"About 1,000 of a set of 15,000 open access scientific journals appear to exist mainly to extract fees from naive academics. A trio of computer scientists from the University of Colorado Boulder, Syracuse University, and China's Eastern Institute of Technology (EIT) arrived at this figure after building a machine learning classier to help identify "questionable" journals and then conducting a human review of the results - because AI falls short on its own."
""The open access movement was set out to fix this lack of accessibility by changing the payment model," the paper explains. "Open-access venues ask authors to pay directly rather than ask universities or libraries to subscribe, allowing scientists to retain their copyrights." Open access scientific publishing is now widely accepted. For example, a 2022 memorandum from the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy directed US agencies to come up with a plan by the end of 2025 to make taxpayer-supported research publicly available."
Researchers built a machine-learning classifier and conducted human review to identify questionable open-access journals, estimating about 1,000 predatory titles among 15,000. A questionable journal violates best practices and maintains low editorial standards, existing mainly to coax academics into paying high fees for publications that lack expected editorial review. The open-access movement began in the 1990s to expand research accessibility and shifted publication costs from institutions to authors. Open-access publishing is now widely accepted, with policies pushing taxpayer-funded research to be publicly available. That shift has, however, enabled a proliferation of dubious scientific publications.
Read at Theregister
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]