Complying with the NIH Public Access Policy - Copyright Considerations and Options

On January 11, 2008, the National Institutes of Health ('NIH') adopted a revised Public Access Policy for peer-reviewed journal articles reporting research supported in whole or in part by NIH funds. Under the revised policy, the grantee shall ensure that a copy of the author's final manuscript, including any revisions made during the peer review process, be electronically submitted to the National Library of Medicine's PubMed Central ('PMC') archive and that the person submitting the manuscript will designate a time not later than 12 months after publication at which NIH may make the full text of the manuscript publicly accessible in PMC. NIH adopted this policy to implement a new statutory requirement under which: The Director of the National Institutes of Health shall require that all investigators funded by the NIH submit or have submitted for them to the National Library of Medicine's PubMed Central an electronic version of their final, peer-reviewed manuscripts upon acceptance for publication to be made publicly available no later than 12 months after the official date of publication: Provided, That the NIH shall implement the public access policy in a manner consistent with copyright law. This White Paper is written primarily for policymaking staff in universities and other institutional recipients of NIH support responsible for ensuring compliance with the Public Access Policy. The January 11, 2008, Public Access Policy imposes two new compliance mandates. First, the grantee must ensure proper manuscript submission. The version of the article to be submitted is the final version over which the author has control, which must include all revisions made after peer review. The statutory command directs that the manuscript be submitted to PMC 'upon acceptance for publication.' That is, the author's final manuscript should be submitted to PMC at the same time that it is sent to the publisher for final formatting and copy editing. Proper submission is a two-stage process. The electronic manuscript must first be submitted through a process that requires input of additional information concerning the article, the author(s), and the nature of NIH support for the research reported. NIH then formats the manuscript into a uniform, XML-based format used for PMC versions of articles. In the second stage of the submission process, NIH sends a notice to the Principal Investigator requesting that the PMC-formatted version be reviewed and approved. Only after such approval has grantee's manuscript submission obligation been satisfied. Second, the grantee also has a distinct obligation to grant NIH copyright permission to make the manuscript publicly accessible through PMC not later than 12 months after the date of publication. This obligation is connected to manuscript submission because the author, or the person submitting the manuscript on the author's behalf, must have the necessary rights under copyright at the time of submission to give NIH the copyright permission it requires. This White Paper explains and analyzes only the scope of the grantee's copyright-related obligations under the revised Public Access Policy and suggests six options for compliance with that aspect of the grantee's obligation. Time is of the essence for NIH grantees. As a practical matter, the grantee should have a compliance process in place no later than April 7, 2008. More specifically, the new Public Access Policy applies to any article accepted for publication on or after April 7, 2008 if the article arose under (1) an NIH Grant or Cooperative Agreement active in Fiscal Year 2008, (2) direct funding from an NIH Contract signed after April 7, 2008, (3) direct funding from the NIH Intramural Program, or (4) from an NIH employee. In addition, effective May 25, 2008, anyone submitting an application, proposal or progress report to the NIH must include the PMC reference number when citing articles arising from their NIH funded research. (This includes applications submitted to the NIH for the May 25, 2008 and subsequent due dates.) Conceptually, the compliance challenge that the Public Access Policy poses for grantees is easily described. The grantee must depend to some extent upon the author(s) to take the necessary actions to ensure that the grantee is in compliance with the Public Access Policy because the electronic manuscripts and the copyrights in those manuscripts are initially under the control of the author(s). As a result, any compliance option will require an explicit understanding between the author(s) and the grantee about how the manuscript and the copyright in the manuscript are managed. It is useful to conceptually keep separate the grantee's manuscript submission obligation from its copyright permission obligation because the compliance personnel concerned with manuscript management may differ from those responsible for overseeing the author's copyright management. With respect to copyright management, the grantee has the following six options: (1) rely on authors to manage copyright but also to request or to require that these authors take responsibility for amending publication agreements that call for transfer of too many rights to enable the author to grant NIH permission to make the manuscript publicly accessible ('the Public Access License'); (2) take a more active role in assisting authors in negotiating the scope of any copyright transfer to a publisher by (a) providing advice to authors concerning their negotiations or (b) by acting as the author's agent in such negotiations; (3) enter into a side agreement with NIH-funded authors that grants a non-exclusive copyright license to the grantee sufficient to grant NIH the Public Access License; (4) enter into a side agreement with NIH-funded authors that grants a non-exclusive copyright license to the grantee sufficient to grant NIH the Public Access License and also grants a license to the grantee to make certain uses of the article, including posting a copy in the grantee's publicly accessible digital archive or repository and authorizing the article to be used in connection with teaching by university faculty; (5) negotiate a more systematic and comprehensive agreement with the biomedical publishers to ensure either that the publisher has a binding obligation to submit the manuscript and to grant NIH permission to make the manuscript publicly accessible or that the author retains sufficient rights to do so; or (6) instruct NIH-funded authors to submit manuscripts only to journals with binding deposit agreements with NIH or to journals whose copyright agreements permit authors to retain sufficient rights to authorize NIH to make manuscripts publicly accessible

