Download [CRACKED] Locked Research Papers
Audie Reints
We are grateful to the data management team at the company that provided the application data for this research. Shumiao Ouyang and Jiaheng Yu provided excellent research assistance. For helpful comments, we also thank Effi Benmelech, Henrik Cronqvist, Thomas Davidoff, Anthony DeFusco, Brian Melzer, as well as seminar participants at Georgetown University, McGill University, University of British Columbia, University of Notre Dame, University of Miami, University of Regensburg, University of Southern California, and LMU Munich Workshop on Natural Experiments and Controlled Field Studies. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research.
Can someone give me a legitimate, convincing argument as to why scientific papers should be locked behind subscriptions and paywalls? That unless you happen to be on a campus, you can't get view a manuscript without paying an often extortionate amount?
So why are things largely as they were 50 years ago? There are a couple of reasons for this. For one, there is the absence of a platform that fully replaces the ring of scientific journals, including a reliable peer review process (or accepted alternative). Furthermore, people tend to do what they are used to doing in the past, and senior researchers (the ones who take the decisions) are used to publish in the traditional venues, and teach the juniors to do the same. Lastly, many researchers are (at least partially) evaluated with respect to the reputation of the venues they publish in, which keeps the old and established journals alive.
First, a lot of preprints, technical reports, extended versions are already available. Instead of only searching via Google, you can check the author's page (often containing preprints, codes), and a lot of archives and similar services: arxiv, biorxiv, hal, researchgate, academia and many others. Some older papers are quite often made available freely.
Publishing is a service that comes with a cost. That was true before the internet, and it is still true today. You can fund this service in many different ways, one being to charge readers with either a subscription or a single article charge. Contrary to what is often said (on the internet), publishers only charge for the publishing process, not for the work that resulted in the content (research, writing, reviewing, etc.). Nothing prevents the authors from giving you the content for free if you ask politely.
This has the advantage of taking the burden of finding funds, and taking care of the practicalities of publishing away from researchers. In that way, they can use their time and resources for actual research.
What @scaaahu said is essentially true unless a journal were to be set up with such a low budget that all of the publications would have to be like arXiv. Suppose you want your repository of scientific papers to have some authoritative gatekeeper to put a limit on crackpot and commercial dreck.
Each of our disciplines has professional societies that are recognized as authoritative and have a journal telling each other and the world what the state of their art currently is. I know my society (the Audio Engineering Society) is just now beginning to do some manner of fair use thing for convention preprints that are not yet Journal papers (and may never be deemed worthy of the Journal). And the Journal papers can be accessed by any of us with membership, but someone on the outside would have to pay something like $20 to get it. (don't like that? become a member.) But for convention papers that are not published (and are preliminary for the authors) they need the ability to disseminate their work, if it is not disseminated in the Journal, without running afoul of copyright law. So fair use is granted.
I work in a university that pays millions of dollars every year for journal subscriptions, and yet I do not have access to many pay-walled research papers, which prevents me from doing research efficiently.
@DavidRicherby It does answer the question: I focused on researchers, not journals. If many researchers are okay to submit to journals that charge for access, then such journals would be crazy not to charge for access, regardless of their budget. If you want to focus on the rational behind journal subscription prices, it has already been asked: Why are journal subscriptions so expensive?
So Academics want access to Journals with a good reputation. Academics also want to publish their papers in Journals with a good reputation, so others will read it, and others give their paper the doubt as to its quality.
Or, in short, most Journals operate in a way to draw money out of the "gift" economy of Academia, where Academics give their research to the commons and gather reputation back. Universities pay into this "gift" economy in order to capture the reputational value of their Academics and use it to gather funds from other sources.
Capitalism encourages people to find monopolies and raise prices to capture the surplus economic value produced by a system. The exclusive right to the name of the Journal and its repository of past papers is a weak monopoly; the paywall is part of exploiting that monopoly to generate profits.
