DOCSLIB.ORG

Compilation of E-Mailed Comments for Public Access Policy Forum Part 2

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Compilation of E-Mailed Comments for Public Access Policy Forum Part 2 OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY Compilation of E-Mailed Comments for Public Access Policy Forum Part 2 Compiled on February 1st 2010 Thank you for the opportunity to comment briefly on this public access policy forum. I wish to echo the comments of my counterpart at the American Anthropological Association, since the American Statistical Association (ASA) was also a part of the NHA study on financing scholarly journal publications (see http://www.nhalliance.org/bm~doc/hssreport.pdf <https://exchange.amstat.org/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www.nhalliance.org/bm~doc/hs sreport.pdf> ). While access to research is clearly important, a mandate to federal agencies that fund research to provide free access to journal articles published by scholarly societies like the ASA will have unintended consequences to the authors and readers of these journals, and to the ability of scholarly societies to sustain their publications programs. Scholarly societies would be set back severely by such a mandate due to loss of the subscription revenue that makes it possible to operate these journals. We already offer these journals to libraries at relatively minimal cost because much of the labor is done by volunteer editors and reviewers. However, there are still basic production costs, and if the revenue to cover these costs is eliminated, we're faced with finding other revenue sources. Good alternatives have yet to be discovered. As the aforementioned study notes, shifting the cost to authors is not feasible, and places a significant obstacle to publication for many authors. Scholarly societies are not enriching themselves at the expense of providing access to researchers. We ask for caution in rushing to mandate free access. We applaud the spirit of the proposal, but the reality of it may be to put scholarly society publishers out of business, an outcome from which no one benefits. Ron Wasserstein Executive Director American Statistical Association The American Association of Physics Teachers (AAPT) supports President Obama’s call for an “unprecedented level of openness in government,” and we are grateful for the opportunity to submit comments to help guide policy making regarding public access to scholarly publications resulting from research funded by agencies of the United States government. AAPT is a professional society with about 10,000 members, a vast majority of whom reside in the United States. AAPT publishes two scholarly journals: The American Journal of Physics and The Physics Teacher, both of which a re peer-reviewed archival publications and are broadly considered to be among the leading physics education journals in the world. As with many scholarly organizations engaged in publishing, AAPT holds the position that scholarly publishers add significant value to research manuscripts through by managing the peer-review process, by maintaining in perpetuity the archival version of record, and by leveraging state-of-the-art technology to make journal articles accessible and creatively usable tools for advancing 2 knowledge. And, like many in the scholarly publishing industry, AAPT has a long-term fiduciary interest in the scholarly and business integrity of its publications, as a service to our members and to the broader society. With regard to OSTP’s interest in developing policies related to public access, AAPT welcomes the January 12, 2010 publication of the “Report and Recommendations from the Scholarly Publishing Roundtable,” (the Report) See: http://www.aau.edu/policy/scholarly_publishing_roundtable.aspx?id=6894 AAPT thanks the Committee on Science and Technology of the United States House of Representatives and OSTP for convening the Scholarly Publishing Roundtable. AAPT endorses the Shared Principles and Recommendations of the Report. AAPT also feels that the Report adequately addresses the nine questions posed in OSTP’s Invitation to Comment. Furthermore, AAPT encourages OSTP and the many stakeholders engaged in the public access issue to use the Report as a starting place for carefully and responsibly developing policies that maximize public access and opportunities for creative uses of research publications. Any new policies should also explicitly promote the entrepreneurial role played by scholarly publishers in sustaining the peer-review process, in pushing the state-of-art in access and use technologies, and in stewarding in perpetuity publishers’ intellectual property. AAPT would welcome the opportunity and is prepared to work with OSTP to develop public access policies that adhere to the principles in the Report and which are further delineated above. Philip W. Hammer, PhD Associate Executive Officer AAPT -- Physics Education I attach BioMed Central's comments in response to the OSTP's request for contributions to its Policy Forum on Public Access to Federally Funded Research. We welcome the opportunity to contribute to this important debate, and we look forward with great interest to future developments in this area. Yours faithfully, Matthew Cockerill, Ph.D. Managing Director BioMed Central BioMed Central’s comments in response to the US Office of Science and Technology Policy request for contributions to its Policy Forum on Public Access to Federally Funded Research BioMed Central operates a commercially viable business as an open access publisher. Under our publishing model, the costs associated with research publication are covered by open access publication fees rather than by subscription revenue. We now publish over 200 online journals operating on this model. These journals go from strength to strength, and are highly ranked by 3 