Blockchain – The decentralization Science was long awaiting
It may seem like I am getting on
the Blockchain wagon like the many 100’s we see daily. Really though, this idea
was brewing long before rising bitcoin values attracted eyes to Blockchain
technology. In fact, many other contexts aside, decentralized knowledge
creation is one of the more natural inheritors of Blockchain. Before I make the
argument though, I would like to point that there are many things that can be
better implemented in the current journal publishing paradigm. Keep in mind
that in this article, I will only address the aspect of Scientific validation.
To discover how blockchain fits
as a solution for Science validation, we must first understand the
characteristics of both. As far as decentralizing the review process goes ideally,
we would imagine a network of academics who contribute directly into a paper
pool. This paper based on expertise is sorted and sent to relevant academics on
the network followed subsequently by the reviewer appending comments to the
paper. These appends would be temporary and be sent to all reviewers again and
based on a consensus of some sort, would get accepted as a valid alteration.
This system has the following
attributes:
Ø It
is decentralized – There is no
central authority regulating the process
Ø As
a corollary, the power is distributed
Ø It
is immutable – all changes made to
knowledge leaves a trail and old knowledge is preserved
Ø The
process is transparent – we can see
all information fed into the network, the changes it undergoes and its travel through
this network
Now examining a blockchain. It is
simply a chain of blocks. Here, for quick understanding we could think of
blocks as databases of information but a bit more than that. It is an
actionable database that stores information, processes it, and based on
constraints provides an output. In bitcoin it mines, stores and exchanges
bitcoins which is the virtual currency. So how does this relate to science
validation? Forget the bitcoins and focus just on the blockchain. It is a distributed, decentralized, immutable and
transparent system. Heard these
attributes before? Yes. It seems to superimpose well with our requirements for
science review processes. For an easy to understand breakdown of the properties
of a blockchain, check out the following video:
There are of course some issues
adopting such a decentralized system. As knowledge created is immutable, it
leads to LARGE vats of information that are required to be stored. So, who
exactly is going to provide the server infrastructure to support such a system?
With the current process of publishing, there is certain degree of value provided
to the author, both monetarily and through establishment of identity. In a
decentralized system, the content takes the center stage and so author
incentives appear to dilute. So, what incentives can a decentralized system
like this offer a knowledge contributor? There are many such questions. Just
like any paradigm shift, these are solvable with a hard-enough push. To have a
look at other possible implications of Blockchain in knowledge creation and
validation, check out this presentation!
(citation: https://doi.org/10.5446/31025)
The proposal:
I suggest the creation of Science Ledger inspired by Blockchain that is
shared by academics on a decentralized review network. The proposed ledger stores
information, records and approves the changes made through network consensus.
I would like to conclude by saying
that while efforts through certain initiatives like Blockchain for Science and efforts by my peers and I exist, this is
a transition that needs to be shouldered by many in the academic community.
Those that are intrigued by the idea and would like to put in some voluntary
work into helping us realize this are welcome to write to me at:
sathyasaisanjay[at]gmail.com
-Sanjay Narayanaswamy
-Sanjay Narayanaswamy
Comments
Post a Comment