I'm curious whether people would find it worth, interesting, valuable, feasible to publish data that don't seem paper-publishable or aren't attractive to publish in current publishing conditions.
E.g., Raciti et al. https://doi.org/10.1093/database/bay013 suggested micropublications, meaning you'd publish data by themselves (they suggest this generally - but one could imagine at least doing it for datasets you don't intend to say much about)
I guess we all have lots of such data??
@HeedLab @sensorimotor @neuroscience This would be a particularly interesting effort for normally "unpublishable" null results or pilot data for unfunded grant proposals that never see the light of day.
@aaronlwong @HeedLab @sensorimotor @neuroscience
Why can't these be "small" papers on biorxiv /arxiv with a linked figshare repo? The paper would just have some basic background on why /how the data was collected.
@jerlich @aaronlwong @sensorimotor @neuroscience
Would biorxiv accept such papers? They do not, for instance, accept reviews. I've assumed so far that they would allow only papers that will go into the regular publication process (or are designed in a way that they could).