Cadmore media player playing video Aligning National Priorities When It Comes To Open Science
Video Player
Accessibility
Using forms mode, you can utilize keyboard shortcuts to make usability more efficient.
Space bar will play and pause the video. Pressing escape will close all displays and pressing it again will jump to the end of the player.
You can press A to open the Keyboard Shortcut Dialog which also provides an audio description of the player and all of its features.
Language
1x
Play Speed
Adjust Volume
Transcript
Search
Result Count
of
Click to jump to result
Search
Re-center
Segments
Result Count
of
Click to jump to result
Search
Name:
Aligning National Priorities When It Comes To Open Science
Description:
Aligning National Priorities When It Comes To Open Science
Thumbnail URL:
https://cadmoremediastorage.blob.core.windows.net/cb0ce832-2615-4d85-87d3-452fdb268677/videoscrubberimages/Scrubber_1.jpg
Duration:
T00H40M10S
Embed URL:
https://stream.cadmore.media/player/cb0ce832-2615-4d85-87d3-452fdb268677
Content URL:
https://cadmoreoriginalmedia.blob.core.windows.net/cb0ce832-2615-4d85-87d3-452fdb268677/AligningNationalPrioritiesWhenItComesToOpenScience .mp4?sv=2019-02-02&sr=c&sig=8iSJHcQn%2FTLwGekenjdB4WoidRKE11cN0mUPoyl73j4%3D&st=2024-12-10T07%3A22%3A03Z&se=2024-12-10T09%3A27%3A03Z&sp=r
Upload Date:
2024-03-06T00:00:00.0000000
Transcript:
Language: EN.
Segment:0 .
So thank you for joining us. I'm going to moderate the conversation here. I'll put the link to the Google Doc. Again in the chat here. You all can are free to use that Google Doc to record your thoughts, comments, ideas, any suggestions you may have.
We are recording this. We'll copy the chat if you want. We will copy the chat into that Google Doc as well. So you don't feel the need to replicate things in both places. We will capture that. There was one comment that came up in the. During the recording that it might be interesting to reflect on here.
Or actually there were two. Let's kind of circle those to. This conversation now. To kick us off, the first is I think it came in during your talk, Dan, it was interesting that the publishers were trusted, chosen more than the institution.
In the data that you were talking about. Any thoughts about why that. Might be or any reaction to that. Yeah hi, everyone. Yeah so I think it's just a nature of the still existing publisher perish mentality from a lot of researchers. And, you know, as we're getting better at educating the community around these ideas of open science and open data and thinking about ways to manage your data going into a grant or going into a research project.
And at the point of publication, some folks really aren't even really thinking about it until they're actually submitting manuscripts to journals, at which point they run into things like data availability statements and thus are working with editors to try and figure that out. I don't think it's necessarily a we're choosing publishers over any other resource in the community. It's more that at that phase of their publication cycle, that's when they're running into that barrier.
The point at which you have to show it on the test. Yes yes. So it's kind of a point of need. I'm wondering if that will slowly shift as there's increasing demand for data management plans and getting researchers thinking about this before they get the grant, before they do the research. Although, you know, granted, not all research is funded.
Yeah, we can hope, right? So, I mean, again, these are just results from a survey of the community. And so we get feedback globally from researchers and other stakeholders. And, you know, I don't want to say it's completely representative, but it does give us some indication of where we still need to go in the space. Yeah Joe, you put a comment in the chat.
You want to elaborate on that and maybe think of ways we could think of ways we could address that. All right. Norman Ornstein, I think is basically contextualized so nicely. It's just a matter of how that it's a bit said that that My immediate reaction was, well that said as I saw or as I mentioned it in the presentation because that researchers actually have a closer connection when it comes to data or content sharing to the publishers as compared to the yeah, the host institution and the stuff therein.
So it should be the other way around you would think. Ah, it used to be the other way around. And I think that calls for a need for capacity building across the institution and also better communication within an institution and across institutions like institutional as well. Yeah Yeah. Just to jump into I think the comment by Maria saying is a need is because institutions have put in AP or the current system ask our researchers to publish so they see the data requirements or standards requirement by publishers as a thing they must do because they can't publish.
So of course, publishers will help them because they want them to publish. So this is kind of like a very not really a peretz's. It's just it's a must, unfortunately, at this moment in time. Interesting in that framing, though many publishers. I won't say all publishers, but many publishers don't actually have those data repositories a place where you can store this kind of information.
