Virtual presentation given to the NCI's Cancer Informatics team. October 15, 2014.

1. making the web
work for science
kaitlin thaney
@kaythaney ; @mozillascience
NCI / 15 oct 2014
1

2. doing good is part of our code
2

3. help researchers use the
power of the open web to
change science’s future.
3

4. (0)
4

5. 5

6. 6

7. power, performance, scale
7

8. our current systems are
designed to create
friction.
despite original intentions.
8

9. current state of science
articles
data
patents
9

10. some have a firehose
articles
data
patents
10

11. 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

12. downside of output-driven
recognition systems
12

13. “There’s greater reward,
and more temptation to
bend the rules.”
- David Resnik, bioethicist
13

14. (1)
14

15. leveraging the power of
the web for scholarship
15

16. “web-enabled research”
- access to content, data, code, materials.
- emergence of “web-native” tools.
- rewards for openness, interop, collaboration, sharing.
- push for ROI, reuse, recomputability, transparency.
16

17. 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

18. we’re rewarding the
wrong behavior.
at the sacrifice of scientific progress.
18

19. Source: Michener, 2006 Ecoinformatics.
19

20. Source: Wolkovich et al. GCB 2012.
20

21. “... 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

22. wasted ...
$$$
time
resource
opportunity
22

23. “research hygiene”
instill best
(digital,
reproducible)
practice
23

24. (2)
24

25. shifting practice takes a
multi-faceted approach.
looking beyond “open” science.
25

26. infrastructure layers for
efficient, reproducible research
research social capital capacity
open tools
standards
best practices
research objects
scientific software
repositories
incentives
recognition / P&T
interdisciplinarity
collaboration
community dialogue
training
mentorship
professional dev
new policies
recognition
stakeholders: universities, researchers,
tool dev, funders, publishers ...
26

27. freedom to prototype
and innovate.
(connecting the dots.)
27

28. our systems need to
talk to one another.
leveraging open technology, existing infrastructure.
28

29. 29

30. 30

31. code as a research object
what’s needed to reuse ?
http://bit.ly/mozfiggit
31

32. code as a research object
http://xkcd.com/285/
http://bit.ly/mozfiggit
32

33. 33

34. 34

35. 35

36. (community driven)
metadata for software discovery: JSON-LD
http://bit.ly/mozfiggit
36

37. (3)
37

38. our practices are
limiting us.
how to further adoption of
open, web-enabled science?
38

39. infrastructure layers
social
software
hardware
39

40. “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

41. “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

42. current activity:
235+ instructors
(60+, training)
4000+ learners
42

43. 43

44. rethinking
“professional development”
44

45. focus on building capacity,
not just more nodes.
45

46. fostering a (sustainable)
community of practitioners
46

47. (4)
47

48. shifting practice
(and getting it to stick)
is challenging.
(takeaways and closing caveats.)
48

49. 49

50. can we do the same
for research on the web?
63 nations
10,000 scientists
50,000 participants
50

51. what are the necessary components?
tools and technology
cultural awareness, best practice
connections, open dialogue
skills training
51

52. Source: Piwowar, et al. PLOS.
52

53. 1. bake reproducible
practices into the fabric of
research.
53

54. 2. design to unlock latent
potential of our systems.
(the technology is already there.)
54

55. 3. rethink how we reward
researchers and support
roles.
(and don’t be afraid to hit refresh.)
55

56. 4. be mindful of jargon/
semantics traps.
56

57. we’re here to help.
teach, contribute, learn.
http://mozillascience.org
sciencelab@mozillafoundation.org
57

58. kaitlin@mozillafoundation.org
@kaythaney ; @mozillascience
special thanks:
58