Posts Tagged ‘Science’
Saturday, December 29th, 2018
The traditional structure of the research article has been honed and perfected for over 350 years by its custodians, the publishers of scientific journals. Nowadays, for some journals at least, it might be viewed as much as a profit centre as the perfected mechanism for scientific communication. Here I take a look at the components of such articles to try to envisage its future, with the focus on molecules and chemistry.
The formula which is mostly adopted by authors when they sit down to describe their chemical discoveries is more or less as follows:
- An introduction, setting the scene for the unfolding narrative
- Results. This is where much of the data from which the narrative is derived is introduced. Such data can be presented in the form of:
- Tables
- Figures and schemes
- Numerical and logical data embedded in narrative text
- Discussion, where the models constructed from the data are illustrated and new inferences presented. Very often categories 2 and 3 are conflated into one single narrative.
- Conclusions, where everything is brought together to describe the essential aspects of the new science.
- Bibliography, where previous articles pertinent to the narrative are listed.
In the last decade or so, the management of research data has developed as a field of its own, with three phases:
- Setting out a data management plan at the start of the project, often a set of aspirations together with putative actions,
- the day-to-day management of the data as it emerges in the form of an electronic laboratory notebook (ELN),
- the publication of selected data from the ELN into a repository, together with the registration of metadata describing the properties of the data.
In the latter category, item 8 can be said to be a game-changer, a true disruptive influence on the entire process. The key aspect is that it constitutes independent publication of data to sit alongside the object constructed from 1-5. More disruption emerges from the open citations project, whereby category 5 above can be released by publishers to adopt its own separate existence. So now we see that of the five essential anatomic components of a research article, two are already starting to achieve their own independence. Clearly the re-invention of the anatomy of the research article is well under way already.
Next I take a look at what sorts of object might be found in category 8, drawing very much on our own experience of implementing 7 and 8 over the last twelve years or so. I start by observing that in 2 above, figures are perhaps the object most in need of disruptive re-invention. In the 1980s, authors were much taken by the introduction of colour as a means of conveying information within a figure more clearly; although the significant costs then had to be borne directly by these authors (and with a few journals this persists to this day). By the early 1990s, the introduction of the Web[1] offered new opportunities not only of colour but of an extra dimension (or at least the illusion of one) by means of introducing interactivity for three-dimensional models. Some examples resulting from combining figures from category 2 with 8 above are listed in the table below.
Example 1 illustrates how a figure from category 2 above can be augmented with active hyperlinks specifying the DOI of the data in category 8 from which the figure is derived, thus creating a direct and contextual connection between the research article and the research data it is based upon. These links are embedded only in the Acrobat (PDF) version of the article as part of the production process undertaken by the journal publisher. Download Figure 9 from the link here and try it for yourself or try the entire article from the journal, where more figures are so enhanced.
Example 2 takes this one stage further. The hyperlinks in the published figure in example 1 were embedded in software capable of resolving them, namely a PDF viewer. But that is all that this software allows. By relocating the hyperlink into a Web browser instead, one can add further functionality in the form of Javascripts perhaps better described as workflows (supported by browsers but not supported by Acrobat). There are three such workflows in example 2.
- The first uses an image map to associate a region of the figure data object defined by a DOI.
- The second interrogates the metadata specifically associated with the DOI (the same DOIs that are seen in the figure itself) to see if there is any so-called ORE metadata available (ORE= Object Re-use and Exchange). If there is, it uses this information to retrieve the data itself and pass it through to
- the third workflow represented by a set of JavaScripts known as JSmol. These interpret the data received and construct an interactive visual 3D molecular model representing the retrieved data.
All this additional workflowed activity is implemented in a data repository. It is not impossible that it could also be implemented at the journal publisher end of things, but it is an action that would have to be supported by multiple publishers. Arguably this sort of enhancement is far better suited and more easily implemented by a specialised data publisher, i.e. a data repository.
Example 3 does the same thing for a table.
Example 4 enhances in a different manner. Conventionally NMR data is added to the supporting information file associated with a journal article, but such data is already heavily processed and interpreted. The raw instrumental data is never submitted to the journal and is pretty much always possibly only available by direct request from the original researchers (at least if the request is made whilst the original researchers are still contactable!). The data repository provides a new mechanism for making such raw instrumental (and indeed computational) data an integral part of the scientific process.