So I would think that it might be a requirement for the publisher to, you know, in order to publish, you need to. Release this somewhere, but it's not often into the publisher system. Yeah I think just from what I've seen in chatting with publishers and also looking at publishers who have enacted data policies in some way, a lot of them are data in the form of data availability requirements.
So it's just saying where your data lives. So that could be an institutional repository. It could be frustratingly places like GitHub or it could be even more frustratingly data available upon request. So it's clear that, you know, again, the community still has a little ways to go, but it's also nice that the publishers aren't saying it must be in one place. It is good if they do offer that resource and say, hey, this is part of our author service, an extension of our author services.
If your discipline or domain or area of study does not have a discipline specific repository, maybe we can offer something here again to kind of tick tick those boxes and ensure best practice. But that could also just as easily be an institutional repository, right. So I think it's just a matter of making sure that the researcher or author really has that resource available.
And are there ways that. That we as a community can drive adoption or the increased use of repositories like Africa archive and the services that you, Joe Knox, were you were talking about. Like, what do we need to do in terms of education and outreach?
I think again, I'll go back to a little bit point if we give researchers real credit on using repositories, not just at nice so that it is available for everybody, but to be realistic and especially when we discuss these things in the continent, is that. You have a saying and saying publish or perish, which is what's been happening.
So now you're asking them to share. Not having that credit. I think one of the core things is to, yes, speak to them and the services of repositories and what is required. It doesn't take away from publishing, but if you actually try to change and give the weighting and sharing in repositories instead of just publishing for academic publishing, you will then change.
The mindset of the people is more of a carrot than a stick that we should be going for. And I would also add that the stakeholders and service providers and I worked closely together, like started happening with data repositories, working with publishers to enable a SeamlessAccess workflow for the user, with the researcher to submit the data along with the manuscript or other research output formats.
Yeah and then again, also tying that to the institutional repositories and finding a way to mirror the data. And preferably what we're trying to achieve for Africa is to preferably have the original data physically stored on the continent for the aspect of data ownership. And I think that's also crucial in Europe, as far as I'm aware, being a European. And yeah, it's I think there's is often still lacking from the composition, but ownership is key.
But when it comes also like everyone. So I extend the conversation a little bit further and Nox has showcased like how so? South Africa is leading the way in big data production, which calls for big data analysis. And now the more researchers from other regions like Latin America, Africa and Asia across Asia and Southeast Asia in particular, are being incentivized to share their data openly.
Then we also need to build capacity and data analysis for these regions, meaning compute, sorry, computing power and. Yeah and the affiliated knowledge is necessary to. So yeah, it's complex, but it's manageable. I mean, no, I think Yeah. I think these things in a globalized world and with global challenges we are facing, but also for the sake of science, for, say, the aspect of data ownership and Federated access to decentralization.
Sorry about that. Sounds like you have someone else who wants to get in on the conversation, Joe. If you want to add to respond to what Jeff said. That works myself. Usually it works.
We actually ran to that problem when I talked about the NIH grant on big data on health in Africa. The proviso on that having that open data was that it should be hosted in Africa. So then the patient was full. So it's taken a long while to come to the patient because of course, I mean, South African can capacity that. But we are looking at trying to make sure that the.
The project is continental wide because it comes with some challenges. If it's only sitting in one region. So what Joyce said is very important on who has guardianship of that open data is very important because African researchers, unfortunately, I have to say this, is that they fear that open data and open science is the next big extraction or what had happened before with minerals.
So that is there's heavy skepticism if you cannot assure who's hosting all this open data, open access preprint. So this is why initiatives like African archives, you can go to our archives, you can go global archives, but there is some skepticism and buy in from most of the African scientists to keep whatever they have because of this. And it'd be interesting to hear from you from a share perspective in response to that concern about data extraction and if there's a sort of a fig Cher response to that notion.
Yeah, that that's the first I had heard of that. So I don't know if I can speak formally on behalf of fig share, but at least my initial reaction is, wow. But one of the things that I mean, we do work with universities globally and we have a number of partners in Africa, specifically in South Africa that we work with. And so from our perspective, we're just trying to, you know, help build a network of content that is discoverable no matter where you are.
And we don't really look too much at who is doing that publishing. It's just facilitating the ability for organizations, institutions, really, to meet these requirements around open access and open data. So yeah, the, the culture shift that might be needed there in convincing folks around open science. That's one objection that I hadn't even thought of.
