Peer Review as Structured Commentary: Immutable Identity, Public Dialogue, and Reproducible Scholarship
By: Craig Steven Wright
Potential Business Impact:
Makes science ideas better with open feedback.
This paper reconceptualises peer review as structured public commentary. Traditional academic validation is hindered by anonymity, latency, and gatekeeping. We propose a transparent, identity-linked, and reproducible system of scholarly evaluation anchored in open commentary. Leveraging blockchain for immutable audit trails and AI for iterative synthesis, we design a framework that incentivises intellectual contribution, captures epistemic evolution, and enables traceable reputational dynamics. This model empowers fields from computational science to the humanities, reframing academic knowledge as a living process rather than a static credential.
Similar Papers
What Drives Paper Acceptance? A Process-Centric Analysis of Modern Peer Review
Computers and Society
Makes papers more likely to be accepted.
Zero-shot reasoning for simulating scholarly peer-review
Artificial Intelligence
Checks science papers for AI cheating.
A Decentralized Framework for Ethical Authorship Validation in Academic Publishing: Leveraging Self-Sovereign Identity and Blockchain Technology
Cryptography and Security
Ensures fair credit for all scientists' work.