Example 5 shows how a bibliography can be linked to a secondary bibliography (citations 35 and 36 in this example in the narrative article) and perhaps in the future to Open Citations semantic searches for further cross references.
So by deconstructing the components of the standard scientific article, re-assembling some of them in a better-suited environment and then linking the two sets of components to each other, one can start to re-invent the genre and hopefully add more tools for researchers to use to benefit their basic research processes. The scope for innovation seems considerable. The issue of course is (a) whether publishers see this as a viable business model or whether they instead wish to protect their current model of the research article and whether (b) authors wish to undertake the learning curve and additional effort to go in this direction. As I have noted before, the current model is deficient in various ways; I do not think it can continue without significant reinvention for much longer. And I have to ask that if reinvention does emerge, will science be the prime beneficiary?
References
- H.S. Rzepa, B.J. Whitaker, and M.J. Winter, "Chemical applications of the World-Wide-Web system", Journal of the Chemical Society, Chemical Communications, pp. 1907, 1994. https://doi.org/10.1039/c39940001907
Tags:Academic publishing, Acrobat, Articles, chemical discoveries, data, Data management, ELN, Information, Molecules, Narrative, PDF, Publishing, Research, Scholarly communication, Science, Scientific Journal, Scientific method, Technical communication, Technology/Internet, Web browser
Posted in Chemical IT | No Comments »
Sunday, November 4th, 2018
For perhaps ten years now, the future of scientific publishing has been hotly debated. The traditional models are often thought to be badly broken, although convergence to a consensus of what a better model should be is not apparently close. But to my mind, much of this debate seems to miss one important point, how to publish data.
Thus, at one extreme is COAlition S, a model which promotes the key principle that “after 1 January 2020 scientific publications on the results from research funded by public grants provided by national and European research councils and funding bodies, must be published in compliant Open Access Journals or on compliant Open Access Platforms.” This includes ten principles, one of which “The ‘hybrid’ model of publishing is not compliant with the above principles” has revealed some strong dissent, as seen at forbetterscience.com/2018/09/11/response-to-plan-s-from-academic-researchers-unethical-too-risky I should explain that hybrid journals are those where the business model includes both institutional closed-access to the journal via a subscription charge paid by the library, coupled with the option for individual authors to purchase an Open Access release of an article so that it sits outside the subscription. The dissenters argue that non-OA and hybrid journals include many traditional ones, which especially in chemistry are regarded as those with the best impact factors and very much as the journals to publish in to maximise both the readership, hence the impact of the research and thus researcher’s career prospects. Thus many (not all) of the American Chemical Society (ACS) and Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC) journals currently fall into this category, as well as commercial publishers of journals such as Nature, Nature Chemistry,Science, Angew. Chemie, etc.
So the debate is whether funded top ranking research in chemistry should in future always appear in non-hybrid OA journals (where the cost of publication is borne by article processing charges, or APCs) or in traditional subscription journals where the costs are borne by those institutions that can afford the subscription charges, but of course also limit the access. A measure of how important and topical the debate is that there is even now a movie devoted to the topic which makes the point of how profitable commercial scientific publishing now is and hence how much resource is being diverted into these profit margins at the expense of funding basic science.
None of these debates however really takes a close look at the nature of the modern research paper. In chemistry at least, the evolution of such articles in the last 20 years (~ corresponding to the online era) has meant that whilst the size of the average article has remained static at around 10 “pages” (in quotes because of course the “page” is one of those legacy concepts related to print), another much newer component known as “Supporting information” or SI♥ has ballooned to absurd sizes. It can reach 1000 pages[1] and there are rumours of even larger SIs. The content of SI is of course mostly data. The size is often because the data is present in visual form (think spectra). As visual information, it is not easily “inter-operable” or “accessible”. Nor is it “findable” until commercial abstracting agencies chose to index it. Searches of such indexed data are most certainly “closed” (again depending on institutional purchases of access) and not “open access”. You may recognise these attributes as those of FAIR (Findable, accessible, inter-operable and re-usable). So even if an article in chemistry is published in pure OA form, in order to get FAIR access to the data associated with the article, you will probably have to go to a non-OA resource run by a commercial organisation for profit. Thus a 10 page article might itself be OA, but the full potential of its 1000+ page data (an elephant if ever there was one) ends up being very much not OA.