So I just need to take a little bit and maybe think about how best to show that, you know, the benefits of making your research openly available. And not seen as an extraction, so to speak. Interesting go ahead. Yeah I mean, I hear that and sometimes even myself, I have when I talk to other colleagues in the continent, I have to come to understand that South Africa is a bit of an anomaly by itself.
It doesn't fit the exact some of the things that are happening in the continent. So I will just to expand on the point that I made is that and we're just talking about it with Joe offline before is that computing power and analytics are important. So most researchers think they can put out their data there, but they don't have the enough amount of computing power and analytics to work with that data.
So the field being scooped out of just that itself is a big problem, never mind the actual data, protecting the data. So there's a lot of things that we have to understand that in the African continent. We may take it as being simple. That's why our biggest thing with all our stakeholders in the continent is how when we talk open science, it doesn't mean.
It means open data or policies access. What does it really what are the regional needs, even each region. Unfortunately, Africa is so vast, is very different. The needs of each continent is you can see sadc space as being a priority. You go to the west, Africa is just you won't even start that conversation. So it, it's quite intricate if we really learned a lot that we really need to talk to local needs and local challenges and fears of the scientists and the researchers involved in order to be able to, to, to, to, to be slightly even successful in the initiative of open science and be thinking about.
That's a really interesting perspective. And I kind of wondering if there's an opportunity, either from a regional network or an opportunity, maybe a service entity that can provide access to those compute resources so that researchers have access to them. Like in what way can the market respond to that, either through government or through research institutions or, you know, maybe some service, nonprofit or otherwise that can provide those resources to those who don't have access to them.
Go ahead. I think you brought one of the things that we really grappling with. How do we work with the current service provider as is being most of them in the global North but having enough. Thoughts and planning to build capacity that is assured that it will stay within the continent.
So if you see the last slide that Joe presented, she's been working with a lot of global partners like xanadu, which are not African based, but now we are building capacity with the need to make sure that we slightly branching out with Africa archives. How can we then move everything and then develop that pipeline? So I think we need to understand and accept us as the continent. We need some bridge, but we need a bridge to see where we are going.
We cannot continue holding our name names, maybe having a Google Cloud or Amazon to say this is where we put our data and then the project is for free. After five years is yanked off. Where does the data go? Yeah Yeah. That's what we have over on the chart. Maybe I want to go onto unmute and address that. How chylomicron is solving or addressing the issue and bringing it back to maybe like to make it applicable also for, for on a global scale like we're now on and awakening as were recipients as mentioned of the global participation fund.
So that also ties to persistent identifiers and allocating metadata for discoverability and building an open infrastructure for Africa, but also on a global scale. So hopefully other participants in the audience will still be able to relate to what we're discussing here. But on the event. So Yeah. Hi, Jill.
Sorry, I'm not putting my video on. I haven't got my makeup on, but I just made a comment saying I was just sort of trying to address one of the points that Knox was making about, you know, the lack of the computing power to analyze big data. And, you know, I work I'm an RN run operator in the country. And it is a big it's also a big challenge.
And I was just making the comment that there are some initiatives adrift to get the three regional research and education networks of wachira and the alliance and ASEAN to make available a network of HPC, high performance compute computing, to try to address that and utilize the research and education networks to be able to access these aggregated HPC on that problem.
Because, as he said, Knox is such a big challenge. We have researchers generating data. And in order to analyze it, they're having to travel to Europe, the states or indeed South Africa with a hard drive, physical hard drive and physically travel to some place to be able to have the data analyzed. So I was saying that yet maybe we should sort of look at that whole project about the network of hbcus to augment the other activities.
And of course, yes. Joe yeah, definitely. We're going to be working hopefully with yourselves and others on the whole area of the pids required, you know, for, for research. So definitely I think I've been we've been in touch with some of your colleagues already, so we're hopefully can work with you, Joe.
And Owen, just quick for those. I presume most of the people here would know, but you want to just type in what Wren means for those who. Oh, yeah, sorry. Yeah National Research and education networks. But yeah, I'll put that in the chat. Great Thanks. No, I was accused I was called out earlier for speaking in acronyms.
