Mozilla Science Lab Week in Review, March 16-22

The Week in Review is our weekly roundup of what’s new in open science from the past week. If you have news or announcements you’d like passed on to the community, be sure to share on Twitter with @mozillascience and @billdoesphysics, or join our mailing list and get in touch there.

  • Andrew Nesbitt has launched, a project to help tackle the discoverability challenge in open source and open science software. By leveraging the PageRank algorithm, Nesbitt hopes to represent what is actually being used (rather than what is simply admired) to better represent the true workhorses of open source.
  • The Center for Open Science began composing a wiki on the arguments and motivations for open science part of a “growing open source, open science” meeting that Titus Brown and Kaitlin Thaney co-organized last week. The new wiki explores ways we can work together better across open science initiatives – watch their space for developments, and get in touch there to contribute!
  • The Wikimedia Foundation has adopted an open access policy to support the free reuse of research produced with their support.
  • Stephanie Hampton et al have submitted a preprint of ‘The Tao of Open Science for Ecology‘, a paper outlining a roadmap to understanding and participating in open science. This paper got its start as a collaborative discussion at the NCEAS Codefest in 2014.
  • GitHub added PDF rendering to their services last week.
  • PLOS Biology published recommendations for the role of publishers in the dissemination of open data.
  • Jojo Scoble wrote a great blog post for Digital Science describing her experiences sharing her data openly, and why other researchers should consider it. On the common worry of whether a dataset is ‘good’ enough to publish, Scoble quoted her former supervisor:

    You could spend years trying to collect the perfect data set when you should be publishing what you have, which is enough.”

  •  The National Science Foundation in the US announced a plan to accommodate comprehensive public access to research results; in it, the “NSF will require that articles in peer-reviewed scholarly journals and papers in juried conference proceedings or transactions be deposited in a public access compliant repository and be available for download, reading and analysis within one year of publication.
  • The Fair Access to Research and Technology (FASTR) act was reintroduced recently to the US Congress. Successor to the Federal Research Public Access Act, FASTR introduces, among other provisions, an emphasis on reuse and correct attribution.
  • PLOS Collections has showcased a collection of negative results, underscoring the importance of publishing such studies to the broader scientific community.
  • In a similar vein, submissions are open for the ERROR conference, highlighting negative results in Munich, Germany on 3-4 September.
  • UNESCO recently put its open access curriculum online; the content is targeted at librarians and researchers, and emphasizes topics from introducing open access, to intellectual property rights to how to share your work in an open access model.
  • Also in partnership with UNESCO, Foster Open Science is hosting a two-day Open Science Workshop for European graduate school administrators in order to ‘construct a roadmap for making Open Science certifiable and standard training for future graduates‘.
  • Tom Baden et al recently published an article on 3D printing your own lab equipment, in order to mitigate the costs and hurdles to setting up a research program.
  • The Scholarly Kitchen recently interviewed two of the founders of Advancing Research and Communication Scholarship (ARCS), a new conference coming April 26-28 in Philadelphia ‘designed to provide a broad and collaborative forum for addressing and affecting scholarly and scientific communication.‘ (- Alice Meadows, Scholarly Kitchen)
  • Chris Parr wrote an article for Times Higher Education on Carol Goble’s work and comments on the hurdles created by ostentation in scholarly communication and questions raised by the failure to distribute both data and code.
  • The Su Lab is holding a hackathon on biomedical big data, May 7-9.
  • Finally, don’t miss our map of hacky hours and study groups – and if you know of anyone running a meetup about coding for researchers, let us know so we can add you to the map!