki]] (its open for you to help with!)
* Create sources per domain where to pull from.
** https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28656 has a solid listing to convert here
* Develop leaders per domain
* Get at least 5 papers per domain
** Think that another paper is more important than the 5 already listed? [[Special:AddData/Summary|Summarize it]] and add it to the list!

== Collaboration and Communication ==

''Please join us in spreading the news about this drive, and join us in chat as well!''

* Public Social Networks
* Our Communication Channels

== Top 100 Papers ==

=== Anthropology ===

==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Arts and Literarure ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Astronomy ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Biology ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Business ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Chemistry ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Clinical Research ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Computer Science ===
==== Sources ====

* Stack Exchange: [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read What papers should everyone read?]
** NB: User contributions on Stack Exchange are licensed under [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ cc-wiki] with [http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/attribution-required/ attribution required]

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

===== On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem =====

The 1936 paper that arguably started computer science itself:

Alan Turing, "[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=16882511564349146333 On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem]", Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society s2-42, 230–265, 1937. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230 doi: 10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230]

In just 36 pages, Turing formulates (but does not name) the Turing Machine, recasts Gödel's famous First Incompleteness Theorem in terms of computation, describes the concept of universality, and in the appendix shows that computability by Turing machines is equivalent to computability by λ-definable functions (as studied by Church and Kleene).

cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1170#1170 attribution]

=====A mathematical theory of communication=====

"[http://guohanwei.51.net/code/A%20Mathematical%20Theory%20of%20Communication.pdf A mathematical theory of communication]" by Claude Shannon, classics of information theory. Very readable. ([http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/ms/what/shannonday/shannon1948.pdf Alternative link].)

cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1172#1172 attribution]

=====Quantum Mechanical Computers=====

[http://www.springerlink.com/content/p1x27746x51x52mm/ Quantum Mechanical Computers (PDF) by Richard Feynman].

He introduces the idea of quantum computation, describes quantum circuits, explains how classical circuits can be simulated by quantum circuits, and shows how quantum circuits can compute functions without lots of garbage qubits (using uncomputation).

He then shows how any classical circuit can be encoded into a time-independent Hamiltonian! His proof goes through for quantum circuits too, therefore showing that time evolving Hamiltonians is BQP-hard! His Hamiltonian construction is also used in the proof of the quantum version of the Cook-Levin theorem, proved by Kitaev, which shows that k-local Hamiltonian is QMA-complete.

cc-by-sa [attribution http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/1177#1177]

===== On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems =====

Kurt Gödel's [http://www.csee.wvu.edu/~xinl/library/papers/math/Godel.pdf On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems].

cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/2218#2218 attribution]

===== Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? =====

"[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.72.2622&rep=rep1&type=pdf Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style? A Functional Style and Its Algebra of Programs]" by John Backus. This is the 1977 ACM Turing Award Lecture in which Backus introduces functional programming to the world. ACM honored Backus with this award for his seminal work on FORTRAN and for being the B in BNF notation used for describing programming language syntax. I found this work to be really inspiring. It caused me to look at computers and programming languages in a whole new way.

It also represents the kind of paper I wish there were more of. It exposes the inspiration and thought processing behind a nest of ideas without the rigorous but limiting tone of a research paper. It is a shame that researchers have to wait for an opportunity like the ACM Turing Award to be able to express themselves in this mode. Of course, few researchers can write like John Backus. This papers clarity of vision amazes me.

cc-by-sa [http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1168/what-papers-should-everyone-read/6785#6785 attribution]

=== Economics ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Education ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Engineering ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Geosciences ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Health ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Mathematics ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Medicine ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Neuroscience ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Philosophy ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Physics ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Psychology ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

=== Sociology ===
==== Sources ====

* Add a source for a top paper or a list of the paper

==== People ====

* Add yourself here if you want to help in this domain!

==== Papers ====

* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!
* Add Paper here!

[[Category:Activity]]

AcaWiki:Top 100 Papers

2011-06-17T00:31:32Z

Greg: /* Computer Science */

File:AcaWikiPressReleaseFormat.odt

2011-06-16T20:55:36Z

Greg: uploaded a new version of "File:AcaWikiPressReleaseFormat.odt"

AcaWiki:PressRelease-2011-06-16

2011-06-16T20:01:49Z

Greg: fix linking

==<center>PRESS RELEASE: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE</center>==

===<center>AcaWiki Seeks Summaries of Top 100 Academic Papers</center>===

Cambridge, MA — Thursday, 16 June 2011 — The AcaWiki project has announced their summer drive to gather summaries for the top 100 academic papers around the world. The AcaWiki website (http://acawiki.org) features an updated logo and theme that brings it into alignment with Wikipedia and other popular Wikis. AcaWiki continues to make strides in improving global access and exposure to academic research and scientific findings. When completed this new list of top papers, along with the over 500 summaries already available, will provide a solid base to fill the needs of many students and academics doing research.

