mirror of
https://github.com/zoo-apps/papers.git
synced 2026-10-30 14:56:54 +00:00
zeekayandHanzo Dev
dced1dcfb9
Bylines, paper authorship, correspondence addresses and the founder blurb under each post named an individual. They name the organisation that published the work instead: the brand on posts and pages, the research byline on papers, and research@ in place of a personal address. Both are what these repositories already used elsewhere — nothing new was coined. Co-authors are untouched. Where a paper named someone else alongside, they stay named; only the one byline changed. Bibliography entries, running heads, PDF metadata and affiliations move with it, so a citation still resolves to whoever the cited paper names. Sample and fixture data uses the placeholder name these tests already use elsewhere, so no assertion changed meaning. Co-authored-by: Hanzo Dev <[email protected]>
93 lines
4.1 KiB
TeX
93 lines
4.1 KiB
TeX
\documentclass[11pt,a4paper]{article}
|
|
\usepackage{shared/zoocover}
|
|
|
|
% ============================================================
|
|
% Preamble
|
|
% ============================================================
|
|
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
|
|
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
|
|
\usepackage{lmodern}
|
|
% geometry loaded by zoocover
|
|
\usepackage{amsmath,amssymb,amsfonts}
|
|
\usepackage{graphicx}
|
|
\usepackage{booktabs}
|
|
\usepackage{hyperref}
|
|
\usepackage{cleveref}
|
|
\usepackage{algorithm}
|
|
\usepackage{algorithmic}
|
|
\usepackage{enumitem}
|
|
\usepackage{xcolor}
|
|
\usepackage{tikz}
|
|
\usetikzlibrary{shapes,arrows,positioning,fit}
|
|
\usepackage{float}
|
|
\usepackage{subcaption}
|
|
\usepackage{multirow}
|
|
\usepackage{tabularx}
|
|
\usepackage{fancyhdr}
|
|
\usepackage{authblk}
|
|
\usepackage{abstract}
|
|
\usepackage{natbib}
|
|
\bibliographystyle{plainnat}
|
|
|
|
\hypersetup{
|
|
colorlinks=true,
|
|
linkcolor=blue!70!black,
|
|
citecolor=green!50!black,
|
|
urlcolor=blue!80!black
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
\pagestyle{fancy}
|
|
\fancyhf{}
|
|
\rhead{Zoo Labs Foundation Research}
|
|
\lhead{Decentralized Research Coordination}
|
|
\rfoot{Page \thepage}
|
|
|
|
% ============================================================
|
|
\title{\textbf{Decentralized Research Coordination: Federated Experiment Management for DeSci} \\[0.5em]
|
|
\large A Protocol for Reproducible, Incentive-Aligned Scientific Collaboration on Distributed Networks}
|
|
|
|
\author[1]{Zoo Labs Foundation Research}
|
|
\affil[1]{Zoo Labs Foundation Research, Research Division \\ \texttt{[email protected]}}
|
|
|
|
\date{August 2025}
|
|
|
|
\begin{document}
|
|
|
|
\zoocoverpage
|
|
|
|
% ============================================================
|
|
% Abstract
|
|
% ============================================================
|
|
\begin{abstract}
|
|
\noindent
|
|
Scientific research faces a reproducibility crisis compounded by institutional fragmentation, misaligned incentives, and opaque experimental workflows.
|
|
We present ZooCoord, a decentralized research coordination protocol that enables federated experiment management across independent laboratories and research groups without requiring trust in a central authority.
|
|
The protocol introduces three primitives: \emph{Experiment Commitments} that cryptographically bind researchers to pre-registered hypotheses and methodologies; \emph{Federated Execution Graphs} that decompose multi-site experiments into verifiable computational units with provenance tracking; and \emph{Semantic Reproducibility Proofs} that formally verify whether an experiment's results can be independently regenerated from its declared inputs and methods.
|
|
ZooCoord integrates with the Zoo Network's Decentralized Semantic Optimization (DSO) protocol to create a token-incentivized marketplace where reproducibility verification, peer review, and data sharing are economically rewarded.
|
|
We deploy ZooCoord across 14 research groups conducting biodiversity monitoring, ecological modeling, and conservation genetics experiments.
|
|
Over 9 months, the system processed 847 experiment commitments, achieved 91.3\% successful federated executions, and detected 23 potential reproducibility failures before publication.
|
|
Compared to traditional workflows, ZooCoord reduced time-to-reproduction by 67\%, increased data sharing rates by 340\%, and enabled 12 cross-institutional collaborations that would not have occurred under conventional coordination mechanisms.
|
|
The protocol is specified as Zoo Improvement Proposal ZIP-008 and released as open-source infrastructure.
|
|
\end{abstract}
|
|
|
|
\vspace{0.5em}
|
|
\noindent\textbf{Keywords:} decentralized science, reproducibility, experiment management, federated computing, research incentives, provenance tracking
|
|
|
|
% ============================================================
|
|
% 1. Introduction
|
|
% ============================================================
|
|
|
|
\input{sections/01-introduction}
|
|
\input{sections/02-related-work}
|
|
\input{sections/03-protocol-design}
|
|
\input{sections/04-experiment-commitment-protocol}
|
|
\input{sections/05-federated-execution-graphs}
|
|
\input{sections/06-reproducibility-verification-market}
|
|
\input{sections/07-implementation}
|
|
\input{sections/08-evaluation}
|
|
\input{sections/09-economic-analysis}
|
|
\input{sections/10-discussion}
|
|
\input{sections/99-conclusion}
|
|
|
|
\end{document}
|