"Share and Enjoy": Publishing Useful and Usable Scientific Models

The reproduction and replication of reported scientific results is a hot topic within the academic community. The retraction of numerous studies from a wide range of disciplines, from climate science to bioscience, has drawn the focus of many commentators, but there exists a wider socio-cultural problem that pervades the scientific community. Sharing code, data and models often requires extra effort, this is currently seen as a significant overhead that may not be worth the time investment. Automated systems, which allow easy reproduction of results, offer the potential to incentives a culture change and drive the adoption of new techniques to improve the efficiency of scientific exploration. In this paper, we discuss the value of improved access and sharing of the two key types of results arising from work done in the computational sciences: models and algorithms. We propose the development of an integrated cloud-based system underpinning computational science, linking together software and data repositories, tool chains, workflows and outputs, providing a seamless automated infrastructure for the verification and validation of scientific models and in particular, performance benchmarks

Reproducibility in Research: Systems, Infrastructure, Culture

The reproduction and replication of research results has become a major issue for a number of scientific disciplines. In computer science and related computational disciplines such as systems biology, the challenges closely revolve around the ability to implement (and exploit) novel algorithms and models. Taking a new approach from the literature and applying it to a new codebase frequently requires local knowledge missing from the published manuscripts and transient project websites. Alongside this issue, benchmarking, and the lack of open, transparent and fair benchmark sets present another barrier to the verification and validation of claimed results. In this paper, we outline several recommendations to address these issues, driven by specific examples from a range of scientific domains. Based on these recommendations, we propose a high-level prototype open automated platform for scientific software development which effectively abstracts specific dependencies from the individual researcher and their workstation, allowing easy sharing and reproduction of results. This new e-infrastructure for reproducible computational science offers the potential to incentivise a culture change and drive the adoption of new techniques to improve the quality and efficiency – and thus reproducibility – of scientific exploration.Royal Society UR

Reading "all about" computerization: five common genres of social analysis

This paper examines unstated, but critical, social assumptions which underlie analyses of computerization. It focuses on the popular, professional and scholarly literature which claims to describe the actual nature of computerization, the character of computer use, and the social choices and changes that result from computerization. This literature can be usefully segmented five ideal type genres: utopian, anti-utopian, social realism, social theory, and analytical reduction. Each genre is characterized and illustrated. The strengths and weaknesses of each genre are described. In the 1990s, there will be a large market for social analyses of computerization. Utopian analyses are most likely to domínate the popular and professional discourse. The empirically oriented accounts of social realism, social theory and analytical reduction, are likely to be much less common and also less commonly seen and read by computer professionals and policymakers. These genres are relatively subtle, portray a more ambiguous world, and have less rhetorical power to capture the imagination of readers. Even though they are more scientific, these empirically anchored genres don't seem to appeal to many scientists and engineers. It is ironic that computing -- often portrayed as an instrument of knowledge -- is primarily the subject of discourses whose knowledge claims are most suspect. Conversely, the discourses whose claims as valid knowledge are strongest seems to have much less appeal in the mass media and technological communities

Training or vacation? The academic conference tourism

The current study concentrates on factors affecting the intentions of academics attending an academic conference. It highlights the importance of academic conferences and academic conference tourism and discusses meetings, the convention industry and also their utility in the career development of academics. Through qualitative research and a review of the literature on conference tourism push and pull motivation factors are suggested. The power of these factors to predict the intention to attend an academic conference is examined through quantitative research and regression analysis. The results indicate that ‘pull’ factors are better predictors of the intention to attend an academic conference than motivational ‘push’ factors

From where do legislators draw scientific knowledge? : Organizations as scientific authorities in four countries’ parliamentary debates

Organizations far beyond traditional academic institutions have become prolific science producers, with many now providing evidence-based advice for national governments and policy-makers. Neo-institutional sociology explains organizations' growing investment in research activities and research-based policy advice by the all-embracing scientization and the expansion of the educated population, phenomena observable throughout the world. There is, however, considerably less knowledge about how the organizations' increased knowledge production and the supply of science-based policy advice are reflected in national policy-making, including the legislative work of parliaments, and to what extent distinct organizations are deemed authoritative in different countries. In this paper, we examine how different organizations are used as scientific authorities in parliamentary debates over new legislation. Drawing on analyses of 576 parliamentary debates from Australia, Finland, Kenya, and the United Kingdom, we study what organizations are acknowledged as scientific authorities and the relative weight of different organization types in the context of political debates over new legislation. The results reveal that while organizations in general are frequently evoked as scientific authorities in all four countries, there is remarkable variation in the types of organizations considered authoritative in different national contexts. We elaborate these findings by analysing ways in which politicians evaluate organizations as sources of scientific authority. While the same set of evaluative schemas are used in all four countries, each is typically applied to certain types of organization. The results suggest that both the supply of scientific policy advice and political culture shape legislators' rhetorical practices when drawing on organizations' scientific authority.Organizations far beyond traditional academic institutions have become prolific science producers, with many now providing evidence-based advice for national governments and policy-makers. Neo-institutional sociology explains organizations' growing investment in research activities and research-based policy advice by the all-embracing scientization and the expansion of the educated population, phenomena observable throughout the world. There is, however, considerably less knowledge about how the organizations' increased knowledge production and the supply of science-based policy advice are reflected in national policy-making, including the legislative work of parliaments, and to what extent distinct organizations are deemed authoritative in different countries. In this paper, we examine how different organizations are used as scientific authorities in parliamentary debates over new legislation. Drawing on analyses of 576 parliamentary debates from Australia, Finland, Kenya, and the United Kingdom, we study what organizations are acknowledged as scientific authorities and the relative weight of different organization types in the context of political debates over new legislation. The results reveal that while organizations in general are frequently evoked as scientific authorities in all four countries, there is remarkable variation in the types of organizations considered authoritative in different national contexts. We elaborate these findings by analysing ways in which politicians evaluate organizations as sources of scientific authority. While the same set of evaluative schemas are used in all four countries, each is typically applied to certain types of organization. The results suggest that both the supply of scientific policy advice and political culture shape legislators' rhetorical practices when drawing on organizations' scientific authority.Peer reviewe

User Needs and Library Services in Agricultural Sciences

published or submitted for publicatio

Open science: policy implications for the evolving phenomenon of user-led scientific innovation

From contributions of astronomy data and DNA sequences to disease treatment research, scientific activity by non-scientists is a real and emergent phenomenon, and raising policy questions. This involvement in science can be understood as an issue of access to publications, code, and data that facilitates public engagement in the research process, thus appropriate policy to support the associated welfare enhancing benefits is essential. Current legal barriers to citizen participation can be alleviated by scientists' use of the "Reproducible Research Standard," thus making the literature, data, and code associated with scientific results accessible. The enterprise of science is undergoing deep and fundamental changes, particularly in how scientists obtain results and share their work: the promise of open research dissemination held by the Internet is gradually being fulfilled by scientists. Contributions to science from beyond the ivory tower are forcing a rethinking of traditional models of knowledge generation, evaluation, and communication. The notion of a scientific "peer" is blurred with the advent of lay contributions to science raising questions regarding the concepts of peer-review and recognition. New collaborative models are emerging around both open scientific software and the generation of scientific discoveries that bear a similarity to open innovation models in other settings. Public engagement in science can be understood as an issue of access to knowledge for public involvement in the research process, facilitated by appropriate policy to support the welfare enhancing benefits deriving from citizen-science