# habib: RT @jaykaydee: My dissertation: “Beliefs and Uses of Tagging Among Undergraduates” http://bit.ly/97bJQI If you’re into that sort of thing

# habib: RT @mfenner: New blog post: ORCID session at #solo10 and other important #orcid news http://bit.ly/crZzWg

# habib: RT @gthorisson: My latest SlideShare upload: ORCID presentation from Science Online London 2010 – http://slidesha.re/dqjO0F

# habib: RT @ORCID_Org: We’re officially a non-profit! Announced today, ORCID initiative is now ORCID, Inc http://bit.ly/c8L8hW

# RT @IanMulvany: #solo10 some pics and links to presentations from the session I hosted. http://directedgraph.net/2010/09/07/solo10-presentation-slides/

# WEBINAR (free): The Future of Search and Discovery, Sept. 8 w/ Jud Dunham and Cameron Neylon http://t.co/tiia9JS

# RT @Machemes: New and Unique Tool Eases the Process of Finding Article Reviewers: The search is based on the Scopus macheme fo… http://bit.ly/9U3bEy

# My slides from Connecting Scientific Resources at Science Online London 2010 available at http://t.co/3vrgEc1 #solo10 #li @IanMulvany @rjw

The videos of the Belgrade lectures are now loaded on the University of Belgrade Library’s YouTube channel.

The second day’s presentation was the more interesting topic and a better presentation overall, so I am going to highlight it first.  A written overview of the highlights, key diagrams, and slides is here and the playlist for the second lecture is embedded below:

The first day’s presentation was titled From Academic Library 2.0 to (Literature) Research 2.0.  A written overview of the highlights, key diagrams, and slides is located here and the playlist is embedded below:

I look forward to any feedback you might have on either presentation.

As mentioned in my previous post, my first Belgrade lecture focused on the concept of Research 2.0.  The second lecture focused on Scholarly Identity 2.0, which is increasingly important because of the wealth of online identity information created by Research 2.0.

The Scholarly Identity Matrix below is adapted from a general identity matrix concept pioneered by the founders of ClaimID. It is meant to display the different types and components of a researcher’s online identity.

The Scholarly Identity 2.0 Concept Model below displays how the different components from the Matrix fit together.

The black text is content types. The blue are the characteristics of identity these content types best represent. The green is who is responsible for managing this information. The Scholarly Identity 2.0 Concept Model takes the series of concept models one step farther, but with a slightly different twist.

The spectrum is more specific than in past models with one end being entirely user-generated content (UGC) and the other traditional scholarly communication. My hypothesis is that scholarly identity online, or Scholarly Identity 2.0, is a combination of these two information types held together by a unique identifier. For example, the combination verifies not just topical expertise through peer-review of articles, but also personality verified by LinkedIn recommendations.

Please share your thoughts on the accuracy of this model in the comments below or on FriendFeed.

The below presentation covers each quadrant of the Matrix culminating in the Concept Model as a summary.

The above is an evolution of the Academic Library 2.0 Concept Models developed for my Master’s Paper. While the original model primarily focused on academic library services for students, the new model focuses on services for researchers.

Like in the original models, the top represents communication spaces grounded in physical space, while the bottom mirrors this in the online realm.

Two ends of the spectrum are informal communications and formal communications. My argument is that Research 2.0 falls somewhere between these extremes.  I developed the model for the presentation below.

(Update: A video of the presentation is located here.)

This model is meant to capture Research 2.0 as concerns scholarly communication and not research conducted through 2.0 methods such as Galaxy Zoo.

I am eager to receive feedback on how well this model represents the concept of Research 2.0.

• Where is it limited?
• Where is it right? Wrong?
• Please feel free to leave comments below (or on FriendFeed)

I had the opportunity to revisit my concept models and develop this variation when preparing for recent lectures hosted by the University of Belgrade Libraries with support from the Serbian Ministry of Science and Technological Development and the Serbian library consortium KoBSON. While there, I also had the opportunity to visit the Institute of Technical Sciences Library and the National Library of Serbia; both of which are working on a number of interesting projects.

The first of these lectures is above, the second lecture (and another new model) will follow in a separate post that explores the concept of Scholarly Identity 2.0.

I would like to give special thanks to Adam Sofronijevic,  at the University of Belgrade Libraries for all his hard work in arranging the lectures and for his hospitality during my visit.

I am live-blogging this from UNC-Chapel Hill where the Health Sciences Library is hosting a talk by Craig Silverstein (Google’s first employee and Director of Technology) titled, “Organizing the World’s Information: Google’s Vision for the 21st Century”. Please pardon the lack of editing. Tickets ran out a while ago. I procrastinated and was lucky to get a seat in the overflow section watching a live feed of the event.