journal citation metrics such as Impact Factor. Open access journals such as Genome Biology, Malaria Journal and BMC Systems Biology, to name just a few, are among the most highly- ranked journals in their respective fields. The success of BioMed Central’s open access journals provides important evidence that immediate open access to the official and authoritative version of published research results is not only desirable but is also achievable and sustainable. The success of the open access model is especially notable given that, until recently, in contrast to the substantial library budgets devoted to subscriptions to serials, there has been little funding explicitly allocated by academic institutions to cover open access publication fees. Authors have therefore had to make direct use of their research grant funding in order to publish in open access journals. The Compact for Open Access Publishing Equity is an important recent initiative, involving Harvard and other leading research universities, which seeks to address this disparity by providing central institutional funding support for open access journals. This can be expected to add to the already considerable momentum driving the growth of the open access publishing model. BioMed Central supports both the goal of open access and the goal of ensuring that the value added by publishers is properly recompensed. In contrast to some of the contributors, we do not feel there is a need to ‘balance’ these two goals as we do not feel that they are in opposition. As noted by other participants in this debate, the benefits resulting to the scientific community from open access to research are substantial. What may be less obvious is that open access need not threaten the role of STM publishers. The open access publishing model, in which publishers are paid directly for the service of publication, is proving in practice to be just as viable a business model than as the traditional model whereby publishers recover the costs associated with publication by taking exclusive rights and then selling access via subscriptions. Given that there is a viable business model for publishing scholarly research that does not depend on restricting access, we do not feel that the US government needs to arbitrarily limit the extent and reach of its open access deposit requirements attached to its research funding. We therefore recommend that the mandatory Public Access Policy which has operated successfully with respect to National Institutes of Health funding since 2008, be extended to cover all federally funded research. We also recommend that consideration is given, over time, to reducing or eliminating the 12 month embargo period, because this embargo period covers the very period during which the results of research are most timely and valuable. Gradual reduction of the embargo period would provide a natural mechanism to encourage publishers to adopt business models compatible with open access, while avoiding disruptive upheaval. About BioMed Central BioMed Central (www.biomedcentral.com) is the world’s largest open access scientific, technical, and medical (STM) publisher. All research articles published by BioMed Central are peer reviewed and are made freely and permanently accessible online upon acceptance. In 2009, biomedical scientists from across the globe submitted over 29,000 research papers to BioMed Central’s 205 journals, a 30% increase over 2008. 4 Research articles published in BioMed Central’s journals are universally and freely accessible via the Internet without charge or any other barrier to access; articles are immediately deposited and permanently archived in multiple international archives (including PubMed Central) and authors retain copyright of their article, which can be freely distributed and reused under a Creative Commons as long as correct attribution is given. Like many other open access publishers, BioMed
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Analysis of Comments and Implementation of the Nih Public Access Policy 2008
    ANALYSIS OF COMMENTS AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NIH PUBLIC ACCESS POLICY 2008 Executive Summary BACKGROUND The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Public Access Policy requires investigators funded by the NIH to submit, or have submitted for them, an electronic version of their final, peer‐reviewed manuscripts upon acceptance for publication to the National Library of Medicine’s digital archive, PubMed Central, to be posted publicly within 12 months after the official date of publication. Congress required the NIH to implement this funding limitation in Division G, Title II, Section 218 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008 (“Section 218”). The Policy is intended to advance science, provide public access to the published results of NIH‐funded research, and improve human health. The current Public Access Policy is the culmination of years of effort and community interaction. Prior to passage of Section 218, NIH undertook extraordinary public outreach concerning the issue of public access to the published results of NIH‐funded research. These outreach efforts included a review of over six thousand public comments and the establishment of an independent advisory group to review NIH’s implementation of a voluntary Public Access Policy. Additionally, as part of the process to implement Section 218 in a transparent and participatory manner, NIH formally sought public input through an open meeting and a Request for Information (RFI) seeking public comment. This open meeting occurred on March 20, 2008 and was designed to ensure that a discussion of stakeholder issues could occur. The feedback from the open meeting helped define questions for an RFI, which was published on the NIH web site on March 28, 2008 and in the Federal Register on March 31, 2008.
