[open-science] Open Science Sweden

[Peter Murray-Rust]

Greetings Simone,
I love your vision and enthusiasm.

Breaking new ground is a hard road but with the help of community it is
much easier. Every year the number of like-minded people grows. I suggest
you concentrate on things where you can see a (clear?) way forward and
where you can make useful progress.




On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 11:37 AM, Jenny Molloy <jenny.molloy at okfn.org>wrote:

> Hi All
>
> I'd like to introduce you to Simone, who is reigniting activity over at
> the Stockholm Open Science group (founded by Egon Willighagen) and hopes to
> get local open science meetups and discussions taking place in Sweden.
>

Egon has been magnificent - doing this for nearly ten years (he worked with
us in Cambridge in ca 2003 I think). He's been developing the semantic
concept in science (bio /chem).

7 years ago we founded the Blue Obelisk in chemistry to develop Open Data,
Open Standards, Open Source (ODOSOS) and that's quite a useful vision for a
lot of science. Jean-Claude Bradley and MatTodd have extended this to open
Notebook Science where the experiments are published as soon as they are
carried out. Not every one is able to do that.

Jenny
>
>
> Hi
> I am Simone, senior post-doc at the department of medical biochemistry and
> biophysics at Karolinska Institutet.
> I decided to join this group in order to promote awareness toward OPEN
> ACCESS. This concept has been pioneered in the computer community and
> resulted in amazing progresses that affected not only the computer
> community itself but the all world. In science open access found his way in
> astronomy, particle physics and genomics.
>

Open Access technically refers only to scholarly publications and making
them available on the Internet. There's relatively little most people can
do other than to choose to publish in existing OA journals or self-archive
their papers. Some very energetic ones start OA journals and others get
involved in politics. OA has been going on for over 10 years. Generally
data is a separate area, Open Data


> I believe that a similar approach should be taken in many more branches of
> science, especially in the medical field.
>

I suspect your interest is broader than OA and I'd suggest it falls under
Open Knowledge

>
> I know is not a simple task and in order to have such a big change, we
> need to develop a new "scientific method" and slowly start a scientific
> revolution. In order to be effectively able to share information we need to
> change our way to do science, the way through which scientist are evaluated
> and also how funding are distributed. I know it is a complex issue but we
> need to start somewhere. I believe that we need to work on it from the
> 'inside' and start to build from the ground up a new way to do science.
> Data generation, data crunching and even the classical "wet bench" science
> changed a lot in the past few decades, however the way we are judged, we
> get grants and communicate our research to the outside world is stacked in
> the past. Now it is time to roll up our sleeves and start to do something.
>

Yes. This revolution is starting, but it's still very small.

>
> Even if in many countries the economical crisis is hitting science really
> hard, here in Sweden there is still the opportunity to be founded and do
> science. The government has been pouring money in rich data projects such
> as Scilife labs. VR is offering quite a few start-up grants and many
> private foundations are investing in research. So I believe that this is a
> good time to start to work in changing the way "we do science", to make
> founding agencies aware that is "ok" to have full access to the data
> generated with their founding and that by sharing we can do bigger jumps
> and progress faster. Because I am a scientist I know that not everything we
> do generate a figure in a final report, much of the work is saved in some
> external HD for "who knows how long". We should be able to open up this HD,
> share the negative data (of course getting credit for them) so if another
> scientist will decide to follow a similar path, he or she will not have to
> "re-invent" the wheel and deal with the same issues we previously
> encountered.
>

The funders are now generally aware of Open Science and it's worth seeing
if they have programs (these will probably be small).  Open Science
overlaps with Citizen Science where people outside traditional academia are
involved.(probably most OS is CS, but not necessarily the reverse).

Many of find our own speciality in OKF and you might want to discuss ideas
on the list. It can also be very useful to run hack days - these are fun,
only require a room and perhaps some pizza. They are a mixture of
discussion and hacking information/software, though we are moving towards
physical objects as well ("maker"). You might want to consider building a
CrowdCrafting app...

Best

P.

>
> Sorry for this long, long post.
>

Not at all


> There is a lot that need to be fixed and polished and I strongly believe
> that we as scientist have to start this new scientific revolution.
>
>
>
-- 
Peter Murray-Rust
Reader in Molecular Informatics
Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
University of Cambridge
CB2 1EW, UK
+44-1223-763069
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-science/attachments/20130930/eded24d5/attachment-0001.html>