I missed the intro. the wireless was messed up in all the auditoriums. I was able to make it into the balcony though.

Craig had a little problem with the powerpoint and joked about having problems with technology. Craig is giving a history of how Google came to be (Pagerank). Showing a slide of the prototype. They couldn’t afford real legos, so they used generic legos to build a case. However, the cheap imposters fell apart one night.

“Britney Spears” was one of the first reasons they moved beyond search. They noticed tons of mispellings and realized they had the the sheer quantity of information to mine for correct spelling and to offer them when someone searches for the wrong spelling.

How then can we make it better? A Google product timeline. They also acquired products like Blogger that help people create content. Of course everything is paid for by their advertising model.

Slide: “Tech Revolution: from mainframes to the web” – big servers, many clients. In other words, the web as platform.

Their goals:

1. Organize all of the worlds information
2. Make it accessible
3. Make it useful

But how?

• Is it practical to scan all of the books ever published. Used a metronome to time how long it takes to scan a book. At 45 minutes a book, they decided it was practical and set forth with Google Book Search.
• The idea is to search the full text of every book and recieve appropriate snippits.
• But many books are still under copyright. Partner with publishers for current print (5%), out of copyright (20%), the other 75% are out of print and in wierd copyright limbo. This is what libraries help with, but it is hard to find them. Thus, they only show snippets.
• Google Scholar: Anurag’s undergraduate thesis. Within 48 hours of publishing, someone told him he made a mistake on page 2 that had been disproven a few years prior. He then vowed to make it possible for people to find those important citations like the one he missed.

• Find a paper
• Shows found cited by
• (missed it)
• Appropriate books
• If they don’t have the item indexed, they at least show the citation if they have it.
• Points out OpenURLlink resolver integration with scholar.

• “Mobile is ubiquitous” – they envision searches to be primarily on cell phones or their descendants.

• He points out what mobile services they already offer, but admits that it is still a very clunky experience.
• Seeing and hearing what we want when we want it. Example used was video iPod.
• Support of one laptop per child program

• “Google Co-op” – how to collect human expertise to help with domain specialties. Didn’t get all of what he was saying.

• Health is one of the first topics they tackled. More health searches than anything else.
• This empowers both consumers and physicians to make better decisions.
• They were told early on by a user”I just wanted to let you know that Google may well have saved my life…” He was having chest pains and googled heart attack to find out symptoms. He was soon calling 911.

Technorati: google

Leslie blogged about her visit in a post on Talking to Strangers on ALA Buses and put up a picture as well. Michael Stephens then mentioned her post and then Karen Schneider mentioned it on her blog. Michael was just using it as an example of her posts, but we were still glad that he chose the one about our event.

…was very successful. About 20 students attended the brown bag lunch at the Health Sciences Library. Leslie also had time to meet with Sarah Michalak (University Librarian), Dr. Griffiths (our Dean), and Rebecca Vargha (SILS Librarian and President-elect of the ALA. About 90 people showed up for Leslie’s talk (“Transforming Libraries for the 21 st Century: A Call to Action”) and about 45 stayed after the reception for the panel (“Uniting Education and Practice: Preparing Students for Tomorrow’s Workforce”). The press release for the event is located here. A .pdf flyer is also available. We got a digital video recording of the whole event, and took a lot of photos. I will post again when they are available.

Thank you very much to the Graduate and Professional Student Federation for their generous sponsorship of this event. Interestingly, their site is a Wiki. Maybe it was good luck that Jimmy Wales was visiting when they made their decision. Thank you also to all the other folks who helped in this process.

We have also gotten confirmation on when her flight will be arriving which makes it possible to continue with planning the details of her visit. It looks like she will be arriving in time to have the brown bag lunch that we hoped to have for students that can’t make the talk.

One of the places we hope to show her while she is here is the scroll that Jack Kerouac typed On the Road on. The scroll will be on display as part of a display at the Melba Remig Saltarelli Exhibit Room on the third floor of Wilson Library until mid-December. The press release for the event can be read here.

Jimmy Wales visited my class this morning. I learned a lot about the way conflict has been managed on the U.S. version of Wikipedia. One topic of discussion was how the communities of different language versions have developed different methods for mediating conflict. It makes sense, but I hadn’t thought of that. Jimmy admitted to having little direct knowledge of how some languages are managing these issues because he can’t read many of them himself. This is good news when considering the sustainability of the project once he leaves. It was very interesting to hear his thoughts on issues of control and how the Wiki model is very different in this respect from many other models for social software. I definitely need to do some more research into the theory underlying the Wiki model. One funny thing I found out about was the Guerilla UK spelling campaign. Fortunately, I just discovered that their is a counter campaign. Had I known sooner that my nation’s honor (not honour) was at stake, I might have become a more active user!