You might argue that the 1000+ pages of data does not require the services of an abstracting agency to be useful. Surely a human can get all the information they want from inspecting a visual spectrum? Here I raise the future prospects of AI (artificial intelligence). The ~1000 page SI I noted above[1] includes e.g NMR spectra for around 70 compounds (I tried to count them all visually, but could not be certain I found them all). A machine, trained to identify spectra from associated metadata (a feature of FAIR), could extract vastly more information than a human could from FAIR raw data‡ (a spectrum is already processed data, with implied information/data loss) in a given time. And for many articles, not just one. Thus FAIR data is very much targeted not only at humans but at the AI-trained machines of the future.
So I again repeat my assertion that focussing on whether an article is OA or not and whether publishing in hybrid journals is to be allowed or not by funders is missing that 100-fold bigger elephant in the room. For me, a publishing model that is fit for the future should include as a top priority a declaration of whether the data associated with it is FAIR. Thus in the Plan-S ten principles, FAIR is not mentioned at all. Only when FAIR-enabled data becomes part of the debates can we truly say that the article and its data are on its way to being properly open access.
‡The FAIR concept did not originally differentiate between processed data (i.e. spectra) and the underlying primary or raw data on which the processed data is based. Our own implementation of FAIR data includes both types of data; raw for machine reprocessing if required, and processed data for human interpretation. Along with a rich set of metadata, itself often created using carefully designed workflows conducted by machines.
♥The proportion of articles relating to chemistry which do not include some form of SI is probably low. These would include articles which simply provide a new model or interpretation of previously published data, reporting no new data of their own. A famous historical example is Michael Dewar’s re-interpretation of the structure of stipitatic acid[2] which founded the new area of non-benzenoid aromaticity.
References
- J.M. Lopchuk, K. Fjelbye, Y. Kawamata, L.R. Malins, C. Pan, R. Gianatassio, J. Wang, L. Prieto, J. Bradow, T.A. Brandt, M.R. Collins, J. Elleraas, J. Ewanicki, W. Farrell, O.O. Fadeyi, G.M. Gallego, J.J. Mousseau, R. Oliver, N.W. Sach, J.K. Smith, J.E. Spangler, H. Zhu, J. Zhu, and P.S. Baran, "Strain-Release Heteroatom Functionalization: Development, Scope, and Stereospecificity", Journal of the American Chemical Society, vol. 139, pp. 3209-3226, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1021/jacs.6b13229
- M.J.S. DEWAR, "Structure of Stipitatic Acid", Nature, vol. 155, pp. 50-51, 1945. https://doi.org/10.1038/155050b0
Tags:Academia, Academic publishing, American Chemical Society, Angewandte Chemie, article processing charge, article processing charges, artificial intelligence, Cognition, Company: RSC, Electronic publishing, G factor, Hybrid open access journal, Knowledge, Michael Dewar, Nature, online era, Open access, Predatory publishing, Publishing, researcher, Royal Society of Chemistry, Scholarly communication, Science, Technology/Internet
Posted in Chemical IT | 2 Comments »
Wednesday, April 18th, 2018
The molecules below were discussed in the previous post as examples of highly polar but formally neutral molecules, a property induced by aromatisation of up to three rings. Since e.g. compound 3 is known only in its protonated phenolic form, here I take a look at the basicity of the oxygen in these systems to see if deprotonation of the ionic phenol form to the neutral polar form is viable.
The equilibrium being considered is shown below for compound 2:
The energetics of this equilibrium shown below, computed at the ωB97XD/Def2-TZVPPD/SCRF=water level and for which the FAIR data DOI is 10.14469/hpc/4073
For 1: X=Cl, the energy is shown below as a function of the O….H distance. Proton abstraction from HCl is exothermic by ~25 kcal/mol.
For 2: X=Cl, the exothermicity increases by only ~5 kcal/mol , despite the apparent aromatisation of a further ring. It is also worth noting that this is greater basicity than that of e.g. water, where around 4-5 water molecules acting in concert are required to deprotonate HCl.