And not everyone knows my acronyms from all of us. Yeah and certainly what Owen is saying, I remember when I was we sit-in the chair of this energy grant. They told us to get data from Kenya on genomics because the data was so big just to transfer. It took them two months. That's two months of virtual transfer of the data because the other guys don't have higher computing power. It didn't matter what they were using.
So it was two months lost just to transfer data. Just to try and put that into context is quite crazy. Yeah kind of draws you back to the 1990s. Nux I have a question for you kind of thinking about this from a regional perspective. Are you having any difficulty in coming up with or establishing norms of practice when it comes to identifiers and metadata and the kind of ancillary, ancillary things around you that you need to know?
You said 5 to 10 to 15 minutes. When you're not on me. Yeah, it's fine. Be interesting to hear your experience in trying to get consensus around some of those things. If if you've had any trouble around some of these topics when dealing with such a large geographic area, as you were talking about, with the difficulties of agreeing on, you know, certain issues that happen in one area of Africa but not others.
Yeah, I wouldn't speak much of this because as a practitioner of this, Joe is more in charge of this. So I think what we are seeing is that when we actually I've been involved and I've been trying to actually step out of a workshop. When I brought up the issue, we have a grant cutting grant grant council's initiatives in South Africa, in Africa with the NRF in South Africa actually hosted 17 other countries for four funds.
So we were discussing these issues of persistent identifiers. And I can tell you. All of them are saying we have to go back and discuss. So you can't really discuss norms because in Africa they have to discuss everything with their government, their researchers, and it's a bit complicated. So I think Joe will probably when they run their workshops, they probably at this moment are working on norms and standards that are globally.
But this is why we need to figure out what are these, some of them, that that may only apply to things in the region that we think maybe not in Africa and other regions that we think is important. Joe, can you comment? You are the most suitable, qualified person. I'm not sure, but I think that reminds me also of the principles and the aspect of authority. And also, again, they don't want to ship and an authority to how to handle the data, how to also assign business identifiers that are of national or regional relevance and specificity, and then to also connect that to a global network instead of imposing some, again, something Western onto various world regions, including like we have some other discussions in Europe like again, are trying to match different standards that have been also in research per se, like trying to standardize workflows and protocols across disciplines.
I think there's a need for both or as we now use English to communicate with people from different parts of the world. So I think we need both local and global to interact and communicate with each other as well as recognize and acknowledge and foster local infrastructure and local ownership. I'm sorry.
Is also taken in June, you can tell. I made my point. Well, I think there's a lot to learn here in terms of. Ways in which we can build systems that are not, you know. While I run a standards organization, and I appreciate the idea of everyone doing the same thing the same way.
I also can appreciate the value of distinction and difference as long as there are ways in which interoperability can happen. So you can cross walk from this system to that system and move from one, one community to another, you know? Universal translators. I mean, all of science shouldn't be happening in English. There are other languages and there are ways to.
Do translation and mapping to build awareness and knowledge across cultures and across communities. Jazz adds, all of science is respectfully not happening. Only in English we are veritable lingua Franca. I don't know what. Just so for everyone here in us to keep that in mind, there's a huge research chorus in China and Russia.
People are studying in Russian and researching Spanish, Portuguese and then also in Africa, French as well. And there's huge language barriers between the different communities which we're trying to bridge in Africa. And that's. And then also there was also like one of my favorite topics, but the difficulty to practice and conduct research in a foreign language or then to have to publish in a different language.
But I think there's a huge opportunity for sure to embrace multilingualism also for the native English speakers here to by default provide translations into other languages. But I personally like to hear also from other people in the audience what their views are and the conversation so far as we're coming towards the end already. And if we're still on topic, I think we are very much, but also to meet everybody's interests and questions.
Is that OK? Sure anyone have any questions or comments? Want to join in the conversation? Please do. Yeah I think I will pick up on a thread that I saw here from Christina on the role of Andrea and I. It is my belief, especially in Africa, that the entrance. Was universities and researchers already belong to this type of networks.
It's easy, as Owen has said, we already have three big ones based on the region. So to try and simplify the complexity, the Indians play a big role. But I think the biggest role in of the entrance in Africa is that we had a big issue of connectivity. Yes, it's at some point it has been solved, not completely, but the shift from the entrance in into moving now into actually big data here is very important and I think it will move or provide some solutions that we are looking for in an open science and an open data.
When I give workshops, I sometimes call on people when they're shy. Go, do you want to call on people? So and there are some questions or opinions of what was discussed. So far. Please it's supposed to be a conversation.