"Our goal for this summer is to collect a clear set of summaries of the top papers from every field,” explained AcaWiki’s founder, Neeru Paharia. “This is a huge task, and one that we will not be able to achieve without the active participation of students and academics from every discipline. While AcaWiki has a growing collection with well over 500 Creative Commons licensed summaries of academic papers, we want more coverage in fields such as economics, psychology, sociology, business, and computer science. In order to do this, we need leaders, and readers, in all major fields of research to join us.”

The AcaWiki project addresses two key problems in the public access and understanding of modern academic research. While the overall volume of significant, cutting-edge research is growing apace, the dissemination of important findings and results is mostly limited to traditional, subscription-based publishing outlets and peer-reviewed journals. Even research that is publicly funded is often not made readily available to the general public, while universities in developing countries are often cut off from access to knowledge by exorbitant subscription fees for standard journals. Since a lot of academic research is couched in jargon that can only be understood by experts, the problem of limited access to knowledge is compounded by a very real deficit in communication between academia and the general public, as well as between academic disciplines themselves.

AcaWiki offers a workable solution to both of these problems by making use of social software and leveraging a community of graduate students, academics, and citizens, to write summaries and long abstracts of academic papers. Contributors are encouraged to write two-to-three paragraph summaries of academic papers and contribute them to the AcaWiki pool. Unlike the original articles themselves, the copyright for these summaries belongs to the contributor. AcaWiki stipulates that all entries on the site be licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution license, so they are free for international distribution via the Internet or in hard copy. Other contributors can annotate, comment, or append information to the original entry, adding greater nuance or clarity.

Along with community leaders Mike Linksvayer, Jodi Schneider, Reid Priedhorsky and others, the open production company, Fabricatorz is improving AcaWiki and growing the project. “By updating the AcaWiki logo with the great design by Aleksander Stachurka, we hope to crystallize the reality of the project,” said Jon Phillips, Fabricatorz Founder. “And, by switching to the default MediaWiki theme, as seen on all Wikimedia Foundation Wikis, we are making it easier to be compatible with the majority of real Wiki communities and developers. We want to collect more high quality academic summaries and to encourage more students and researchers to use the site and help us achieve our goal.”

The project has released a public roadmap for the next three to six months on its website at: http://acawiki.org/Roadmap Beyond summarizing academic papers, the Roadmap is an open plan for others to help by filing bugs and developing plans for making AcaWiki a better resource and community.

Targeted List of Disciplines

* Anthropology
* Arts and Literarure
* Astronomy
* Biology
* Business
* Chemistry
* Clinical Research
* Computer Science
* Economics
* Education
* Engineering
* Geosciences
* Health
* Mathematics
* Medicine
* Neuroscience
* Philosophy
* Physics
* Psychology
* Sociology

For More Information

* http://acawiki.org
* http://acawiki.org/Top_100_Papers

About AcaWiki

AcaWiki is like "Wikipedia for academic research" designed to collect summaries and literature reviews of peer-reviewed academic research, and make them available to the general public. AcaWiki is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization with seed funding from the Hewlett Foundation.

Press Contact

* Jon Phillips, press@acawiki.org, +1.415.830.3884

Press Kit

* http://acawiki.org/about
* [http://acawiki.org/images/4/43/PRESSRELEASE-AcaWiki-Seeks-Top-100-Academic-Papers.pdf Release as PDF]
* [http://acawiki.org/images/1/11/PRESSRELEASE-AcaWiki-Seeks-Top-100-Academic-Papers.odt Release as ODT]

[[Category:Press Release]] [[Category:2011]]

File:PRESSRELEASE-AcaWiki-Seeks-Top-100-Academic-Papers.odt

2011-06-16T19:11:09Z

Greg: uploaded a new version of "File:PRESSRELEASE-AcaWiki-Seeks-Top-100-Academic-Papers.odt"

File:PRESSRELEASE-AcaWiki-Seeks-Top-100-Academic-Papers.pdf

2011-06-16T19:10:45Z

Greg: uploaded a new version of "File:PRESSRELEASE-AcaWiki-Seeks-Top-100-Academic-Papers.pdf"

