Closed alxndrkalinin closed 7 years ago
It's good to open issues for papers like this so that we can discuss them and actively decide whether to include or exclude them. I agree with your assessment. I'll close the issue to indicate that we don't plan to add this to our review. Anyone should still feel free to add further comments though.
@agitter At this point issues in this repo became probably the biggest collection of DL bio applications out there, outgrowing other ones like awesome-deepbio. Would be interesting to think about sustainable ways to keep it expanding.
@alxndrkalinin Exactly! That's why I keep posting papers here. It helps me track the literature and opens it for discussion if anyone else watching finds a paper interesting.
I would like to think about a longer term strategy to sustain this effort. I imagine enthusiasm will drop once the journal version of the review is finalized. But because we have been using this as an experiment in publication, we should think about to keep this active (cc @cgreene).
I agree with both of you. I'm not sure how to design a system that keeps this going. Maybe if we tweet about the ongoing discussions it will draw people in & make clear that it's still alive.
It's bloody useful, thanks guys. Can't help but think that in the longterm github issues are perhaps not the best venue for it: I appreciate the alerts but they're drowning out my other alerts. Move it to github wiki or pages?
@agapow That could be a good solution. In the short term, I plan to add some of these papers from the recent issues in version 2 of our review, so I'll continue using issues for that. Once the journal version of the paper is finished, I'm open to switching to another system.
It might need some thought about what's the necessary features are of any paper list:
I'd like to see something that has some level of archiving - and ideally even permanence/citability. Github doesn't help with this but it would be in the ideal system.
Tagging @freeman-lab since this may be something he has also considered.
One could create a bot that scrapes twitter feeds, arxiv and biorxiv feeds etc to find relevant content. Mendeley, citeUlike, zotero could be good ways to easily arxiv the references. Some of these like Mendeley have public groups that folks can join and tag/comment etc. Also makes it easy to directly convert to whatever bib format you want.
On Jun 30, 2017 5:39 AM, "Casey Greene" notifications@github.com wrote:
Tagging @freeman-lab https://github.com/freeman-lab since this may be something he has also considered.
— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/greenelab/deep-review/issues/557#issuecomment-312256552, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAI7EWxccGXbDmDgzDgLdRW3mEGx35aXks5sJOySgaJpZM4OIpNs .
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40005-017-0332-x
I personally didn't like this article, I think it's very superficial, but decided to add anyway since we're sort of collecting related resources here, maybe someone will get something useful out of it.