But it is, in a way. And it's an interesting this is an interesting lens on what's happening in the US as well in that. While we have some more consistency in some areas imposed by coordination amongst publishers for things like data duis, we are in the US very far from having consistent practice.
As much as we like to think with when it comes, particularly when it comes to metadata, when it comes to tracking scholarly outputs that are not journal articles, tracking data sets, what happens with them? So this conversation does have a lens into the United States and does have a lens into US practice. You know, we don't have quite you know. I would say most people are not having the problems of month long data transfers, but discovery is still a problem.
Interoperability is still a problem. You know, we are very far from a world that is fair, findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable. Owen Yeah. Thanks, Todd, and apologies for my outburst. But considering what you were just saying, Todd, I was kind of curious.
I came into the session a little bit late, but I caught the end of Dan's presentation where he was sort of talking about, I think it was about policies of being able to map your metadata to where your actual data sets or data actually resides, or having policies, potential policies where it's mandated that your outputs or publishing outputs sort of mapped to your actual research data.
So that can be accessed. I was just trying to sorry, I would just like to ask Dan, if you could just sort of summarize that again for a moment and potentially, does that mean we're looking at having the actual research data stored somewhere in some kind of repository or database? And then you have the actual metadata elsewhere that links to that data and then the policies around the accessibility to such data.
What, what seems to be the trend global trends with that, I don't know if that's Dan yeah, I can speak to the US side of things because there's been a whirlwind of activity, especially in the last year really. But it all started kind of back in 2013 with the Holdren OSTP memo, the then director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy in the US. And that was the first one of these policies put forth that focused on federal agencies in the United States and how they handled the dissemination of content after they were funded by these major federal agencies.
So if you were an ANSI operating over $100 million in research and development, you had to come out with a policy for publications as well as for research data. And that was I don't know, what is it like eight years, 9 years ago now? And so last year with the new updated OSTP memo, what this essentially the Nelson memo, what this essentially says is any federal agency, regardless of how much funding they do in R&D, has to have a policy for to make the publications openly available and make the research data openly available.
And so the way that you get the authors and researchers themselves thinking about this is mandating data management plans at point of grant proposal. So saying I'm applying for this grant to do this type of research and this is what I plan on doing with my data. And then at the end of my research, as I'm publishing the results, I'm also going to have a plan to make my data openly available.
And so the idea is to really encourage anyone who's federally funded to be thinking about ways to make not only their manuscripts open access, but their data open. And the, you know, all of the agencies that followed with updated plans on how they plan on ticking these boxes. And, you know, they the White House also published an updated, desirable characteristics of data repositories.
So at least from our perspective, it's trying to create these standardized nations around the different providers of infrastructure. And so we work with the NIH, and it's really great because they're working with a number of different generalist repositories. These are repositories that accept you can kind of think of it as the long tail of research. If your discipline doesn't have a place to store data, then you can use a generalist repository and assign metadata to it, receive a digital object identifier, make sure it's, you know, have a license for re-use and make sure it's discoverable.
And so one of the things that if you think about this from trying to work more closely towards fair, findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable data is making sure that these different infrastructure tools tick these boxes, that researchers are more aware of them, that it's not just the gene banks of the world that is making data openly available, but also researchers who have raw outputs or clean data that historically lived on a hard drive or wasn't available.
So it's creating this sea change in how researchers think about it. And thus publishers also have to have policies in place to kind of ensure that they're remaining compliant. And the funders are also having policies and infrastructure discussions to make sure that the policies that they're coming out with, their grantees can actually. Fly with it. So the fact that the people who have the money are making everyone think about this in a very different way that has gained a ton of traction can only be a good thing.
And so I hope that, you know, I know that we're getting close to time, but I just wanted to provide a little summary there and if anyone wants to tack on to that. Welcome to Monroe. Feinstein that was quite, quite helpful. Thank you. All right.
Can I also maybe follow up on that? Because that's a challenge we are constantly facing with Epic archive. Then again, also again for them within the gray initiative, we were working or have had discussions for the NIH together with our staff and others, and try it and other repository systems. Did you come to an agreement in terms of inter-operability of the repositories or what's the roadmap there?
Because that would be highly interesting also for us. Yeah and that's one of the key tenants of it, right? Standardizing metadata practices, or at least how that data is Fed to the central indices. Like how if we're all using data idea wise, do we all have the necessary fields needed for people to ask good questions of the data across different repositories? So that's one of them in trying to make sure that that information is standardized.
