research 3.0&the future of scholarly communications
richard j. bookman
richter libraryuniversity of miami18 july 2012
NIH Purchasing Power – 2003-2013
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Senate
$18
$20
$22
$24
$26
$28
$30
$32
$27.1$27.9 $28.5 $28.5
$29.0 $29.3
$30.5$31.0 $30.7 $30.6 $30.7
$26.9 $26.4
$25.3$24.8
$23.9 $24.2$23.9
$23.0$22.4
$21.9
Current Constant (BRDPI)
Bill
ion
s
Labor-HHS BA only
Sources: NIH Budget Office; House and Senate Appropriations Committees
NIH Purchasing Power – 2003-2013
Labor-HHS BA onlySources: NIH Budget Office; House and Senate Appropriations Committees
NIH Grant Success RatesFY 1978-2012
Over the past decade, before pursuing a particular line of research, scientists (including C.G.B.) in the haematology and oncology department at the biotechnology firm Amgen in Thousand Oaks, California, tried to confirm published findings related to that work. Fifty-three papers were deemed 'landmark' studies. It was acknowledged from the outset that some of the data might not hold up, because papers were deliberately selected that described something completely new, such as fresh approaches to targeting cancers or alternative clinical uses for existing therapeutics. Nevertheless, scientific findings were confirmed in only 6 (11%) cases. Even knowing the limitations of preclinical research, this was a shocking result.
you may ask yourself…
…how did we get here?
hypothetical model of the evolution & structure of science
daniel zeller 2007
research 1.0who’s doing research?
how is research organized?
how is research communicated?
who’s paying for research?
Morrill Act of 1862
the endless frontier 1945
bayh-dole act of 1980
research 2.xwho’s doing research?
how is research organized?
how is research communicated?
who’s paying for research?
unintended consequences…
rewards & incentives matter…
need
curiosity
fame
fortune
time for a new version…
in a rapidly evolving context
bigbang
alan turing 1912-1954
the internet of things
big bang
the internet of things
big data
^
every
\
http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/MIS.2009.36
research 3.0de
sign
spe
c
hints of 3.0…..
Terms of UseSee this page for info, including copyright
?
1.0 megapub per year…
…and that’s just medline.
digital research objects
Some other publisher
6. (Re-)User applications: distributed applications run (autonomously?) on the set of exposed data objects.
Producing research objects
Concept modified from one developed by Anita de Waard, Ed Hovy, Phil Bourne, Gully Burns and Cartic Ramakrishnan
1. Research: Each object in the system has metadata (including provenance) and relations to other data objects added to it.
metadata
metadata
metadata
metadata
metadata
5. Publishing and distribution: When a document is published, a collection of validated research objects is exposed to the world. Document remains connected to its related data objects, and their provenance can be traced.
2. Workflow: All data objects used by or created in the lab are captured within a (lab-owned) workflow system.
4. Editing and review: Once the co-authors agree, the paper is ‘exposed’ to editors, who in turn expose it to reviewers. Reports are stored in the authoring/editing system, the paper gets updated, until it is validated.
Review
EditRevise
Rats were subjected to two tests (click on fig 2 to see underlying data). These results suggest that the neurological pain produced by ….
3. Authoring: A communication is written in an authoring tool which can pull data objects with provenance from the workflow tool in the appropriate representation into the document.
re-useful is the new useful
research 3.0who’s doing research?
how is research organized?
how is research communicated?
who’s paying for research?
design
spe
c
what’s next?
individuals
interest groups
institutions
nations
put the science first
libraries ?
flip the library
cloudminders
research 3.0&the future of scholarly communications
Top Related