    [Show full text]
  • Preprints, Institutional Repositories, and the Version of Record
    Purdue University Purdue e-Pubs Charleston Library Conference Preprints, Institutional Repositories, and the Version of Record Judy Luther Informed Strategies, [email protected] Ivy Anderson California Digital Library Monica Bradford Science John Inglis bioRxiv Follow this and additional works at: https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/charleston Part of the Library and Information Science Commons An indexed, print copy of the Proceedings is also available for purchase at: http://www.thepress.purdue.edu/series/charleston. You may also be interested in the new series, Charleston Insights in Library, Archival, and Information Sciences. Find out more at: http://www.thepress.purdue.edu/series/charleston-insights-library-archival- and-information-sciences. Judy Luther, Ivy Anderson, Monica Bradford, and John Inglis, "Preprints, Institutional Repositories, and the Version of Record" (2017). Proceedings of the Charleston Library Conference. http://dx.doi.org/10.5703/1288284316717 This document has been made available through Purdue e-Pubs, a service of the Purdue University Libraries. Please contact [email protected] for additional information. Preprints, Institutional Repositories, and the Version of Record Presented by Judy Luther, Informed Strategies; Ivy Anderson, California Digital Library; Monica Bradford, Science; and John Inglis, bioRxiv The following is a transcription of a live presentation I thought, “I’m not even sure I have the questions to at the 2017 Charleston Conference. ask at this point.” Judy Luther: I’m Judy Luther. I have a background I have a very helpful panel who has come up with that pretty much covers all different sectors of the some very good questions. The one percolating for market. I started as an academic librarian.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Access Availability of Scientific Publications
    Analytical Support for Bibliometrics Indicators Open access availability of scientific publications Analytical Support for Bibliometrics Indicators Open access availability of scientific publications* Final Report January 2018 By: Science-Metrix Inc. 1335 Mont-Royal E. ▪ Montréal ▪ Québec ▪ Canada ▪ H2J 1Y6 1.514.495.6505 ▪ 1.800.994.4761 [email protected] ▪ www.science-metrix.com *This work was funded by the National Science Foundation’s (NSF) National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics (NCSES). Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this report do not necessarily reflect the views of NCSES or the NSF. The analysis for this research was conducted by SRI International on behalf of NSF’s NCSES under contract number NSFDACS1063289. Analytical Support for Bibliometrics Indicators Open access availability of scientific publications Contents Contents .............................................................................................................................................................. i Tables ................................................................................................................................................................. ii Figures ................................................................................................................................................................ ii Abstract ............................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ismb/Eccb 2015
    Research Collection Journal Article ISMB/ECCB 2015 Author(s): Moreau, Yves; Beerenwinkel, Niko Publication Date: 2015 Permanent Link: https://doi.org/10.3929/ethz-b-000102416 Originally published in: Bioinformatics 31(12), http://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btv303 Rights / License: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International This page was generated automatically upon download from the ETH Zurich Research Collection. For more information please consult the Terms of use. ETH Library Bioinformatics, 31, 2015, i1–i2 doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btv303 ISMB/ECCB 2015 Editorial ISMB/ECCB 2015 This special issue of Bioinformatics serves as the proceedings of the 175 external reviewers recruited as sub-reviewers by program com- joint 23rd annual meeting of Intelligent Systems for Molecular mittee members. Table 1 provides a summary of the areas, area Biology (ISMB) and 14th European Conference on Computational chairs and a review summary by area. The conference used a two- Biology (ECCB), which took place in Dublin, Ireland, July 10–14, tier review system—a continuation and refinement of a process that 2015 (http://www.iscb.org/ismbeccb2015). ISMB/ECCB 2015, the begun with ISMB/ECCB 2013 in an effort to better ensure thorough official conference of the International Society for Computational and fair reviewing. Under the revised process, each of the 241 sub- Biology (ISCB, http://www.iscb.org/), was accompanied by nine missions was first reviewed by at least three expert referees, with a Special Interest Group meetings of 1 or 2 days each, and two satel- subset receiving between four and six reviews, as needed. lite meetings.
    [Show full text]
  • Enabling Research Through Open Access Policies
    THE SCHOLARLY PUBLISHING & ACADEMIC RESOURCES COALITION 21 Dupont Circle NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 296-2296 www.arl.org/sparc Enabling Research through Open Access Policies Heather Joseph, Executive Director SPARC Washington, DC USA The Issue • Funders invest in research with the expectation that it will result in improvements to the public good. • They increasingly recognize that dissemination is an essential component of the research process. • Research is cumulative - it advances through sharing results. The value of an investment in research is maximized only through use of its findings. www.arl.org/sparc 2 The Issue • Too often, the research results (either publicly or privately funded ) are simply not widely available to the community of potential users. • Internet provides new opportunity to bring information broader audience at virtually no marginal cost, and use it new, innovative ways. Result: Call for new framework designed to allow research results to be more easily accessed and used. www.arl.org/sparc 3 Without Open Access But Article Isn’t Available….. Usability is Key “By open access, we mean its free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search or link to the full text of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software or use them for any other lawful purpose…” - The Budapest Open Access Initiative www.arl.org/sparc 6 Greater Access is a Policy Concern “Governments would boost innovation and get a better return on their investment in publicly funded research by making research findings more widely available….
