The peer-to-patent initiative : revitalizing patent examination with peer review

Every day we hear someone complain that this or that patent should not have been granted. People complain that the patent system is now a threat to existing business and innovation be- cause the patent office grants with alarming regularity patents for inventions that are neither novel nor non-obvious. People argue that the patent office cannot keep up with the job of examining the backlog of hundreds of thousands of patents and that, even if it could, the large volumes of prior art literature that need to be considered each time a patent application is received make the decision as to whether a patent should be granted or not a treacherous one.

Torsional Interaction Studies on a Power System Compensated by SSSC and Fixed Capacitor

In this paper, a static synchronous series compensator (SSSC), along with a fixed capacitor, is used to avoid torsional mode instability in a series compensated transmission system. A 48-step harmonic neutralized inverter is used for the realization of the SSSC. The system under consideration is the IEEE first benchmark model on SSR analysis. The system stability is studied both through eigenvalue analysis and EMTDC/PSCAD simulation studies. It is shown that the combination of the SSSC and the fixed capacitor improves the synchronizing power coefficient. The presence of the fixed capacitor ensures increased damping of small signal oscillations. At higher levels of fixed capacitor compensation, a damping controller is required to stabilize the torsional modes of SSR.

Thinking Collaboratively about the Peer-Review Process for Journal- Article Publication

In this conversation, Kevin K. Kumashiro shares his reflections on challenges to publishing anti-oppressive research in educational journals. He then invites eight current and former editors of leading educational research journals--William F. Pinar, Elizabeth Graue, Carl A. Grant, Maenette K. P. Benham, Ronald H. Heck, James Joseph Scheurich, Allan Luke, and Carmen Luke--to critique and expand on his analysis. Kumashiro begins the conversation by describing his own experiences submitting manuscripts to educational research journals and receiving comments by anonymous reviewers and journal editors. He suggests three ways to rethink the collaborative potential of the peer-review process: as constructive, as multilensed, and as situated. The eight current and former editors of leading educational research journals then critique and expand Kumashiro's analysis. Kumashiro concludes the conversation with additional reflections on barriers and contradictions involved in advancing anti-oppressive educational research in educational journals. (Contains 3 notes.)