But not only that, but also the usage statistics, you know, somebody mentioned counter before and if we're only talking about your ones and zeros like tabular research data, then yes, that is something that you can have counter compliant. There's a program called make data count. People should check that out. But if you're hosting software and videos and other like various type formats of data, it becomes a little bit more complicated than just one counter compliance checkbox.
So still something that we're working on. But hopefully that is one of the things that you can, will be closer to through the gray initiative. All right. Well, fantastic. Thank you so much, Dan Knox. Joe, thank you for participating in today's session. We will be having the NISO awards ceremony in about 15 minutes with our miles Conrad lecture, Dr. Safiya Noble.
That will be one of the highlights of the conference. I hope you all join in that session. We have a bit of a break before we do that, so we will draw this session to a close. Thank you all for participating. And we will see you shortly. Thank you. Thanks, everyone. Thanks
Segment:0 .
So thank you for joining us. I'm going to moderate the conversation here. I'll put the link to the Google Doc. Again in the chat here. You all can are free to use that Google Doc to record your thoughts, comments, ideas, any suggestions you may have.
We are recording this. We'll copy the chat if you want. We will copy the chat into that Google Doc as well. So you don't feel the need to replicate things in both places. We will capture that. There was one comment that came up in the. During the recording that it might be interesting to reflect on here.
Or actually there were two. Let's kind of circle those to. This conversation now. To kick us off, the first is I think it came in during your talk, Dan, it was interesting that the publishers were trusted, chosen more than the institution.
In the data that you were talking about. Any thoughts about why that. Might be or any reaction to that. Yeah hi, everyone. Yeah so I think it's just a nature of the still existing publisher perish mentality from a lot of researchers. And, you know, as we're getting better at educating the community around these ideas of open science and open data and thinking about ways to manage your data going into a grant or going into a research project.
And at the point of publication, some folks really aren't even really thinking about it until they're actually submitting manuscripts to journals, at which point they run into things like data availability statements and thus are working with editors to try and figure that out. I don't think it's necessarily a we're choosing publishers over any other resource in the community. It's more that at that phase of their publication cycle, that's when they're running into that barrier.
The point at which you have to show it on the test. Yes yes. So it's kind of a point of need. I'm wondering if that will slowly shift as there's increasing demand for data management plans and getting researchers thinking about this before they get the grant, before they do the research. Although, you know, granted, not all research is funded.
Yeah, we can hope, right? So, I mean, again, these are just results from a survey of the community. And so we get feedback globally from researchers and other stakeholders. And, you know, I don't want to say it's completely representative, but it does give us some indication of where we still need to go in the space. Yeah Joe, you put a comment in the chat.
You want to elaborate on that and maybe think of ways we could think of ways we could address that. All right. Norman Ornstein, I think is basically contextualized so nicely. It's just a matter of how that it's a bit said that that My immediate reaction was, well that said as I saw or as I mentioned it in the presentation because that researchers actually have a closer connection when it comes to data or content sharing to the publishers as compared to the yeah, the host institution and the stuff therein.
So it should be the other way around you would think. Ah, it used to be the other way around. And I think that calls for a need for capacity building across the institution and also better communication within an institution and across institutions like institutional as well. Yeah Yeah. Just to jump into I think the comment by Maria saying is a need is because institutions have put in AP or the current system ask our researchers to publish so they see the data requirements or standards requirement by publishers as a thing they must do because they can't publish.
So of course, publishers will help them because they want them to publish. So this is kind of like a very not really a peretz's. It's just it's a must, unfortunately, at this moment in time. Interesting in that framing, though many publishers. I won't say all publishers, but many publishers don't actually have those data repositories a place where you can store this kind of information.
So I would think that it might be a requirement for the publisher to, you know, in order to publish, you need to. Release this somewhere, but it's not often into the publisher system. Yeah I think just from what I've seen in chatting with publishers and also looking at publishers who have enacted data policies in some way, a lot of them are data in the form of data availability requirements.
So it's just saying where your data lives. So that could be an institutional repository. It could be frustratingly places like GitHub or it could be even more frustratingly data available upon request. So it's clear that, you know, again, the community still has a little ways to go, but it's also nice that the publishers aren't saying it must be in one place. It is good if they do offer that resource and say, hey, this is part of our author service, an extension of our author services.