File:PRESSRELEASE-AcaWiki-Seeks-Top-100-Academic-Papers.odt

2011-06-16T19:08:49Z

Greg: uploaded a new version of "File:PRESSRELEASE-AcaWiki-Seeks-Top-100-Academic-Papers.odt"

Top 100 Papers

2011-06-16T19:04:43Z

Greg: fix redirect

#REDIRECT [[AcaWiki:Top_100_Papers]]

AcaWiki:Top 100 Papers

2011-06-16T18:19:36Z

Greg: /* HOWTO */

AcaWiki:Top 100 Papers

2011-06-16T17:49:53Z

Greg: /* HOWTO */ summarize it!

User:Greg

2010-06-08T21:22:30Z

Greg:

{{User
|name=Greg Grossmeier
|photo=Greg-Headshot.jpg
|location=University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
}}
My Blog: [http://blog.grossmeier.net http://blog.grossmeier.net]

My Bio: [http://grossmeier.net/about http://grossmeier.net/about]

File:Greg-Headshot.jpg

2010-06-08T21:17:34Z

Greg:

What Do I Want from the Publisher of the Future

2010-06-08T21:12:02Z

Greg:

{{Summary
|title=What Do I Want from the Publisher of the Future?
|authors=Philip E. Bourne
|tags=publishing, scholarly communication, openaccess, open source, data, workflow,
|summary=In this Perspective by the Editor-in-Chief of PLoS Computation Biology, the possibility of a completely integrated and public research ecosystem is explored. The author frames this in the context of a publisher, most likely due to their personal perspective as Editor-in-Chief, but a publisher-centric view is not a requirement of the analysis.

The main argument is that article publications are only one part of the production known as research and the other parts should also be published to be a part of the scholarly record. It is further argued that, with the advent of ubiquitous and cheap digital technologies, there is no excuse for not publishing those materials. The other, arguable equally or even more important, parts are grouped together under the term "workflow" and are comprised of the methods (software in some cases) and the data collected, analyzed, or used.

Another pressure to publish the workflow of research is that there is a tremendous amount of material that is easily lost due to bad information management. The author cites 4 examples from his own research (and acknowledges that he could list many more) including: much intellectual memory is locked away in badly managed personal email folders, important communication happens via presentations without a useful central location to share those materials with others, important pieces of software are lost due to personnel transfers, and data is sometimes lost for the same reason.

There are, however, issues which must be addressed. These are:
* "It is much harder to manage." Papers/Documents/PDFs are a known and mostly solved problem within the area of scholarly communication. A dynamic workflow, is not.
* "The scientific endeavor as a simple linear workflow is also clearly an oversimplification." Managing distinct steps along a known path is easy. But managing the various and multiple paths taken during a process is much harder, especially when many steps are undertaken multiple times with differing parameters.
* Confidentiality: Some research will need to be private during the process due to either personal opinions on when it is acceptable to share or due to research participant privacy issues. Philip speculates that when given the choice, more scientific information will be shared earlier within this system.
* Peer Review: It would be important for expert peers to also review the workflow of a researcher, not just their submitted paper, and in some progressive cases, their supporting datasets.
* New Infrastructure: There are already systems in place for managing the peer-review of articles but there needs to be a similar solution for the review of workflows.
* Data Repositories vs Publishers: Publishers do not inherently need to host all materials associated with a publication and can instead provide strong interoperability options with data repositories.
* Community Acceptance: With a seemingly radical jump in the services provided by a publisher this may cause some members of the scholarly community to be hesitant to accept the new paradigm. However, some publishers already provide some services to accept and publish additional parts of the workflow than just the final article now, and extending those offerings seems logical. Additionally, an acceptance of this new material within the reward system of academia is a crucial step.
* Journals and the Reward System: Scientific success has largely been associated with (seemingly) simple metrics associated with only article publications. Adding other materials from the research workflow is just another facet to be considered and its value measured.

If all of these issues are addressed and the new system is accepted then, "the complete result will be a digital workflow that begins with a documented idea and ends in a set of conclusions from a scientific experiment, all of which will be published by the publisher of the future and accepted as the norm in scholarly communication."
|journal=PLoS Computational Biology
|pub_date=2010
|doi=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000787
|journal_vol=6
|pub_open_access=
}}

What Do I Want from the Publisher of the Future

2010-06-08T21:09:46Z

Greg:

{{Summary
|title=What Do I Want from the Publisher of the Future?
|authors=Philip E. Bourne
|tags=publishing, scholarly communication, openaccess, open source, data, workflow,
|summary=In this Perspective by the Editor-in-Chief of PLoS Computation Biology, the possibilities of a completely integrated and public research ecosystem is explored. The author frames this in the context of a publisher, most likely due to their personal perspective as Editor-in-Chief, but a publisher-centric view is not a requirement of the analysis.

