01 Ignat Open Science and Seachange Research 2_1

<strong>2019-11 Script Open Science Seachange</strong> <strong>What do we mean when we talk about Open Science. I have one short answer to that:</strong> <strong>[CLICK]</strong> <strong>Open Science means a seachange in research! I will support my answer with 6 perspectives and a set of conclusions. I try to leave 5 minutes for questions. Please feel invited!</strong> <strong>Here is the agenda of my presentation.</strong> <strong>We will cover the context, definitions, examples of OS across sectors, the matter of sustainability, some fresh perspectives (The Gestalt and The Hazards) and we will look into the deep roots of the Open Science transformation.</strong> <strong>First to start: the context and the definitions</strong> <strong>---</strong> <strong>Meet Prof. Steve Mann from Toronto. He coining the term Open Science, back in 1998.</strong> <strong>In one of his articles about Surveillance, Sousveillance, and Metaveillance, Prof. Mann says:</strong> <strong>[CLICK] “Science is a human endeavour in which we attempt to go wherever the truth may lead us, in pursuit of new discoveries“. The term OpenScience was coined by him to emphasize this need for truth and open disclosure … „and if surveillance cannot deliver on that promise, we need to look at other veillances!“ – he said and came up with the idea of Open Science.</strong> <strong>Among others, Steve Mann has been recognized as “the father of wearable computing” and “the father of wearable augmented reality.</strong> <strong>---</strong> <strong>Are you familiar with the Reproducibility Crisis?</strong> <strong>Nature published a study in 2016 showing that more than 70% of researchers have tried and failed to reproduce another scientist's experiments, and more than half have failed to reproduce their own experiments. These are the figures of surveying over 1,500 researchers.</strong> <strong>---</strong> <strong>What is the cause of this crisis?</strong> <strong>More than 60% of respondents said that the pressure to publish and the selective reporting are the most important factors.</strong> <strong>If we look closer, we see that these 2 reasons are further confirmed by [CLICK] 2 other reasons which are closely related to them: row data being unavailable and the insufficient peer review.</strong> <strong>I share the opinion of some academics that all these factors are intensified by common forces: competition for grants and positions, and a growing burden of bureaucracy for researchers.</strong> <strong>For many, this was the main reason to open science. It is very IMPORTANT to have in mind this CONTEXT!</strong> <strong>----</strong> <strong>Open Science Definition? it seems we can never run out of many! Here is just a hand of them which I could grab in minute of desk research.</strong> <strong>No matter we speak about The European Open Science Monitor, FOSTER Taxonomy, OSPP ambitions, Centre for Open Science wheel or Open Science Mushroom, everybody claims a definition.</strong> <strong>But it shouldn't bother us! Since ”Science” doesn’t have a universal definition, why should we try to have one for Open Science?</strong> <strong>So, let’s celebrate the diversity! [CLICK]</strong> <strong>I favour a definition, but that doesn’t mean I exclude the others. </strong> <strong>---</strong> <strong>Let‘s examine now how public research is doing in this landscape.</strong> <strong>----</strong> <strong>How are we doing in Europe?</strong> <strong>-----</strong> <strong>Here is Europe‘s top-down approach.</strong> <strong>In 2014, The European Commission ordered public consultations for reforming science.</strong> <strong>Right in the introduction of their background document the Commission stated:</strong> <strong>“The impact of these trends* (digital technologies, globalisation of research, societal demands for science) is already visible and it addresses some of the most burning issues of science, such as the slowness of the publication process, the increasing criticism of the existing peer review system, and the challenge of reproducing research results due to the lack of available data“</strong> <strong>These issues are still burning today.</strong> <strong>----</strong> <strong>Open Science long existed in Europe, before 2014.</strong> <strong>However, I find relevant to bring up to you the chronology of the Open Science Policy Platform (OSPP from now on), a high-level expert group that informs EC, European Council and national organisations.</strong> <strong>It started in 2014 with a public consultation</strong> <strong>In 2015: The Competitiveness Council welcomed the development of an Open Science Agenda</strong> <strong>2016, the launch of Open Science Policy Platform (OSPP) by Commissioner Moedas and chaired by Dr. Eva Mendez from Madrid.</strong> <strong>In 2018: OSPP releases their set of guidelines - Integrated Advice of the OSPP - and it receives a new mandate</strong> <strong>------</strong> <strong>And here it comes one of my favourite definition of Open Science:</strong> <strong>For OSPP,</strong> <strong>Open Science is scholarly research that is collaborative, transparent and reproducible and whose outputs are publicly available.