

GitXiv: Collaborative Open Computer Science - archgoon
http://gitxiv.com/

======
samim
You can read more about GitXiv here: [https://medium.com/@samim/gitxiv-
collaborative-open-computer...](https://medium.com/@samim/gitxiv-
collaborative-open-computer-science-e5fea734cd45)

------
jessriedel
Previous submission (by me) on related issues...and converging on a similar
portmateau:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9415985](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9415985)

~~~
samim
fascinating! had not seen that one yet, nicely formulated. Lets do a hangout
sometime soon?

~~~
jessriedel
Maybe, I guess. Who are you? Send me an email to my username @gmail.com

~~~
graphific
Nice post and especially your blog post "gitwikxiv". So many models & projects
are already out there: PaperBricks, [http://knowen.org/](http://knowen.org/),
[https://www.authorea.com/](https://www.authorea.com/),
[https://casetext.com/](https://casetext.com/),
[https://www.sharelatex.com/](https://www.sharelatex.com/),
[https://selectedpapers.net/](https://selectedpapers.net/),
[http://stacks.math.columbia.edu/](http://stacks.math.columbia.edu/),
[https://www.codalab.org/](https://www.codalab.org/),
[https://pubpeer.com/](https://pubpeer.com/),
[http://thinklab.com/publications](http://thinklab.com/publications)

With GitXiv as one commenter also implied we really want to focus on building
a bridge between the 2 core issues of making real research
possible/replicatable: articles & code (of course with the 3th even more
difficult problem to solve being "data"), as well as building a community
around it. Another point of focus is making everything what goes on with
GitXiv as transparent as possible, ie by having public "issues" at github
([https://github.com/samim23/GitXiv/issues](https://github.com/samim23/GitXiv/issues)),
and open discussions at our wiki:
[https://github.com/samim23/GitXiv/wiki/Thoughts-on-
GitXiv](https://github.com/samim23/GitXiv/wiki/Thoughts-on-GitXiv)

Jess: Let's have a hangout for sure!

------
songgao
This looks awesome! The comment part is particular enabling. I wonder if it's
possible to build an open peer-review process on top of this.

Also, would be nice to have HTTPS given that it does have register/sign-in,
etc.

~~~
TuringTest
I was thinking the same. In our current era of always-on info saturation, a
blog may prove to be more adequate for science divulgation and peer-review
than the older journal format.

------
tachim
Check out [https://www.codalab.org/](https://www.codalab.org/) too. It's a
more complete toolkit for reproducible computational research.

~~~
TuringTest
If I understand the article, the goal of the site is not merely to provide a
toolkit for collaboration but to build a community around it - which is
critical if they want to achieve adoption.

With Gitxiv, two minutes after following the link and reading the blurt, I
have access to a continuous stream of projects organized in categories, to
which I can post comments - in essence, it's a blog focused on CS news, which
also can be used to kickstart collaboration. This already provides me with
value even if I don't intend to use the platform. It's a neat approach for
filtering the noise and providing a strong signal.

------
dkarapetyan
So CS but you can either register or log in with twitter? Where is github
oauth?

(Looks like there is an issue open so that's good:
[https://github.com/samim23/GitXiv/issues/3](https://github.com/samim23/GitXiv/issues/3))

~~~
samim
we´ll get to github login asap!

------
agentultra
Awesome.

Is it just me with my limited sample or is there a huge trend towards
recurrent neural networks, deep learning, and natural language processing
right now?

This, combined with other sources, could be a good way to find indicators of
what we should all be brushing up on.

------
stared
Very nice, but IMHO too much of clutter. Why 3 abstracts?

Wouldn't it be better to have one abstract and leave arXiv abstract and GitHub
abstract in their places (or import them)?

~~~
samim
top abstract = human readable overview of what paper/code describes. the other
abstracts are paper/code specific - which often deviate allot. The aim is to
give you an overview at a glance. If you have ideas on how to improve, please
post them on our github issues page, always open for great suggestions!

~~~
stared
But then, isn't it better to have one high-level overview instead of 3
overlapping overviews? (3 overviews do not make it easier to get a quick grasp
of the project.)

I don't have a quick solution - it's much matter of taste (and balance).

BTW:

\- Any plans to add some external measures of interest? (E.g. GitHub stars,
arXiv trackbacks, SciRate scites/# of comments?)

~~~
samim
The authors often don´t provide one or the other, so we opted to give them
choice over convention. API integrations are planned down the line. As well as
using machine learning techniques to cut down on noise.

------
smallape
cocs. right.

------
shahryc
awesome!

