How do we build a human-centered open science?

Preprints . Research Parasites . Scientific Reproducibility . Citizen science . Mozilla, the producer of the Firefox browser, has started an Open Science initiative. Open science really hit the mainstream in 2016. So what is open science? Depending on who you ask, it simply means more timely and regular releases of data sets, and publication in open-access journals. Others imagine a more radical transformation of science and scholarship and are advocating " open-notebook " science with a continuous public record of scientific work and concomitant release of open data. In this more expansive vision: science will be ultimately transformed from a series of static snapshots represented by papers and grants into a more supple and real-time practice where the production of science involves both professionals and citizen scientists blending, and co-creating a publicly available shared knowledge. Michael Nielsen , author of the 2012 book Reinventing Discovery: The New Era of Networked Science (Nielsen 2012) describes open science, less as a set of specific practices, but ultimately as a process to amplify collective intelligence to solve scientific problems more easily: To amplify collective intelligence, we should scale up collaborations, increasing the cognitive diversity and range of available expertise as much as possible. This broadens the range of problems that can be easy solved … Ideally, the collaboration will achieve designed serendipity, so that a problem that seems hard to the person posing it finds its way to a person with just the right microexpertise to easily solve it. Attempts to reform the way we do science have been underway for decades, from arXiv in the 1990s (Ginsparg 2011), to open access publishing in the early 2000s (Suber 2002). The degree to which any scientific field practices open science varies considerably, but it's pretty fair to say that the institutional embracement of open science hasn't exactly been speedy despite demonstrated successes in the physical sciences and mathematics such as the Polymath project (Cranshaw and Kittur 2011) and Galaxy Zoo (Lintott et al. 2008). In physics it is had been mainstream for a while now to release manuscripts first on arXiv (Ginsparg 2011). There are new resources in the astronomy community for uploading, maintaining and curating raw data on exoplanets (Rein 2012) and supernovae (Guillochon, Parrent, and Margutti 2016). In the biomedical sciences, progress has been considerably slower, perhaps due its larger institutional and financial footprint: it's the proverbial large supertanker that needs a long time to turn around, let alone move in different direction. Whatever the reason, open science is now firmly on the radar, and it has unleashed a torrent of opinion and criticism, examining all aspects from its practicality to its desirability.

[1]  Harold Varmus,et al.  [E-Biomed: A Proposal for Electronic Publications in the Biomedical Sciences (Draft and Addendum)] , 1999 .

[2]  Farid Neema,et al.  Data sharing , 1998 .

[3]  Eric S. Raymond,et al.  The cathedral and the bazaar - musings on Linux and open source by an accidental revoltionary (rev. ed.) , 2001 .

[4]  D. Tyfield Transition to Science 2.0: “Remoralizing” the Economy of Science , 2013 .

[5]  Brian A. Nosek,et al.  How open science helps researchers succeed , 2016, eLife.

[6]  Peter Suber Open access to the scientific journal literature , 2002, Journal of biology.

[7]  G. Standing A Precariat Charter: From Denizens to Citizens , 2014 .

[8]  A proposal for community driven and decentralized astronomical databases and the Open Exoplanet Catalogue , 2012, 1211.7121.

[9]  Kendall Powell,et al.  The future of the postdoc , 2015, Nature.

[10]  Astra Taylor The People's Platform: Taking Back Power and Culture in the Digital Age , 2014 .

[11]  Marcia McNutt,et al.  Data sharing , 2016, Science.

[12]  Samuel A. Moore,et al.  Erratum: “Excellence R Us”: university research and the fetishisation of excellence , 2017, Palgrave Communications.

[13]  S. Haustein,et al.  The Oligopoly of Academic Publishers in the Digital Era , 2015, PloS one.

[14]  Siva Vaidhyanathan,et al.  The Googlization of Everything: (And Why We Should Worry) , 2011 .

[15]  Henry R Bourne A fair deal for PhD students and postdocs , 2013, eLife.

[16]  C. Lintott,et al.  Galaxy Zoo: morphologies derived from visual inspection of galaxies from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey , 2008, 0804.4483.

[17]  A. Waite,et al.  Adaptation to a new environment allows cooperators to purge cheaters stochastically , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[18]  R. Margutti,et al.  An Open Catalog for Supernova Data , 2016, 1605.01054.

[19]  Eric S. Raymond,et al.  The cathedral and the bazaar - musings on Linux and Open Source by an accidental revolutionary , 2001 .

[20]  M. Baldwin,et al.  Open and shut. , 2009, Nursing standard (Royal College of Nursing (Great Britain) : 1987).

[21]  Darrel C. Ince,et al.  The case for open computer programs , 2012, Nature.

[22]  P. David Can ‘Open Science’ be Protected from the Evolving Regime of IPR Protections? , 2004 .

[23]  José Taberner Guasp The Precariat. The New Dangerous Class , 2014 .

[24]  Marcus Munafò,et al.  Open Science and Research Reproducibility , 2016, Ecancermedicalscience.

[25]  Megan Wacha arXiv e-prints and the journal of record: An analysis of roles and relationships , 2017 .

[26]  Derek Taylor,et al.  It Was Twenty Years Ago Today , 1987 .

[27]  Thomas Vogt,et al.  Reinventing Discovery: The New Era of Networked Science , 2012 .

[28]  Aniket Kittur,et al.  The polymath project: lessons from a successful online collaboration in mathematics , 2011, CHI.