For 1: X=OH, the proton abstraction from water is mildly endothermic by about 13 kcal/mol; indeed there is no energy minimum for carbonyl protonation and instead a relatively strong hydrogen bond to the water is formed instead.
For 2: X=OH the endothermicity is reduced to ~9 kcal/mol.
For 1: X=CH3, deprotonation of methane is now strongly endothermic by ~40 kcal/mol.
So the molecules 1 – 2 above are clearly not superbases, which perhaps augers well for being able to deprotonate the ionic phenols into these neutral but highly polar molecules.
Tags:Antiseptics, Aromatization, Chemistry, energy, energy minimum, Hydrogen, Molecule, Neurotoxins, Science
Posted in Interesting chemistry | No Comments »
Monday, August 1st, 2016
In March, I posted from the ACS meeting in San Diego on the topic of Research data: Managing spectroscopy-NMR, and noted a talk by MestreLab Research on how a tool called Mpublish in the forthcoming release of their NMR analysis software Mestrenova could help. With that release now out, the opportunity arose to test the system.
I will start by reminding that NMR data associated with a published article is (or should be) openly free: one should not need a subscription to the journal to access it (although one might in order to find it). Now, NMR data as it emerges from a spectrometer is highly sophisticated, comprising a collection of (sometimes) binary proprietary files containing the measured free induction decays (FID). Turning this raw data into an interpretable NMR spectrum, the visual form of the data that so appeals to human beings, is non trivial. This requires what may be highly sophisticated software and that in turn means that it may be a commercial product. Of course there are also examples of non-commercial open software packages that are best-of-breed; indeed in its early life-cycle MestreNova was known as MESTREC before becoming a commercial product. Could one achieve the benefits of both open and fully functional NMR data with no loss from the original instrument coupled with the ability to apply top-quality software for its analysis in an open manner? This is a demonstration of how Mpublish achieves this.
-
Invoke the URL data.datacite.org/chemical/x-mnpub/10.14469/hpc/1087 from a browser
-
This action queries the metadata deposited with DataCite for the doi 10.14469/hpc/1087 and retrieves the first instance of any file associated with that dataset that has the format type chemical/x-mnpub. You can directly view this metadata by invoking just data.datacite.org/10.14469/hpc/1087 where you can find both mnpub and mnova formats listed. A command such as data.datacite.org/chemical/x-mnpub/10.14469/hpc/1087 allows the file retrieval to be incorporated into automated workflows based just on the doi and the media type desired. Note my parenthetical comment above about finding data; here you only need its doi to retrieve it!
-
The URL above downloads a small text file with the suffix .mnpub which contains in essence two components:
-
A URL pointing directly to an .mnova file at the repository for which the doi has been issued
-
A signature key derived used to verify that the public key of the publisher (the data repository in this instance) was counter-signed by Mestrelab.
-
If you now download the application program and install it (but for the purpose of this demonstration, ignore any requests to try to license the program. Use it unlicensed) and open the .mnpub file using it, you should get the below.The application program has checked the signature key, and if valid, proceeds to download a full data file (a .mnova file in this case), and to analyze and display it within the program. The data is fully active; it can be manipulated and analysed. Notice in the picture below, the red arrow points to the state of the license, in this case not present.
-
It is also possible to apply this procedure to the raw data as it emerges from the (Bruker) spectrometer, and compressed into a .zip archive. The MestreNova software will automatically process the contents by applying various default parameters, although the result may not correspond exactly to that present in e.g. the equivalent .mnova file (which may have had specific parameters applied).
It is my hope that anyone who records NMR data and processes it using software such as MestreNova will now consider using the mechanism above to accompany their submitted articles, rather than just automatically pasting a static image of the spectrum into a PDF file as "supporting information". This is part of what is meant by "managed research data" (RDM).
One cannot help but note that many types of scientific instrument nowadays come with bespoke software for analysing the data they produce. Very often this software is unavailable to anyone who has not purchased the instrument itself. To make the data available to others, the processed data and its visual interpretation often have to be reduced, with much consequent information loss, to a lowest common denominator format such as Acrobat/PDF. Here we see a mechanism for avoiding any such information loss whilst enabling, for that dataset only, the full potential for (re)analysing the data. It will be interesting to see if other examples of this model or its equivalent emerge in the near future.
