Open evaluation of science: can we simply say "no, thank you?"

Abstract In today’s world of information doubling at faster rates because of rapid technological and biomedical advances nations must pay closer attention to the productivity and creativity that can be obtained from their universities. A professor’s intellectual property may have important patent consequences. Thus, universities must foster lines of communication that aid the professor in making critical decisions not only about the advance but its potential to generate a revenue stream. In the same light, universities must also be able to evaluate the contribution and the potential of a lab to make future contributions in an objective manner since all laboratories and projects cannot be funded in a nation/university due to the high cost of doing so. In the past, this evaluation has taken the form of a grant, which depends on peer evaluations. Now however, due to ever increasing flow of information, which generates new technologies, additional evaluation processes must be in place so the funding can be prioritized and revenue not wasted. This calls for a rapid evaluation process, taking advantage of the increase in informational flow. This process must be as objective as possible, providing documentation of the ability to generate successful projects without damaging continuing research and hurting the ability of high risk projects to reach fruition.