If your discipline or domain or area of study does not have a discipline specific repository, maybe we can offer something here again to kind of tick tick those boxes and ensure best practice. But that could also just as easily be an institutional repository, right. So I think it's just a matter of making sure that the researcher or author really has that resource available.
And are there ways that. That we as a community can drive adoption or the increased use of repositories like Africa archive and the services that you, Joe Knox, were you were talking about. Like, what do we need to do in terms of education and outreach?
I think again, I'll go back to a little bit point if we give researchers real credit on using repositories, not just at nice so that it is available for everybody, but to be realistic and especially when we discuss these things in the continent, is that. You have a saying and saying publish or perish, which is what's been happening.
So now you're asking them to share. Not having that credit. I think one of the core things is to, yes, speak to them and the services of repositories and what is required. It doesn't take away from publishing, but if you actually try to change and give the weighting and sharing in repositories instead of just publishing for academic publishing, you will then change.
The mindset of the people is more of a carrot than a stick that we should be going for. And I would also add that the stakeholders and service providers and I worked closely together, like started happening with data repositories, working with publishers to enable a SeamlessAccess workflow for the user, with the researcher to submit the data along with the manuscript or other research output formats.
Yeah and then again, also tying that to the institutional repositories and finding a way to mirror the data. And preferably what we're trying to achieve for Africa is to preferably have the original data physically stored on the continent for the aspect of data ownership. And I think that's also crucial in Europe, as far as I'm aware, being a European. And yeah, it's I think there's is often still lacking from the composition, but ownership is key.
But when it comes also like everyone. So I extend the conversation a little bit further and Nox has showcased like how so? South Africa is leading the way in big data production, which calls for big data analysis. And now the more researchers from other regions like Latin America, Africa and Asia across Asia and Southeast Asia in particular, are being incentivized to share their data openly.
Then we also need to build capacity and data analysis for these regions, meaning compute, sorry, computing power and. Yeah and the affiliated knowledge is necessary to. So yeah, it's complex, but it's manageable. I mean, no, I think Yeah. I think these things in a globalized world and with global challenges we are facing, but also for the sake of science, for, say, the aspect of data ownership and Federated access to decentralization.
Sorry about that. Sounds like you have someone else who wants to get in on the conversation, Joe. If you want to add to respond to what Jeff said. That works myself. Usually it works.
We actually ran to that problem when I talked about the NIH grant on big data on health in Africa. The proviso on that having that open data was that it should be hosted in Africa. So then the patient was full. So it's taken a long while to come to the patient because of course, I mean, South African can capacity that. But we are looking at trying to make sure that the.
The project is continental wide because it comes with some challenges. If it's only sitting in one region. So what Joyce said is very important on who has guardianship of that open data is very important because African researchers, unfortunately, I have to say this, is that they fear that open data and open science is the next big extraction or what had happened before with minerals.
So that is there's heavy skepticism if you cannot assure who's hosting all this open data, open access preprint. So this is why initiatives like African archives, you can go to our archives, you can go global archives, but there is some skepticism and buy in from most of the African scientists to keep whatever they have because of this. And it'd be interesting to hear from you from a share perspective in response to that concern about data extraction and if there's a sort of a fig Cher response to that notion.
Yeah, that that's the first I had heard of that. So I don't know if I can speak formally on behalf of fig share, but at least my initial reaction is, wow. But one of the things that I mean, we do work with universities globally and we have a number of partners in Africa, specifically in South Africa that we work with. And so from our perspective, we're just trying to, you know, help build a network of content that is discoverable no matter where you are.
And we don't really look too much at who is doing that publishing. It's just facilitating the ability for organizations, institutions, really, to meet these requirements around open access and open data. So yeah, the, the culture shift that might be needed there in convincing folks around open science. That's one objection that I hadn't even thought of.
So I just need to take a little bit and maybe think about how best to show that, you know, the benefits of making your research openly available. And not seen as an extraction, so to speak. Interesting go ahead. Yeah I mean, I hear that and sometimes even myself, I have when I talk to other colleagues in the continent, I have to come to understand that South Africa is a bit of an anomaly by itself.
It doesn't fit the exact some of the things that are happening in the continent. So I will just to expand on the point that I made is that and we're just talking about it with Joe offline before is that computing power and analytics are important. So most researchers think they can put out their data there, but they don't have the enough amount of computing power and analytics to work with that data.