    [Show full text]
  • ISCB Ebola Award for Important Future Research on the Computational Biology of Ebola Virus
    ISCB Ebola Award for Important Future Research on the Computational Biology of Ebola Virus Journal Information Article/Issue Information Journal ID (nlm-ta): F1000Res Self URI: f1000research-4-6464.pdf Journal ID (iso-abbrev): F1000Res Date accepted: 13 January 2015 Journal ID (pmc): F1000Research Publication date (electronic): 15 January 2015 Title: F1000Research Publication date (collection): 2015 ISSN (electronic): 2046-1402 Volume: 4 Publisher: F1000Research (London, UK) Electronic Location Identifier: 12 Article Id (accession): PMC4457108 Article Id (pmcid): PMC4457108 Article Id (pmc-uid): 4457108 PubMed ID: 26097686 DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.6038.1 Funding: The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work. Categories Subject: Editorial Categories Subject: Articles Subject: Bioinformatics Subject: Theory & Simulation Subject: Tropical & Travel-Associated Diseases Subject: Viral Infections (without HIV) Subject: Virology ISCB Ebola Award for Important Future Research on the Computational Biology of Ebola Virus v1; ref status: not peer reviewed Peter D. Karp Bonnie Berger Diane Kovats Thomas Lengauer Michal Linial Pardis Sabeti Winston Hide Burkhard Rost 1 1International Society for Computational Biology, La Jolla, CA, USA 2 2SRI International, Menlo Park, CA, USA 3 3Department of Mathematics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA 4 4Computational Biology and Applied Algorithmics, Max Planck Institute for Informatics, Saarbruecken, Germany 5 5Hebrew University & Institute of Advanced
    [Show full text]
  • Sharon M. Donovan, Ph.D., R.D. on Behalf Of
    December 19, 2011 Office of Science and Technology Policy National Science and Technology Council’s Task Force on Public Access to Scholarly Publications 725 17th Street Washington DC 20502 Via Email To: [email protected] Re: Public Access to Peer-Reviewed Scholarly Publications Resulting from Federally Funded Research Request for Information Dear OSTP Task Force on Public Access to Scholarly Publications: The American Society for Nutrition (ASN) appreciates the opportunity to provide information to the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) National Science and Technology Council’s Task Force on Public Access to Scholarly Publications regarding public access to peer-reviewed scholarly publications resulting from federally funded research. Founded in 1928, ASN is a nonprofit scientific society with over 4,300 members in more than 75 countries working in academia, practice, government, and industry. ASN is dedicated to bringing together the world’s top nutrition research scientists to advance our knowledge and application of nutrition. ASN publishes peer- reviewed research publications The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (AJCN), The Journal of Nutrition (JN), and the 2010-launched review journal Advances in Nutrition. AJCN and JN are the two of the top peer-reviewed scientific journals in the areas of nutrition science and dietetics. ASN supports the principle of increased public access to scientific information that stimulates innovation, and voluntarily has taken the following significant steps to accomplish this: • Since 1997, the Society has included free access to the online journal collection as a membership benefit. • ASN has offered free public access to articles 12 months after publication on its website since 2000.
    [Show full text]
  • Pirated Economics
    Munich Personal RePEc Archive Pirated Economics Babutsidze, Zakaria SKEMA Business School, OFCE Sciences Po 2 June 2016 Online at https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/72621/ MPRA Paper No. 72621, posted 20 Jul 2016 07:48 UTC Pirated Economics Zakaria Babutsidze SKEMA Business School & OFCE Sciences Po Abstract: I argue that the impact of piracy engines for scholarly content on science depends on the nature of the research. Social sciences are more likely to reap benefits from such engines without inflicting much damage to r journal publishe revenues. To validate , the claim I examine the data from illegal downloads of economics content from Sci-­‐Hub over -­‐ five month period. I conclude that: (a) the extent of piracy in economics is not pervasive; (b) as downloads are coming mostly -­‐ from under developed countries; (c) users pirate even the content freely available online. As a result, publishers are not losing much revenues, while the exposure to generated knowledge is being extended. JEL Code: A1 1. Introduction The idea of open science has challenged -­‐ many stake holders in science and publishing for years. Many have argued that pricing practices by mainstream scientific journal publishers have built walls around the knowledge precluding a large part of researchers and public from accessing public good. Some have even compared this “paywall” to the wall dividing east and west Berlin during the cold war (Oxenham 2016). This has become particularly problematic when it comes to the knowledge generated by publicly funded research. Some reckon that eliminating scientific journal publishing from the knowledge creation process will save $9.8bln of public money annually (Brembs 2016).