Tags:Acrobat, analysis software, chemical, Chemistry, City: San Diego, format type chemical/x-mnpub, media type, Mestrenova, non-commercial open software packages, Nuclear magnetic resonance, Nuclear magnetic resonance spectra database, Nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy, PDF, public key, Science, Scientific method, spectroscopy, Technology/Internet
Posted in Chemical IT | 3 Comments »
Monday, February 1st, 2016
I attended the first (of a proposed five) workshops organised by LEARN (an EU-funded project that aims to ...Raise awareness in research data management (RDM) issues & research policy) on Friday. Here I give some quick bullet points relating to things that caught my attention and or interest. The program (and Twitter feed) can be found at https://learnrdm.wordpress.com where other's comments can also be seen.
-
Henry Oldenburg, founder member and first secretary of the Royal Society, was the first Open Scientist.
-
About 100 people attended the workshop. Of these ~3-5 identified themselves as researchers creating data, and the rest comprised research data managers, administrators, librarians, publishers (but see below) etc. Many were new to their posts.
-
Not publishing scientific data should become recognised as scientific malpractice.
-
Central libraries should pro-actively disperse their knowledge to data scientists in departments.
-
If a scientist is concerned that openly publishing their data might give advantage to their competitors, they are urged to counteract this by "being cleverer than the others".
-
The three great bastions of open science are (a) Open Data, (b) Open access articles and (c) doing science openly. Examples of this third category include open notebook science (ONS), a form notably pioneered by Jean-Claude Bradley. One attribute of ONS was noted as no insider knowledge.
-
Learned societies should endow medals for Open Science.
-
(Some) publishers are reinventing themselves as Research Facilitators.
The plenaries are all well worth dipping into (certainly the video and in some cases all the slides are scheduled to appear).
If you are a researcher (undergraduate students, PGs, PDRAs, early career researchers and academics) you should immediately track down your local evangelist/expert in RDM and ask what the local infrastructures are (or will be shortly built).
Tags:Academic publishing, European Union, first Open Scientist, first secretary, Free culture movement, Henry Oldenburg, Jean Claude Bradley, Open access, Open data, Open science, RDM, Research, researcher, Royal Society, Science, Scientific method, Scientific misconduct, scientist, Technology/Internet
Posted in Chemical IT | 1 Comment »
Saturday, June 20th, 2015
The university sector in the UK has quality inspections of its research outputs conducted every seven years, going by the name of REF or Research Excellence Framework. The next one is due around 2020, and already preparations are under way! Here I describe how I have interpreted one of its strictures; that all UK funded research outputs (i.e. research publications in international journals) must be made available in open unrestricted form within three months of the article being accepted for publication, or they will not be eligible for consideration in 2020.
At the outset, I should say that one infrastructure to help researchers adhere to the guidelines is being implemented in the form of the Symplectic system. This allows a researcher to upload the final accepted version of a manuscript. At Imperial College, a digital repository called Spiral serves this purpose and also acts as the front end for collecting informative metadata to enhance discoverability. The final accepted version is then converted by the publisher into a version-of-record. This contains styling unique to the publisher and the content is subjected to further scrutiny by the authors as proof corrections. In an ideal world, these latter changes should also be faithfully propagated back to the final accepted version, as would all the supporting information associated with the article. Since most authors do not exactly enjoy the delights of proof corrections, this final reconciliation of the two versions may not always be assiduously undertaken.
I became concerned about the existence of two versions of any given scientific report and that the task of ensuring total fidelity in the content of both versions may negatively impact on the author’s time. Much better if the publisher could grant permission for the author to archive the version-of-record into a digital repository.
Some experiments were needed, and I decided to start them in reverse, by archiving my oldest publications. Since Symplectic now provides a system to do this, I began by using it. Symplectic identifies each publisher’s policies for archival, of which the most liberal are known as ROMEO GREEN. To quote from the definition, this colour allows the author to “archive pre-print and post-print or publisher’s version/PDF“. In an afternoon I had processed most of my ROMEO green articles. You know how it is sometimes, you do not read the fine print! And so the library soon informed me that archival of ROMEO GREEN was in fact only permitted on the author’s “personal web page”. Spiral, as an institutional repository, does not apparently constitute a personal web page for me and so none of my Symplectic submissions could be accepted for archival there.
