"making the web work for science" - nci cbiit
DESCRIPTION
Virtual presentation given to the NCI's Cancer Informatics team. October 15, 2014.TRANSCRIPT
kaitlin thaney@kaythaney ; @mozillascience
NCI / 15 oct 2014
making the web work for science
1
doing good is part of our code
2
help researchers use the power of the open web to change science’s future.
3
(0)
4
5
6
power, performance, scale
7
our current systems are designed to create
friction.despite original intentions.
8
current state of science
articlesdata
patents
9
some have a firehose
articlesdata
patents
10
traditions last not because they are excellent, but because influential people are averse to change and because of the sheer burdens of
transition to a better state ...
“
“Cass Sunstein
11
downside of output-driven recognition systems
12
“There’s greater reward, and more temptation to
bend the rules.”- David Resnik, bioethicist
13
(1)
14
leveraging the power of the web for scholarship
15
- access to content, data, code, materials.- emergence of “web-native” tools.- rewards for openness, interop, collaboration, sharing.- push for ROI, reuse, recomputability, transparency.
“web-enabled research”
16
what do we mean by “open research”?
community technology practices
collaborative interoperable open review
participatory discoverable data management
recognition open tools sharing / reuse
mentorship designed for reuse
documentation / versioning
17
we’re rewarding the wrong behavior.
at the sacrifice of scientific progress.
18
Source: Michener, 2006 Ecoinformatics.
19
Source: Wolkovich et al. GCB 2012.
20
“... up to 70 percent of research from academic labs cannot be reproduced, representing an enormous waste of money and effort.” - Elizabeth Iorns, Science Exchange
21
wasted ...$$$time
resourceopportunity
22
instill best (digital,
reproducible) practice
“research hygiene”
23
(2)
24
shifting practice takes a multi-faceted approach.
looking beyond “open” science.
25
research social capital capacity
infrastructure layers for efficient, reproducible research
open toolsstandards
best practicesresearch objectsscientific software
repositories
incentivesrecognition / P&Tinterdisciplinarity
collaborationcommunity dialogue
trainingmentorship
professional devnew policiesrecognition
stakeholders: universities, researchers, tool dev, funders, publishers ...
26
freedom to prototype and innovate.
(connecting the dots.)
27
our systems need to talk to one another.
leveraging open technology, existing infrastructure.
28
29
30
code as a research objectwhat’s needed to reuse ?
http://bit.ly/mozfiggit
31
code as a research object
http://xkcd.com/285/
http://bit.ly/mozfiggit
32
33
34
35
(community driven)metadata for software discovery: JSON-LD
http://bit.ly/mozfiggit
36
(3)
37
our practices are limiting us.
how to further adoption of open, web-enabled science?
38
socialsoftwarehardware
infrastructure layers
39
“web-enabled science”- access to content, data, code, materials.- emergence of “web-native” tools.- rewards for openness, interop, collaboration, sharing.- push for ROI, reuse, recomputability, transparency.
40
“web-enabled science”what’s missing?
- access to content, data, code, materials.- emergence of “web-native” tools.- rewards for openness, interop, collaboration, sharing.- push for ROI, reuse, recomputability, transparency.
41
current activity:235+ instructors
(60+, training)4000+ learners
42
43
rethinking “professional development”
44
focus on building capacity, not just more nodes.
45
fostering a (sustainable) community of practitioners
46
(4)
47
shifting practice (and getting it to stick)
is challenging.(takeaways and closing caveats.)
48
49
63 nations 10,000 scientists
50,000 participants
can we do the same for research on the web?
50
tools and technologycultural awareness, best practice
connections, open dialogueskills training
what are the necessary components?
51
Source: Piwowar, et al. PLOS.
52
1. bake reproducible practices into the fabric of
research.
53
2. design to unlock latent potential of our systems.
(the technology is already there.)
54
3. rethink how we reward researchers and support
roles. (and don’t be afraid to hit refresh.)
55
4. be mindful of jargon/semantics traps.
56
