assertion

Full identifier: https://w3id.org/np/RA39-hHHPjBx9RnxX1PjGHrdyZRnDM1FXBh2Ys4cvY1CU#assertion

Minted in Nanopublication

 CoSMO Semantic Post SemanticPost comment approve/disapprove edit as derived nanopublication

This is the identifier for the assertion of this nanopublication. https://w3id.org/np/RA39-hHHPj...#assertion this assertion http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#comment comment (this is a literal) " "Peer review...for centuries the standard tool to determine an academic paper’s suitability for publication". https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-02943-z?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&error=cookies_not_supported&code=3aece27d-b313-46e1-bcf1-1ecf2c746579 No. The term is only a few decades old and Nature itself didn't it routinely until the 1970s. 1/3 More on the history of peer review here and refs within https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.3002234 2/3 That said, lots to agree with in the statement that "unprofessional peer review is that which is unethical, irrelevant, mean-spirited or cruel and lacking constructive criticism". Lot of that about in both formal and informal peer review.. 3/3 " .
This is the identifier for the assertion of this nanopublication. https://w3id.org/np/RA39-hHHPj...#assertion this assertion https://schema.org/keywords keywords (this is a literal) "academic-publishing" .
This is the identifier for the assertion of this nanopublication. https://w3id.org/np/RA39-hHHPj...#assertion this assertion https://schema.org/keywords keywords (this is a literal) "courtesy" .
This is the identifier for the assertion of this nanopublication. https://w3id.org/np/RA39-hHHPj...#assertion this assertion https://schema.org/keywords keywords (this is a literal) "ethics" .
This is the identifier for the assertion of this nanopublication. https://w3id.org/np/RA39-hHHPj...#assertion this assertion https://schema.org/keywords keywords (this is a literal) "history-of-science" .
This is the identifier for the assertion of this nanopublication. https://w3id.org/np/RA39-hHHPj...#assertion this assertion https://schema.org/keywords keywords (this is a literal) "peer-review" .
This is the identifier for the assertion of this nanopublication. https://w3id.org/np/RA39-hHHPj...#assertion The assertion above http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#wasGeneratedBy wasGeneratedBy This is a local identifier minted within the nanopublication. https://w3id.org/np/RA39-hHHPj...#activity activity .
This is the identifier for this whole nanopublication. https://w3id.org/np/RA39-hHHPj... This nanopublication date and time when the nanopublication was created http://purl.org/dc/terms/created was created on (this is a literal) "2024-09-25T17:17:46.461Z" .
This is a local identifier minted within the nanopublication. https://w3id.org/np/RA39-hHHPj...#sig sig http://purl.org/nanopub/x/hasSignatureTarget has as target This is the identifier for this whole nanopublication. https://w3id.org/np/RA39-hHHPj... this nanopublication .
This is a local identifier minted within the nanopublication. https://w3id.org/np/RA39-hHHPj...#sig sig http://purl.org/nanopub/x/hasAlgorithm has the algorithm (this is a literal) "RSA" .

Sensenets, 25 Sep 2024, 17:17:46 UTC

References

Nanopublication Part Subject Predicate Object Published By Published On
links a nanopublication to its provenance http://www.nanopub.org/nschema#hasProvenance provenance
assertion
Sensenets
2024-09-25T17:17:46.461Z
links a nanopublication to its provenance http://www.nanopub.org/nschema#hasProvenance provenance
assertion
Sensenets
2024-09-25T17:17:46.461Z
links a nanopublication to its assertion http://www.nanopub.org/nschema#hasAssertion assertion
assertion
Sensenets
2024-09-25T17:17:46.461Z
links a nanopublication to its provenance http://www.nanopub.org/nschema#hasProvenance provenance
assertion
Sensenets
2024-09-25T17:17:46.461Z
links a nanopublication to its assertion http://www.nanopub.org/nschema#hasAssertion assertion
assertion
"Peer review...for centuries the standard tool to determine an academic paper’s suitability for publication". https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-02943-z?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&error=cookies_not_supported&code=3aece27d-b313-46e1-bcf1-1ecf2c746579 No. The term is only a few decades old and Nature itself didn't it routinely until the 1970s. 1/3 More on the history of peer review here and refs within https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.3002234 2/3 That said, lots to agree with in the statement that "unprofessional peer review is that which is unethical, irrelevant, mean-spirited or cruel and lacking constructive criticism". Lot of that about in both formal and informal peer review.. 3/3
Sensenets
2024-09-25T17:17:46.461Z
links a nanopublication to its assertion http://www.nanopub.org/nschema#hasAssertion assertion
assertion
Sensenets
2024-09-25T17:17:46.461Z
links a nanopublication to its assertion http://www.nanopub.org/nschema#hasAssertion assertion
assertion
Sensenets
2024-09-25T17:17:46.461Z
links a nanopublication to its provenance http://www.nanopub.org/nschema#hasProvenance provenance
assertion
Sensenets
2024-09-25T17:17:46.461Z
links a nanopublication to its assertion http://www.nanopub.org/nschema#hasAssertion assertion
assertion
ethics
Sensenets
2024-09-25T17:17:46.461Z
links a nanopublication to its assertion http://www.nanopub.org/nschema#hasAssertion assertion
assertion
academic-publishing
Sensenets
2024-09-25T17:17:46.461Z

Show All

Raw

TriG(txt), JSON-LD(txt), N-Quads(txt), XML(txt)