The main argument is that article publications are only one part of the production known as research and the other parts should also be published to be a part of the scholarly record. It is further argued that, with the advent of ubiquitous and cheap digital technologies, there is no excuse for not publishing those materials. The other, arguable equally or even more important, parts are grouped together under the term "workflow" and are comprised of the methods (software in some cases) and the data collected, analyzed, or used.

Another pressure to publish the workflow of research is that there is a tremendous amount of material that is easily lost due to bad information management. The author cites 4 examples from his own research (and acknowledges that he could list many more) including: much intellectual memory is locked away in badly managed personal email folders, important communication happens via presentations without a useful central location to share those materials with others, important pieces of software are lost due to personnel transfers, and data is sometimes lost for the same reason.

There are, however, issues which must be addressed. These are:
* "It is much harder to manage." Papers/Documents/PDFs are a known and mostly solved problem within the area of scholarly communication. A dynamic workflow, is not.
* "The scientific endeavor as a simple linear workflow is also clearly an oversimplification." Managing distinct steps along a known path is easy. But managing the various and multiple paths taken during a process is much harder, especially when many steps are undertaken multiple times with differing parameters.
* Confidentiality: Some research will need to be private during the process due to either personal opinions on when it is acceptable to share or due to research participant privacy issues. Philip speculates that when given the choice, more scientific information will be shared earlier within this system.
* Peer Review: It would be important for expert peers to also review the workflow of a researcher, not just their submitted paper, and in some progressive cases, their supporting datasets.
* New Infrastructure: There are already systems in place for managing the peer-review of articles but there needs to be a similar solution for the review of workflows.
* Data Repositories vs Publishers: Publishers do not inherently need to host all materials associated with a publication and can instead provide strong interoperability options with data repositories.
* Community Acceptance: With a seemingly radical jump in the services provided by a publisher this may cause some members of the scholarly community to be hesitant to accept the new paradigm. However, some publishers already provide some services to accept and publish additional parts of the workflow than just the final article now, and extending those offerings seems logical. Additionally, an acceptance of this new material within the reward system of academia is a crucial step.
* Journals and the Reward System: Scientific success has largely been associated with (seemingly) simple metrics associated with only article publications. Adding other materials from the research workflow is just another facet to be considered and its value measured.

If all of these issues are addressed and the new system is accepted then, "the complete result will be a digital workflow that begins with a documented idea and ends in a set of conclusions from a scientific experiment, all of which will be published by the publisher of the future and accepted as the norm in scholarly communication."
|journal=PLoS Computational Biology
|pub_date=2010
|doi=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000787
|journal_vol=6
|pub_open_access=
}}

What Do I Want from the Publisher of the Future

2010-06-08T21:07:38Z

Greg:

{{Summary
|title=What Do I Want from the Publisher of the Future?
|authors=Philip E. Bourne
|tags=publishing, scholarly communication, openaccess, open source, data, workflow,
|summary=In this Perspective by the Editor-in-Chief of PLoS Computation Biology, the possibilities of a completely integrated and public research ecosystem is explored. The author frames this in the context of a publisher, most likely due to their personal perspective as Editor-in-Chief, but a publisher-centric view is not a requirement of the analysis.

The main argument is that article publications are only one part of the production known as research and the other parts should also be published to be a part of the scholarly record. It is further argued that, with the advent of ubiquitous and cheap digital technologies, there is no excuse for not publishing those materials. The other, arguable equally or even more important, parts are grouped together under the term "workflow" and are comprised of the methods (software in some cases) and the data collected, analyzed, or used.

Another pressure to publish the workflow of research is that there is a tremendous amount of material that is easily lost due to bad information management. The author cites 4 examples from his own research (and acknowledges that he could list many more) including: much intellectual memory is locked away in badly managed personal email folders, important communication happens via presentations without a useful central location to share those materials with others, important pieces of software are lost due to personnel transfers, and data is sometimes lost for the same reason.

