Scientific publishing platforms and the traditional peer review process have been criticized for taking too much time to publish a paper, for lacking of reliability, for being too expensive, or even for creating biases. These criticisms can concern several differing levels, such as the work of peer reviewers, or editorial decisions that can affect peer review. In a first part, we will analyze all different types of peer review in order to understand if one can address issues about the peer review process. In a second part, we are going to make a list of all existing features that users can find on commercial and open source platforms. Finally, an analysis will be made in order to determine which feature should be included in a future open source scientific publishing platform, based on an online survey.
|Date of Award||18 Jun 2019|
|Supervisor||Ivan Jureta (Supervisor)|