</strong> <strong>[CLICK] …. and I stop here. I don‘t like the rest which suggest that EU is embarking on the Open Science journey to win a competition against the rest of the world.</strong> <strong>-----</strong> <strong>What OSPP did? They released in 2018 a set of recommendations for what they identified as ”The 8 ambitions for Open Science”.</strong> <strong>They put these ambitions in the context of some stakeholders, displayed here on the bottom.</strong> <strong>-----</strong> <strong>Let me zoom-in:</strong> <strong>these are the 8 ambitions that European Commission set for a cultural and structural change to Open Science.</strong> <strong>Each of these ambitions could also be understood as a Strategic Direction for delivering Open Science.</strong> <strong>The European Commission is now sending a clear message to all research communities.</strong> <strong>[CLICK] Press the Open button! Join us in this journey! …and discover a new world of research.</strong> <strong>------</strong> <strong>But Europe is moving also bottom-up in its transformation to Open Science.</strong> <strong>Here is the example of UK’s first fully Open Access Press: UCL Press.</strong> <strong>Through their press, they reached over 2.5 million book and journal downloads since launch in June 2015</strong> <strong>Compare this figure with the conventional sales of monographs which reach 300 copies.– for the most successful titles!</strong> <strong>------</strong> <strong>I can continue the European examples of Open Science with TU Delft Data Stewards Champions, Leiden‘s GoFAIR Initiative or the Hungarian EISZ Consortium that negotiated contracts with publishers which now cover over 80% of their needs!</strong> <strong>Open Knowledge Maps re-designs the knowledge discovery service. DOAJ is well known to you. The UK Reproducibility Network tackles the reproducibility crisis.</strong> <strong>------</strong> <strong>Let’s see now how our colleagues are doing over the Atlantic.</strong> <strong>One big difference is that USA doesn’t have a federal top-down approach. </strong> <strong>------</strong> <br> <strong>Therefore, on US front I will start with the Center for Open Science which I appreciate very much. Their definition of Open Science goes straightforward: Show your work! Share your work! Advance Science!</strong> <strong>Their approach is strongly related to the Reproducibility Crises and they believe that the Open Science vision is achievable because</strong> <strong>•openness, integrity, and reproducibility are shared values,</strong> <strong>•the technological capacity is available,</strong> <strong>•and sustainable business models that promote openness exist already.</strong> <strong>[CLICK] The Open Science Framework is a collection of tools that they develop to enable Open Science through all scientific phases, which they represent in this wheel.</strong> <strong>-------</strong> <strong>The same as Europe, USA is working on multiple fronts of Open Science, almost all of them bottom-up, independent of the federal bodies.</strong> <strong>Here is just a small number of other Open Science initiatives in USA:</strong> <strong>1.SciStarter and Arizona State University are accelerating Citizen Science</strong> <strong>2.University of California is taking a leading position and inspires the other US universities how to negotiate with publishers</strong> <strong>3.University of Harvard through their Office for Scholarly Communication is inspiring the world how to reform the contracts that authors sign with publishers.</strong> <strong>------</strong> <strong>Open Science at The Neuro (the Montreal Neurological Institute and Hospital) deserves a separate attention!</strong> <strong>In 1934, Dr. Wilder Penfield had the unique vision to advance medicine through patient-centred science. Today, The Neuro continues to lead scientific innovation as the first academic institute to develop and adopt Open Science.</strong> <strong>I only have a few minutes to talk with you today, but if you want to see how an entire academic institution and a hospital is acting completely on an Open Science landscape, please go and visit that link, turn the notifications off on your computer, have something to drink for 2 hours and study!</strong> <strong>-------</strong> <strong>But is Open Science an apanage for public institutions? Definitely NO. Let’s an example!</strong> <strong>--------</strong> <strong>Open Science is for all: public, private, non-for profit or for-profit research!</strong> <strong>Structural Genomics Consortium is a Public-Private Partnership that was created as a collaboration between academia, public funders and industry - nine big pharma companies!</strong> <strong>They use Open Science methods to enable consistent data and accel

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.