There are, however, issues which must be addressed. These are:
* "It is much harder to manage." Papers/Documents/PDFs are a known and mostly solved problem within the area of scholarly communication. A dynamic workflow, is not.
* "The scientific endeavor as a simple linear workflow is also clearly an oversimplification." Managing distinct steps along a known path is easy. But managing the various and multiple paths taken during a process is much harder, especially when many steps are undertaken multiple times with differing parameters.
* Confidentiality: Some research will need to be private during the process due to either personal opinions on when it is acceptable to share or due to research participant privacy issues. Philip speculates that when given the choice, more scientific information will be shared earlier within this system.
* Peer Review: It would be important for expert peers to also review the workflow of a researcher, not just their submitted paper, and in some progressive cases, their supporting datasets.
* New Infrastructure: There are already systems in place for managing the peer-review of articles but there needs to be a similar solution for the review of workflows.
* Data Repositories vs Publishers: Publishers do not inherently need to host all materials associated with a publication and can instead provide strong interoperability options with data repositories.
* Community Acceptance: With a seemingly radical jump in the services provided by a publisher this may cause some members of the scholarly community to be hesitant to accept the new paradigm. However, some publishers already provide some services to accept and publish additional parts of the workflow than just the final article now, and extending those offerings seems logical. Additionally, an acceptance of this new material within the reward system of academia is a crucial step.
* Journals and the Reward System: Scientific success has largely been associated with (seemingly) simple metrics associated with only article publications. Adding other materials from the research workflow is just another facet to be considered and its value measured.

If all of these issues are addressed and the new system is accepted then, "the complete result will be a digital workflow that begins with a documented idea and ends in a set of conclusions from a scientific experiment, all of which will be published by the publisher of the future and accepted as the norm in scholarly communication."
|journal=PLoS Comput Biol
|pub_date=2010
|doi=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000787
|journal_vol=6
|pub_open_access=
}}

What Do I Want from the Publisher of the Future

2010-06-08T20:58:15Z

Greg:

{{Summary
|title=What Do I Want from the Publisher of the Future?
|authors=Philip E. Bourne
|summary=In this Perspective by the Editor-in-Chief of PLoS Computation Biology, the possibilities of a completely integrated and public research ecosystem is explored. The author frames this in the context of a publisher, most likely due to their personal perspective as Editor-in-Chief, but a publisher-centric view is not a requirement of the analysis.

The main argument is that article publications are only one part of the production known as research and the other parts should also be published to be a part of the scholarly record. It is further argued that, with the advent of ubiquitous and cheap digital technologies, there is no excuse for not publishing those materials. The other, arguable equally or even more important, parts are grouped together under the term "workflow" and are comprised of the methods (software in some cases) and the data collected, analyzed, or used.

Another pressure to publish the workflow of research is that there is a tremendous amount of material that is easily lost due to bad information management. The author cites 4 examples from his own research (and acknowledges that he could list many more) including: much intellectual memory is locked away in badly managed personal email folders, important communication happens via presentations without a useful central location to share those materials with others, important pieces of software are lost due to personnel transfers, and data is sometimes lost for the same reason.

There are, however, issues which must be addressed. These are:
* "It is much harder to manage." Papers/Documents/PDFs are a known and mostly solved problem within the area of scholarly communication. A dynamic workflow, is not.
* "The scientific endeavor as a simple linear workflow is also clearly an oversimplification." Managing distinct steps along a known path is easy. But managing the various and multiple paths taken during a process is much harder, especially when many steps are undertaken multiple times with differing parameters.
* Confidentiality: Some research will need to be private during the process due to either personal opinions on when it is acceptable to share or due to research participant privacy issues. Philip speculates that when given the choice, more scientific information will be shared earlier within this system.
* Peer Review: It would be important for expert peers to also review the workflow of a researcher, not just their submitted paper, and in some progressive cases, their supporting datasets.
* New Infrastructure: There are already systems in place for managing the peer-review of articles but there needs to be a similar solution for the review of workflows.
* Data Repositories vs Publishers: Publishers do not inherently need to host all materials associated with a publication and can instead provide strong interoperability options with data repositories.
* Community Acceptance: With a seemingly radical jump in the services provided by a publisher this may cause some members of the scholarly community to be hesitant to accept the new paradigm. However, some publishers already provide some services to accept and publish additional parts of the workflow than just the final article now, and extending those offerings seems logical. Additionally, an acceptance of this new material within the reward system of academia is a crucial step.
* Journals and the Reward System: Scientific success has largely been associated with (seemingly) simple metrics associated with only article publications. Adding other materials from the research workflow is just another facet to be considered and its value measured.

