Science 2.0

(A new modus operandi for science and research)

Its potential impact on excellence

Excellence in Research Estonian academy of Sciences, Council of Estonian Centres of excellence in research,

Estonian Research Council

22-23 October 2013.

Talinn

JC.Burgelman (DG R&I) (not speaking on behalf of the EC)

&

D. Osimo (Open Evidence)

We lack scientific evidence of what the future will be…..

Three stories

Galaxyzoo (citizen science)

Synaptic Leap (networked science)

Excel-gate (open data)

2

Key question:

• Are we at the beginning of a change in modus operandi of science

and research ("Perez change")?

• If so, it implies the need to rethink our institutional facts of scientific life:

- curricula development, ‘’high impact’’ measures, education,

- Scientific methods, approaches and publishing,

- …

• And thus….research and innovation strategies & policies

(Perez change: rewards and risks, new players emerge, old have to adapt/innovate or

risk losing relevance,..)

1. What is going on?

2. Impact on the science and research system?

3. Irreversible?

4. Policy implications?

1. What is going on?

Observable explosive growth of data, authors (data & intelligence

producers) and publication platforms Authorship: growing

10–fold each year

vs typical 10–fold

each hundred years

(Pellis & Bigelow

2009)

Data: “Every 2

Days We Create As

Much Information

As We Did Up To

2003” (Schmidt

2008)

Analysis

Publication

Review Conceptualisation

Data gathering

Open

access

Scientific

blogs Collaborative

bibliographies

Alternative

Reputation

systems

Citizens

science Open

code

Open

labbook

s /

wflows

Open

annotat

ion

Open

data

Pre-

print

Data-

intensive

6

Where does it come from?

Analysis

Publication

Review Conceptualisation

Data gathering

Open

access

Scientif

ic blogs

Collaborativ

e

bibliographi

es

Alternativ

e

Reputatio

n systems

Citizen

s

science Open

code

Open

labboo

ks /

wflows

Open

annotat

ion

Open

data

Pre-

print

Data-

intensive

7

Datadryad.org

Myexperiment.

org

Runmycode

.org

ArXiv

Sci-

starter.com

Openannotation.

org

Altmetric.com

Mendeley.com Researchgate.

com

Figshare.com

Roar.eprints.org

An emerging "ecosystem "of services

and standards

Its is real!

In one word: much more than Open Access!

Analysis

Publication

Review Conceptualisation

Data gathering

Open

access

8

2. Impact: More than a marginal change: the modus

operandi for R&S is changing

CKAN

Science blogs

25K on

Research

Blogging

platform

Mendeley

(2000K

users,2013)

Examples: Arxiv OpenAire Openannotation.org DataNet

Manual

Computational

Deductive

2nd paradigm: theoretical

(Newton)

3rd paradigm: computational

(Von Neumann)

Inductive

1st paradigm: empirical

(Bacon)

4th paradigm: data-

intensive (Venter, DNA sequencing)

A 4th paradigm of data-intensive science?

Data explosion only starting (internet of things!)

Greater role for inductive, not only hypothesis driven science: “Here’s

the evidence, now what is the hypothesis?”

Observable impact:

More productive science

•New type of scientific outputs

•Using the same data sets for multiple research

•Crowdsourcing

•Faster circulation of high-quality ideas

• “We can throw the numbers into the biggest computing clusters the world has ever seen and let statistical algorithms find patterns where science cannot.” (Anderson 2007)

Better science

•Greater falsifiability: move towards reproducible science thanks to publishing data + code in addition to article

•Easier to follow the process, no need to wait for the product

•Rapidly uncover mistaken findings

•Greater availability of data collection and datasets increases the utility of inductive methods.

11

3. Irreversible? Science 2.0 is driven by:

- Explosion of knowledge and science

producing actors (globally)

- Demand for “faster” science

- Demand for catching up

- Demographics (“digital natives” go global)

- Cheap and easy to use ICT (low entry

barriers)

Irreversible trend

The old ideal of ‘’les encyclopedistes’’ is gone (but Wittgenstein would have it

easier to publish his thinking today and we have wikipedia…)

The "Scientific Powers That Be", disappear or adapt?

How important will Nature remain? (11% of world output in Open access journals)

New ways to determine reputation, CV’s? (DFG – only 5 publications to mention,

NSF asks PI to list research “products”)

New gatekeepers (intermediaries) will come.

More Creative Commons? Open access?

More citizen (as scientist) science?

Faster science (google scholar…), beta science a valid status?

Data-visualisation as a key language and statistics as a key science

Knowledge manager skills and services vital part of education?

Due to data abundance: more time to think the questions, but also “Learn to think”?

New curricula needed? With more attention to multi disciplinarity? And to product

development (+/- 10% of all scientific work goes to SW dev, Nature)

New metrics needed

4. Important (policy) implications?

Towards a green paper

DG RTD with DG Connect, the CSA and DG JRC

• Work on better mapping the business model and policy implications of

Science 2.0.

• European wide consultation to be launched focussing on which policy

actions for the European Commission to take….or not.

• Green paper by spring 2014

CONTRIBUTE!