1.
A quick overview of the available reference managers (zotero, mendeley, endnote) Jose Quesada 5-5-2010 NOTE: reference managers change all the time; this information may be obsolete by the time you read this.

3.
<ul><li>Everytime metadata is manually re-entered a grad student cries. </li></ul><ul><li>-Howison </li></ul>

4.
Advantages for you <ul><li>Should be faster that doing things by hand </li></ul><ul><li>Reformatting a paper for a different journal </li></ul><ul><li>Never have to think 'where do I have last cited that paper... so I can copy-paste the reference’ </li></ul><ul><li>Removing a paragraph will remove the references too </li></ul><ul><li>If you fix a typo on your db, it will fix the references on all papers that contain it </li></ul><ul><li>Good for sharing papers and citations in a research group </li></ul>

5.
Advantages long-term <ul><li>Metadata that travels with the paper. Will make papers easy to find and utilize </li></ul><ul><li>Current tools are trying to do it ‘the hard way’: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Scholar, Citeseer: Parsing author, title, etc out of the papers that we academics have in our homepages, and making them searchable for the rest of the word </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Mendeley: Parsing author, title, etc out the papers on your computer and make them searchable for you </li></ul></ul>

6.
Equilibrium: shareability vs. functionality <ul><li>Desktop reference managers </li></ul><ul><ul><li>they live on the desktop and integrate well with writing tools </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Social bookmarking systems (citeUlike, connotea) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>they are webpages, like delicious for academics </li></ul></ul>

9.
Is is technically possible? <ul><li>Standards </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Music: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>ID3 </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Papers: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>XMP </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>BibTeX </li></ul></ul></ul>

10.
annotations <ul><li>When you highlight or add a note to a paper, it’s also metadata </li></ul><ul><li>This is not likely to be shared </li></ul>

11.
Soft peer review

12.
Soft peer review

13.
Google scholar <ul><li>Go to preferences </li></ul>

14.
<ul><li>Advantages </li></ul><ul><ul><li>rapid release cycle </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Metadata stays in the cloud </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>offers the best ‘facebook-like’ features </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>best social search </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Innovative tools for measuring impact: ReaderRank </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>API </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Annotations are included </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Disadvantages </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Automatic recognition often fails, and the manual fixing may be more trouble than it’s worth </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Crashes quite often </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>May end up sharing more information than you are comfortable with </li></ul></ul>

16.
<ul><li>Advantages </li></ul><ul><ul><li>open source, free </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>best paper detection online (even amazon books) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Great integration with word AND LyX, openoffice </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Metadata stays in the cloud </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>offers ‘facebook-like’ features, more to come </li></ul></ul><ul><li>disadvantages </li></ul><ul><ul><li>lives inside Firefox. UI is not as good as standalone apps </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>search is slow. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The more references you have, the slower it feels </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Less templates than endNote </li></ul></ul>

19.
Conclusions <ul><li>Mendeley is the most ambitious and fast-moving. There are still glitches for day-to-day use </li></ul><ul><li>Zotero is the most effective for my workflow </li></ul><ul><li>EndNote is dead </li></ul>