If all of these issues are addressed and the new system is accepted then, "the complete result will be a digital workflow that begins with a documented idea and ends in a set of conclusions from a scientific experiment, all of which will be published by the publisher of the future and accepted as the norm in scholarly communication."
|journal=PLoS Comput Biol
|pub_date=2010
|doi=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000787
|journal_vol=6
|pub_open_access=
}}

What Do I Want from the Publisher of the Future

2010-06-08T18:14:32Z

Greg: Created page with '{{Summary |title=What Do I Want from the Publisher of the Future? |authors=Philip E. Bourne |journal=PLoS Comput Biol |journal_vol=6 |pub_date=2010 |doi=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000…'

{{Summary
|title=What Do I Want from the Publisher of the Future?
|authors=Philip E. Bourne
|journal=PLoS Comput Biol
|journal_vol=6
|pub_date=2010
|doi=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000787
|subject=
|pub_open_access=
|tags=
|summary=
|relevance=}}

User:Greg

2010-05-27T18:20:50Z

Greg:

{{User
|name=Greg Grossmeier
|photo=Gotchi 3 base perspective192.png
|location=University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
}}

:: [http://blog.grossmeier.net My blog]
:: [http://grossmeier.net/about About Me] (most updated version of any bio on any profile page)

User:Greg Grossmeier

2010-05-27T18:19:21Z

Greg: Blanked the page

User:Greg

2010-05-27T18:15:52Z

Greg:

{{User
|name=Greg Grossmeier
|photo=Gotchi 3 base perspective192.png
|location=University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
|blog=http://blog.grossmeier.net
}}

User:Greg

2010-05-27T18:15:28Z

Greg: why did I move my page?

{{User
|name=Greg Grossmeier
|photo=Gotchi 3 base perspective192.png
|location=University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
|blog=http://grossmeier.net, http://blog.grossmeier.net
}}

User talk:Greg Grossmeier

2010-05-27T04:40:40Z

Greg: moved User talk:Greg to User talk:Greg Grossmeier

'''Greg Grossmeier'''
:: Copyright Specialist, University of Michigan Library
:: Fellow, Creative Commons

* http://grossmeier.net
* http://blog.grossmeier.net

User talk:Greg

2010-05-27T04:40:40Z

Greg: moved User talk:Greg to User talk:Greg Grossmeier

#REDIRECT [[User talk:Greg Grossmeier]]

User:Greg Grossmeier

2010-05-27T04:40:39Z

Greg: moved User:Greg to User:Greg Grossmeier

{{User
|name=Greg Grossmeier
|photo=Gotchi 3 base perspective192.png
|location=University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
|blog=http://grossmeier.net, http://blog.grossmeier.net
}}

User:Greg

2010-05-27T04:40:39Z

Greg: moved User:Greg to User:Greg Grossmeier

#REDIRECT [[User:Greg Grossmeier]]

User talk:Greg Grossmeier

2010-05-27T04:25:40Z

Greg: Created page with ''''Greg Grossmeier''' :: Copyright Specialist, University of Michigan Library :: Fellow, Creative Commons * http://grossmeier.net * http://blog.grossmeier.net'

'''Greg Grossmeier'''
:: Copyright Specialist, University of Michigan Library
:: Fellow, Creative Commons

* http://grossmeier.net
* http://blog.grossmeier.net

Accelerating the pace of discovery by changing the peer review algorithm

2010-05-27T04:20:00Z

Greg: Created page with '{{Summary |title=Accelerating the pace of discovery by changing the peer review algorithm |authors=Stefano Allesina |journal=0911.0344 |url=http://arxiv.org/abs/0911.0344 |pub_da…'

{{Summary
|title=Accelerating the pace of discovery by changing the peer review algorithm
|authors=Stefano Allesina
|journal=0911.0344
|url=http://arxiv.org/abs/0911.0344
|pub_date=2009
|subject=
|pub_open_access=
|tags=
|summary=
|relevance=}}

User:Greg Grossmeier

2009-07-10T14:09:19Z

Greg: New page: {{User |name=Greg Grossmeier |photo=Gotchi 3 base perspective192.png |location=University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan |blog=http://grossmeier.net, http://blog.grossmeier.net }}

{{User
|name=Greg Grossmeier
|photo=Gotchi 3 base perspective192.png
|location=University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
|blog=http://grossmeier.net, http://blog.grossmeier.net
}}

File:Gotchi 3 base perspective192.png

2009-07-10T14:08:09Z

Greg: Greg's hackergotchi

Greg's hackergotchi