> > whose correctness is actually
> > dependent on the correctness of the
> > results of *a* paper it cites
> where each paper is independent of
> *all* the others
> > whose correctness is actually
> > dependent on the correctness of the
> > results of *a* paper it cites
> where each paper is independent of
> *all* the others
Really, the information should be abstracted away from the paper, a la freebase or wikidata, and there should be strict rules (e.g. the protocols stackoverflow enforces) such that no cycles can occur, such that propositions can be resolved to axioms, and such that it is practical to compute scores in a finite period of time with reasonable resource constraints...
See also gitxiv.org (at attempt at literate research for computer science and physics papers that can be paired with code). It doesn't address the problem described, but if statements of a paper are codified (e.g. curry howard isomorphism) in a strict way, it makes it easier for "linked statements" to have a quantifiable value.