Architecture outline (A): A prompt is transformed into a sequence of encodings. Each encoding is fed to a set of cross-attention modules (purple blocks) of a diffusion U-Net denoiser. Zoomed-in purple module shows how the Key and Value pathways are conditioned on the text encoding. The Key drives the attention map, which then modulates the Value pathway. Gated Rank-1 Edit (B): Top: The K pathway is locked so any encoding of ?_Hugsy that reaches ?? is mapped to the key of the supre-category ?_teddy. Bottom: Any encoding of ?_Hugsy that reaches ?? , is mapped to ?_Hugsy, which is learned. The gated aspect of this update allows to selectively apply it to only the necessary encodings and provides means for regulating the strength of learned concept, as expressed in the output images.
In most cases, the citations have been added to My Bibliography because they are affiliated with an award you own. Many investigators use the private label to track papers that they did not author but were directly supported by their NIH funds. Additional information can be found in Viewing Citations and Making Citations Private ( _Citations_and_Mak)
Yes. My Bibliography will not harvest award information from the text of your paper or indexing services. You will need to associate the awards that supported your research with your citations in My Bibliography.
Patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) can lose all muscle-based routes of communication as motor neuron degeneration progresses, and ultimately, they may be left without any means of communication. While others have evaluated communication in people with remaining muscle control, to the best of our knowledge, it is not known whether neural-based communication remains possible in a completely locked-in state. Here, we implanted two 64 microelectrode arrays in the supplementary and primary motor cortex of a patient in a completely locked-in state with ALS. The patient modulated neural firing rates based on auditory feedback and he used this strategy to select letters one at a time to form words and phrases to communicate his needs and experiences. This case study provides evidence that brain-based volitional communication is possible even in a completely locked-in state.
Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a devastating neurodegenerative disorder that leads to the progressive loss of voluntary muscular function of the body1. As the disorder typically progresses, the affected individual loses the ability to breathe due to diaphragm paralysis. Upon accepting artificial ventilation and with oro-facial muscle paralysis, the individual in most cases can no longer speak and becomes dependent on assistive and augmentative communication (AAC) devices2,3, and may progress into the locked-in state (LIS) with intact eye-movement or gaze control4,5. Several invasive6,7,8,9,10 and non-invasive11,12,13,14,15,16 brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) have provided communication to individuals in LIS17,18,19,20 using control of remaining eye-movement or (facial) muscles or neural signals. Once the affected individual loses this control to communicate reliably or cannot open their eyes voluntarily anymore, no existing assistive technology has provided voluntary communication in this completely locked-in state (CLIS)17,18,19,20. Non-invasive11,12,13,14,15,16 and invasive6,7,8,9,10 BCIs developed for communication have demonstrated successful cursor control and sentence formation by individuals up to the stage of LIS. However, none of these studies has demonstrated communication at the level of voluntary sentence formation in CLIS individuals, who lack stable and reliable eye-movement/muscle control or have closed eyes, leaving the possibility open that once all movement - and hence all possibility for communication - is lost, neural mechanisms to produce communication will concurrently fail. Several hypotheses have been formulated, based on the past BCI failures, to explain the inability of ALS-patients in CLIS to select letters to form words and sentences ranging from extinction of intentions21 related to protracted loss of sensory input and motor output, cognitive dysfunction, particularly when it occurs in association with fronto-temporal degeneration. A successful demonstration of any BCI enabling an individual without reliable eye-movement control and with eyes closed (CLIS) to form a complete sentence would upend these hypotheses, opening the door to communication and the investigation of psychological processes in the completely paralyzed ALS patients and probably also other disease or injury states leading to CLIS.
Many of the letters were everyday correspondence, but collectively they paint a detailed picture of life in Europe during the 1600s. "The letters represent the thoughts, cares, and dreams of a cross-section of society: there are missives by ambassadors, dukes and duchesses, merchants, publishers, and spies, but also by actors and musicians, ordinary lovers, struggling refugees, and by women as well as men," write the researchers who have been studying the collection.
df19127ead