Time to rethink the experiment. Firstly, I very much wanted the reprints to be held by a proper digital repository rather than a conventional web page. Why? I wanted my reprints to adhere as much as possible to FAIR: findable, accessible, interoperable and re-usable. Well, at least the first two of those (the last two relate more to data). A repository is designed to hold metadata in a formal and standards-based manner and metadata helps achieve FAIR. So I asked the Royal Society of Chemistry (as a ROMEO GREEN publisher) whether a personal web page hosted on a digital repository would qualify. I was soon informed that I had proposed a neat solution here, and they couldn’t see an issue.
Now, all I had to do is find a repository where I could create such a personal web page. The chemistry department at Imperial College has for ten years hosted a DSpace repository called SPECTRa[1] which already has the functionality for individuals to create personal collections. I had also picked up on the increasing attention being given to Zenodo, like the World-Wide Web itself an offshoot of CERN (of large Hadron Collider fame) and born from the need for researchers to more permanently archive the outputs of their researches. These outputs include software, videos, images, presentations, posters, publications and (most obviously for CERN) datasets. I thought I would include them in my experiment as well. There results are summarised below.
The last line of this table includes a link to another design feature of a repository, facilitating the ability to harvest the content. The ContentMine project (“The right to read is the right to mine!“) has shown how such harvesting of facts from the literature can be automated on a vast scale, and (IMHO) represents an example of those disruptive innovations that have the power to change the world forever. It also enshrines the idea that scientific facts funded by the public purse should be capable of being openly liberated from their containers. A harvestable repository seems an ideal container for achieving this.
My experiment is part of what might be seen as the increasingly subtle interplay between:
- scientific authors, whose creative endeavour research is and without whom scientific publishers would not exist
- publishers who create a business model from the content freely given them by authors but also (especially if a commercial publisher) need to be accountable to their shareholders.
- the funding councils, many of whom now wish the outcomes of the research they fund to be openly available to all
- the local libraries/administrators who have to adhere to/enforce all the rules contractually handed down to them by publishers whose direct customers they are, but who also need to serve their community of readers and authors.
- researchers who would rather do research than fret about the above, and who would rather spend limited resources doing that research rather than diverting an increasing amount of their attention into the above system.
- readers, who need unimpeded access to the research endeavours of others, but often have little influence on the policies and actions of all the other stakeholders, since they are NOT considered customers (of the publishers).
- etc. etc.
My experiment was in part designed to explore these rules, their interpretations and their boundaries. For the time being at least I seem to have found an arrangement that allows me to distribute versions-of-record of my own work, thanks to a generous and far-sighted learned society publisher. Watch this space!
References
- J. Downing, P. Murray-Rust, A.P. Tonge, P. Morgan, H.S. Rzepa, F. Cotterill, N. Day, and M.J. Harvey, "SPECTRa: The Deposition and Validation of Primary Chemistry Research Data in Digital Repositories", Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, vol. 48, pp. 1571-1581, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1021/ci7004737
- H.S. Rzepa, and B.C. Challis, "The Mechanism Of Diazo-Coupling To Indoles And The Effect Of Steric Hindrance On The Rate Limiting Step", Zenodo, 1975. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18758
- H.S. Rzepa, "Hydrogen transfer reactions of indoles", 1974. http://doi.org/10044/1/20860
- H.S. Rzepa, "Hydrogen Transfer Reactions Of Indoles", Zenodo, 1974. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18777
- H.S. Rzepa, "C 25 H 34 Cl 1 N 3 O 1", 2015. https://doi.org/10.14469/ch/191342
- H.S. Rzepa, A. Lobo, M.S. Andrade, V.S. Silva, and A.M. Lourenco, "Chiroptical properties of streptorubin B – the synergy between theory and experiment.", 2015. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18632
Tags:Academia, Academic publishing, Archival science, author, Data management, Digital library, EPrints, Institutional repository, Knowledge, Knowledge representation, Library science, metadata, Open access, PDF, personal web page, Preprint, Publishing, Repository, researcher, ROMEO GREEN, Science, Technology/Internet, United Kingdom, web server
Posted in Chemical IT | No Comments »