    [Show full text]
  • Text Starts Here
    March 25, 2020 Lisa Nichols, Ph.D. Assistant Director for Academic Engagement Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) 1650 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20504 Re: Public Access to Peer-Reviewed Scholarly Publications, Data and Code Resulting from Federally Funded Research Dear Dr. Nichols: The American Society for Nutrition (ASN) appreciates the opportunity to provide comments to the Office of Science Technology and Policy (OSTP) regarding Public Access to Peer- Reviewed Scholarly Publications, Data and Code Resulting from Federally Funded Research. Founded in 1928, ASN is a nonprofit scientific society with more than 7,000 members in more than 75 countries working in academia, clinical practice, government and industry. ASN is dedicated to bringing together the world’s top nutrition research scientists to advance knowledge and application of nutrition. ASN supports the principle of public access to science and voluntarily has taken significant steps to support broad access to content published in our society journals. ASN publishes leading, peer-reviewed scientific journals in the areas of nutrition science and dietetics, The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (AJCN), The Journal of Nutrition (JN), the review journal Advances in Nutrition, and the open access journal Current Developments in Nutrition. ASN supports efforts to explore ways to increase public access to peer-reviewed scholarly publications, data and code resulting from federally funded research with a clear, coordinated policy from the U.S. government to
    [Show full text]
  • Computational Biology and Bioinformatics
    Vol. 30 ISMB 2014, pages i1–i2 BIOINFORMATICS EDITORIAL doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btu304 Editorial This special issue of Bioinformatics serves as the proceedings of The conference used a two-tier review system, a continuation the 22nd annual meeting of Intelligent Systems for Molecular and refinement of a process begun with ISMB 2013 in an effort Biology (ISMB), which took place in Boston, MA, July 11–15, to better ensure thorough and fair reviewing. Under the revised 2014 (http://www.iscb.org/ismbeccb2014). The official confer- process, each of the 191 submissions was first reviewed by at least ence of the International Society for Computational Biology three expert referees, with a subset receiving between four and (http://www.iscb.org/), ISMB, was accompanied by 12 Special eight reviews, as needed. These formal reviews were frequently Interest Group meetings of one or two days each, two satellite supplemented by online discussion among reviewers and Area meetings, a High School Teachers Workshop and two half-day Chairs to resolve points of dispute and reach a consensus on tutorials. Since its inception, ISMB has grown to be the largest each paper. Among the 191 submissions, 29 were conditionally international conference in computational biology and bioinfor- accepted for publication directly from the first round review Downloaded from matics. It is expected to be the premiere forum in the field for based on an assessment of the reviewers that the paper was presenting new research results, disseminating methods and tech- clearly above par for the conference. A subset of 16 papers niques and facilitating discussions among leading researchers, were viewed as potentially in the top tier but raised significant practitioners and students in the field.