Design, test, and performance of the Mariner 5 temperature control reference

Design and performance of Mariner 5 temperature control assembly coating

Dark Matter with Time-Dependent Mass

We propose a simple model in which the cosmological dark matter consists of particles whose mass increases with the scale factor of the universe. The particle mass is generated by the expectation value of a scalar field which does not have a stable vacuum state, but which is effectively stabilized by the rest energy of the ambient particles. As the universe expands, the density of particles decreases, leading to an increase in the vacuum expectation value of the scalar (and hence the mass of the particle). The energy density of the coupled system of variable-mass particles (``vamps'') redshifts more slowly than that of ordinary matter. Consequently, the age of the universe is larger than in conventional scenarios.Comment: 14 pages, 2 figures; based on a talk by SMC at Cosmo-97, September 1997, Ambleside, England. Important references adde

The homeownership experience of households in bankruptcy

This paper provides the first in-depth analysis of the homeownership experience of households in bankruptcy. The authors consider households who are homeowners at the time of filing. These households are typically seriously delinquent on their mortgages at the time of filing. The authors measure how often they end up losing their houses in foreclosure, the time between bankruptcy filing and foreclosure sale, and the foreclosure sale price. In particular, they follow homeowners who filed for chapter 13 bankruptcy between 2001 and 2002 in New Castle County, Delaware, through October 2007. They present three main findings. First, close to 30 percent of the filers lost their houses in foreclosure despite filing for bankruptcy. The rate rose to over 40 percent for those who were 12 months or more behind on their mortgage payment, about the same fraction as among those who entered into foreclosure directly. Second, filing for bankruptcy allowed those who eventually lost their houses to foreclosure to remain in their houses for, on average, an additional year. Third, although the average final sale price exceeded borrowers’ own estimates at the time of filing, the majority of the lenders suffered losses. These findings are pertinent to the recent debate over the bankruptcy code on mortgage modification. Finally, the paper also reports circumstances related to the loan, borrower, and lender that make it more or less likely that a certain result will take place.Home ownership ; Bankruptcy

Standard Transistor Array (STAR). Volume 1, addendum 1: CAPSTAR user's guide

The cell placement techniques developed for use with the standard transistor array were incorporated in the cell arrangement program for STAR (CAPSTAR). Instructions for use of this program are given

Individual Learning About Consumption

The standard approach to modelling consumption/saving problems is to assume that the decisionmaker is solving a dynamic stochastic optimization problem However under realistic descriptions of utility and uncertainty the optimal consumption/saving decision is so difficult that only recently economists have managed to find solutions using numerical methods that require previously infeasible amounts of computation Yet empirical evidence suggests that household behavior conforms fairly well with the prescriptions of the optimal solution raising the question of how average households can solve problems that economists until recently could not This paper examines whether consumers might be able to find a reasonably good ’rule-of-thumb?approximation to optimal behavior by trial-and-error methods as Friedman (1953) proposed long ago We find that such individual learning methods can reliably identify reasonably good rules of thumb only if the consumer is able to spend absurdly large amounts of time searching for a good rule

Variance estimation for the instrumental variables approach to measurement error in generalized linear models

This paper derives and gives explicit formulas for a derived sandwich variance estimate. This variance estimate is appropriate for generalized linear additive measurement error models fitted using instrumental variables. We also generalize the known results for linear regression. As such, this article explains the theoretical justification for the sandwich estimate of variance utilized in the software for measurement error developed under the Small Business Innovation Research Grant (SBIR) by StataCorp. The results admit estimation of variance matrices for measurement error models where there is an instrument for the unknown covariate. Copyright 2003 by StataCorp LP.sandwich estimate of variance, measurement error, White's estimator, robust variance, generalized linear models, instrumental variables

Measurement error, GLMs, and notational conventions

This paper introduces additive measurement error in a generalized linear-model context. We discuss the types of measurement error along with their effects on fitted models. In addition, we present the notational conventions to be used in this and the accompanying papers. Copyright 2003 by StataCorp LP.generalized linear models, transportability, measurement error

Model support roll balance and roll coupling

The design concepts of two specialized wind tunnel model support mechanisms are described. The forced oscillation roll balance mechanism was designed to meet the specific requirement to measure aerodynamic forces and moments to permit determination of the damping-in-roll parameters of winged configurations. A variable speed motor is used to oscillate the model by means of an offset crank. The oscillating motion is resisted by a torsion spring to provide a restoring torque and is attached to the section forward of the strain-gage balance. This spring action allows the model to be oscillated at a frequency for velocity resonance, whereby the mechanical spring and any aerodynamic spring balance. This spring action allows the model to be oscillated at a frequency for velocity resonance, whereby the mechanical spring and any aerodynamic spring balance out the model inertia. The only torque then required to oscillate the model at that particular frequency is equal to that due to aerodynamic damping. The second mechanism, a roll coupling for remotely rotating a model, was designed to invert or roll a model about its longitudinal axis when mounted for testing