Upgrade to Pro — share decks privately, control downloads, hide ads and more …

Open Science Projects I would like to do

Open Science Projects I would like to do

Martin Fenner

April 13, 2015

More Decks by Martin Fenner

Other Decks in Science


  1. – Michael Nielsen Open science is the idea that scientific

    knowledge of all kinds should be openly shared as early as is practical in the discovery process.
  2. Open Science Definitions • Infrastructure School
 Efficient research depends on

    the available tools and applications. • Public School
 Science needs to be made accessible to the public. • Democratic School
 The access to knowledge is unequally distributed. • Pragmatic School
 Knowledge-creation could be more efficient if scientists worked together. • Measurement School
 Scientific contributions today need alternative impact measurements. Fecher & Friesike (2014). http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00026-8_2
  3. Infrastructure • Our scholarly communication concepts and tools have not

    properly adapted to today’s digital workflows. • The concept of a scholarly citation is a good example: • Thousands of citation styles that differ little • Limited standards and tools to cite data, software, reagents, or other resources • Confusion about formal vs. informal citations • Restricted access to reference lists and informal citations
  4. – Wf4Ever Research Object Model 1.0 http://wf4ever.github.io/ro/ A research object

    aggregates a number of resources that are used and/or produced in a given scientific investigation. This aggregation supports access to those collected resources – or at least access to the identification of those resources.
  5. Research Objects • Can we use the concept of aggregation

    in research objects to replace the traditional reference list? • What is the equivalent of the research object manifest file in JATS and TEI? • Can we agree on a standard to describe the relationships between research objects? • Convert a large set of scholarly works to research objects for analysis of associated resources. Belhajjame et al. (2014) http://arxiv.org/abs/1401.4307
  6. Democratic School • The access to knowledge is unequally distributed.

    • One important barrier is the cost for creating and distributing scholarly documents. • Tools that make document creation and distribution easier and thus cheaper can help to increase access to knowledge.
  7. Document Conversion • JATS and TEI have become the de-facto

    XML-based standards for scholarly documents. • Scholarly documents are written in Microsoft Word and LaTeX. • PDF remains the standard for reading scholarly documents, although people increasingly expect HTML and ePub. • Conversion of the author-submitted text is often manual, slow, and expensive. Or, important document structure and metadata are lost in the conversion.
  8. Document Conversion • Can the conversion between formats be automated,

    or will we always need manual intervention? And how do we handle document versions? • Can we develop linting tools to automate the quality control of document conversion? • What enhancements/standards are needed for HTML/ePub to become an alternative to XML? • What features are needed for Scholarly Markdown to become an alternative writing format?
  9. Collaboration • Formal and informal collaborations are essential components of

    the scholarly process. • Despite an increasing number of digital collaboration tools, conferences remain a mainstay of scholarly communication. • Presentation slides and posters are more difficult to find and access compared to journal articles and books. • Slides and posters offer a unique value compared to more formal publications, e .g. immediacy and conciseness
  10. Conferences • Do conceptual work for increasing the discoverability of

    slides and posters, e.g. assigning persistent identifiers, creating a discovery index, or offering a repository • Track relations between slides, posters and formal publications. • Investigate social media activity around conference presentations, and correlate with later outcomes such as formal publication.
  11. Measurement • It has become more important where you publish

    than what you publish. The journal article (in the right journal) is increasingly becoming the currency for promotion and funding. • Other research outputs are less visible, and metrics often not available. • We increasingly use metrics instead of individual judgement to evaluate researchers and research. • One unintended consequence is that assessment is more and more controlled by journal publishers instead of institutions or individual researchers.
  12. Assessment • Discuss definitions and best practices for alternative assessment

    metrics • Collect metrics for novel research outputs, e.g. scientific software • Investigate data quality: differences between providers • Do conceptual model for the appropriate use of metrics to assess individual researchers Zahedi, Fenner & Costas (2014) http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1041821
  13. Discovery • While the role of the journal as a

    filter might have become less important, discovery of relevant scholarly content remains a major challenge. • While scholarly metrics are mainly used for assessment, they can also help with the discovery of scholarly content. • Altmetrics and usage stats are particularly relevant because of their immediate availability. • Little is known about the role of these metrics in the discovery process, e.g. in distinguishing popularity from relevance.
  14. This presentation is made available under a CC-BY 4.0 license.