    [Show full text]
  • Accounts of Chemical Research 8 (1975) - 21, 22 {1-11}, 23 - 30 (1997)
    A Accounts of Chemical Research 8 (1975) - 21, 22 {1-11}, 23 - 30 (1997) Acta Chemica Scandinavica 1 (1947) - 27 (1973) : Acta Chemica Scandinavica. 1974 - 1988 : Ser. Aと Ser. B . に分離 A 28 (1974) - A 42 (1988) : Ser. A : Physical and Inorganic Chemistry B 28 (1974) - B 42 (1988) : Ser. B : Organic Chemistry and Biochemistry 43 (1989) : 合併 Acta Chemica Scandinavica. 1 (1947) - 51 (1997) Acta Phytotaxonomica et Geobotanica →APG * Advances in Analytical Chemistry and Instrumentation 1 (1960) - 11 (1973) * Advances in Biological and Medical Physics 10 (1965) - 17 (1980) * Advances in Carbohydrate Chemistry → Advances in Carbohydrate Chemistry and Biochemistry * Advances in Carbohydrate Chemistry and Biochemistry 1 (1945) - 23 (1968) : Advances in Carbohydrate Chemistry 1 (1945) - 61 (2007) 62 (2008) + : 電子ジャーナル * Advances in Catalysis 1 (1948) - 21 (1970) : Advances in Catalysis and Related Subjects 1 (1948) - 41 (1996) * Advances in Catalysis and Related Subjects → Advances in Catalysis * Advances in Chemical Engineering 1 (1956) - 23 (1996) * Advances in Chemical Physics 1 (1958) - 58, 60 - 93, 95 - 96 (1996) * Advances in Clinical Chemistry 1 (1958) - 31 (1994) * Advances in Drug Research 1 (1964) - 12 (1977) * Advances in Electrochemistry and Electrochemical Engineering 1 1 (1961) - 13 (1984) * Advances in Enzyme Regulation 1 (1963) - 33 (1993) * Advances in Enzymology * Advances in Enzymology and Related Subjects * Advances in Enzymology and Related Subjects of Biochemistry → Advances in Enzymology and Related Areas of Molecular Biology
    [Show full text]
  • SCIENCE CITATION INDEX EXPANDED - JOURNAL LIST Total Journals: 8631
    SCIENCE CITATION INDEX EXPANDED - JOURNAL LIST Total journals: 8631 1. 4OR-A QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF OPERATIONS RESEARCH 2. AAPG BULLETIN 3. AAPS JOURNAL 4. AAPS PHARMSCITECH 5. AATCC REVIEW 6. ABDOMINAL IMAGING 7. ABHANDLUNGEN AUS DEM MATHEMATISCHEN SEMINAR DER UNIVERSITAT HAMBURG 8. ABSTRACT AND APPLIED ANALYSIS 9. ABSTRACTS OF PAPERS OF THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY 10. ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE 11. ACADEMIC MEDICINE 12. ACADEMIC PEDIATRICS 13. ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY 14. ACCOUNTABILITY IN RESEARCH-POLICIES AND QUALITY ASSURANCE 15. ACCOUNTS OF CHEMICAL RESEARCH 16. ACCREDITATION AND QUALITY ASSURANCE 17. ACI MATERIALS JOURNAL 18. ACI STRUCTURAL JOURNAL 19. ACM COMPUTING SURVEYS 20. ACM JOURNAL ON EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES IN COMPUTING SYSTEMS 21. ACM SIGCOMM COMPUTER COMMUNICATION REVIEW 22. ACM SIGPLAN NOTICES 23. ACM TRANSACTIONS ON ALGORITHMS 24. ACM TRANSACTIONS ON APPLIED PERCEPTION 25. ACM TRANSACTIONS ON ARCHITECTURE AND CODE OPTIMIZATION 26. ACM TRANSACTIONS ON AUTONOMOUS AND ADAPTIVE SYSTEMS 27. ACM TRANSACTIONS ON COMPUTATIONAL LOGIC 28. ACM TRANSACTIONS ON COMPUTER SYSTEMS 29. ACM TRANSACTIONS ON COMPUTER-HUMAN INTERACTION 30. ACM TRANSACTIONS ON DATABASE SYSTEMS 31. ACM TRANSACTIONS ON DESIGN AUTOMATION OF ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS 32. ACM TRANSACTIONS ON EMBEDDED COMPUTING SYSTEMS 33. ACM TRANSACTIONS ON GRAPHICS 34. ACM TRANSACTIONS ON INFORMATION AND SYSTEM SECURITY 35. ACM TRANSACTIONS ON INFORMATION SYSTEMS 36. ACM TRANSACTIONS ON INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS AND TECHNOLOGY 37. ACM TRANSACTIONS ON INTERNET TECHNOLOGY 38. ACM TRANSACTIONS ON KNOWLEDGE DISCOVERY FROM DATA 39. ACM TRANSACTIONS ON MATHEMATICAL SOFTWARE 40. ACM TRANSACTIONS ON MODELING AND COMPUTER SIMULATION 41. ACM TRANSACTIONS ON MULTIMEDIA COMPUTING COMMUNICATIONS AND APPLICATIONS 42. ACM TRANSACTIONS ON PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES AND SYSTEMS 43. ACM TRANSACTIONS ON RECONFIGURABLE TECHNOLOGY AND SYSTEMS 44.
    [Show full text]