Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Review and Preview

Review and Preview

In statistics, several tools are used to interpret the data. Measures of central tendency represent the characteristics of the data, such as mean, median, and mode. Additionally, measures of variance like standard deviation and range are used to find the spread of data from the mean. Relative standing measures the distance between data locations. Commonly used measures of relative standings are percentile, z score, and quartiles.
Percentiles are a type of fractile that partition data into...

Review and Preview

Review and Preview

Data are individual items of information obtained from a population or sample. Data may be classified as qualitative (categorical), quantitative continuous, or quantitative discrete. Because it is not practical to measure the entire population in a study, researchers use samples to represent the population. A random sample is a representative group from the population chosen by using a method that gives each individual in the population an equal chance of being included in the sample. Random...

Feedback Loops

Feedback Loops

In most cases, excessive hormone production is prevented by negative feedback—a loop that starts with a stimulus inducing the release of a particular substance, like a hormone, to maintain a certain level before triggering a signal that results in a decrease in further release of the hormone.

Feedback Inhibition

Feedback Inhibition

Biochemical reactions are occurring constantly in cells, converting starting substances to different products, usually with the help of enzymes that speed the reactions. Without enzymes, it would take far too long for most reactions to occur to be useful to the cell!

Affinity and Avidity

Affinity and Avidity

Types of Aggregate Grading

Types of Aggregate Grading

Aggregate grading is crucial in economically obtaining a concrete mix with adequate strength, reasonable workability, and minimal segregation. There are four types of aggregate gradation: well-graded, uniformly (or one-sized) graded, gap-graded, and open-graded.
Well-graded aggregates include a complete range of necessary size fractions that fit together to create a dense matrix with minimal voids, represented by a smooth, continuous gradation curve. This type of grading ensures good...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

A new class of metrics for spike trains.

Neural computation·2013

Same author

The chronotron: a neuron that learns to fire temporally precise spike patterns.

PloS one·2012

Same author

Reinforcement learning through modulation of spike-timing-dependent synaptic plasticity.

Neural computation·2007

See all related articles

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 21, 2026

Comparing Bibliometric Analysis Using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Databases

Comparing Bibliometric Analysis Using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Databases

Published on: October 24, 2019

Aggregating post-publication peer reviews and ratings.

Răzvan V Florian¹

¹Romanian Institute of Science and Technology Cluj-Napoca, Romania.

Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience

|June 5, 2012

Summary

Scientists can improve research funding decisions by rating publications they read. Aggregating these reviews in an online database can revolutionize scientific evaluation and encourage participation through a public review portfolio.

Keywords:

peer review post-publication peer review scientific evaluation

More Related Videos

Global and Current Research Trends of Single-Cell Sequencing in Cancer: A Bibliometric and Visualization Study

Global and Current Research Trends of Single-Cell Sequencing in Cancer: A Bibliometric and Visualization Study

Published on: April 18, 2025

A User-friendly and Powerful R Analysis of Large-scale Datasets

A User-friendly and Powerful R Analysis of Large-scale Datasets

Published on: November 4, 2025

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 21, 2026

Comparing Bibliometric Analysis Using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Databases

Comparing Bibliometric Analysis Using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Databases

Published on: October 24, 2019

Global and Current Research Trends of Single-Cell Sequencing in Cancer: A Bibliometric and Visualization Study

Global and Current Research Trends of Single-Cell Sequencing in Cancer: A Bibliometric and Visualization Study

Published on: April 18, 2025

A User-friendly and Powerful R Analysis of Large-scale Datasets

A User-friendly and Powerful R Analysis of Large-scale Datasets

Published on: November 4, 2025

Area of Science:

Bibliometrics
Scientometrics
Research Evaluation

Background:

Research funding allocation relies on publication reviews, often lacking domain specialists.
Valuable evaluative insights from scientists reading numerous articles are currently lost.
Existing peer review systems face challenges in scope and scale.

Purpose of the Study:

To propose an online database for aggregating scientist reviews and ratings of publications.
To suggest a system encouraging review submission via a public, anonymized review portfolio.
To provide quantitative estimates for review and rating generation.

Main Methods:

Conceptual framework for an aggregated online review database.
Proposal for a scientist review portfolio system.
Quantitative estimation of obtainable reviews and ratings.

Main Results:

The proposed system can capture lost evaluative information from scientists' reading habits.
An aggregated database can significantly enhance research evaluation processes.
A review portfolio system can incentivize participation while maintaining anonymity.

Conclusions:

Aggregating scientist reviews offers a novel approach to revolutionize research funding evaluations.
The proposed system can leverage existing reading behaviors to generate valuable data.
This method enhances the efficiency and scope of scientific evaluation.