So the field being scooped out of just that itself is a big problem, never mind the actual data, protecting the data. So there's a lot of things that we have to understand that in the African continent. We may take it as being simple. That's why our biggest thing with all our stakeholders in the continent is how when we talk open science, it doesn't mean.
It means open data or policies access. What does it really what are the regional needs, even each region. Unfortunately, Africa is so vast, is very different. The needs of each continent is you can see sadc space as being a priority. You go to the west, Africa is just you won't even start that conversation. So it, it's quite intricate if we really learned a lot that we really need to talk to local needs and local challenges and fears of the scientists and the researchers involved in order to be able to, to, to, to, to be slightly even successful in the initiative of open science and be thinking about.
That's a really interesting perspective. And I kind of wondering if there's an opportunity, either from a regional network or an opportunity, maybe a service entity that can provide access to those compute resources so that researchers have access to them. Like in what way can the market respond to that, either through government or through research institutions or, you know, maybe some service, nonprofit or otherwise that can provide those resources to those who don't have access to them.
Go ahead. I think you brought one of the things that we really grappling with. How do we work with the current service provider as is being most of them in the global North but having enough. Thoughts and planning to build capacity that is assured that it will stay within the continent.
So if you see the last slide that Joe presented, she's been working with a lot of global partners like xanadu, which are not African based, but now we are building capacity with the need to make sure that we slightly branching out with Africa archives. How can we then move everything and then develop that pipeline? So I think we need to understand and accept us as the continent. We need some bridge, but we need a bridge to see where we are going.
We cannot continue holding our name names, maybe having a Google Cloud or Amazon to say this is where we put our data and then the project is for free. After five years is yanked off. Where does the data go? Yeah Yeah. That's what we have over on the chart. Maybe I want to go onto unmute and address that. How chylomicron is solving or addressing the issue and bringing it back to maybe like to make it applicable also for, for on a global scale like we're now on and awakening as were recipients as mentioned of the global participation fund.
So that also ties to persistent identifiers and allocating metadata for discoverability and building an open infrastructure for Africa, but also on a global scale. So hopefully other participants in the audience will still be able to relate to what we're discussing here. But on the event. So Yeah. Hi, Jill.
Sorry, I'm not putting my video on. I haven't got my makeup on, but I just made a comment saying I was just sort of trying to address one of the points that Knox was making about, you know, the lack of the computing power to analyze big data. And, you know, I work I'm an RN run operator in the country. And it is a big it's also a big challenge.
And I was just making the comment that there are some initiatives adrift to get the three regional research and education networks of wachira and the alliance and ASEAN to make available a network of HPC, high performance compute computing, to try to address that and utilize the research and education networks to be able to access these aggregated HPC on that problem.
Because, as he said, Knox is such a big challenge. We have researchers generating data. And in order to analyze it, they're having to travel to Europe, the states or indeed South Africa with a hard drive, physical hard drive and physically travel to some place to be able to have the data analyzed. So I was saying that yet maybe we should sort of look at that whole project about the network of hbcus to augment the other activities.
And of course, yes. Joe yeah, definitely. We're going to be working hopefully with yourselves and others on the whole area of the pids required, you know, for, for research. So definitely I think I've been we've been in touch with some of your colleagues already, so we're hopefully can work with you, Joe.
And Owen, just quick for those. I presume most of the people here would know, but you want to just type in what Wren means for those who. Oh, yeah, sorry. Yeah National Research and education networks. But yeah, I'll put that in the chat. Great Thanks. No, I was accused I was called out earlier for speaking in acronyms.
And not everyone knows my acronyms from all of us. Yeah and certainly what Owen is saying, I remember when I was we sit-in the chair of this energy grant. They told us to get data from Kenya on genomics because the data was so big just to transfer. It took them two months. That's two months of virtual transfer of the data because the other guys don't have higher computing power. It didn't matter what they were using.
So it was two months lost just to transfer data. Just to try and put that into context is quite crazy. Yeah kind of draws you back to the 1990s. Nux I have a question for you kind of thinking about this from a regional perspective. Are you having any difficulty in coming up with or establishing norms of practice when it comes to identifiers and metadata and the kind of ancillary, ancillary things around you that you need to know?
You said 5 to 10 to 15 minutes. When you're not on me. Yeah, it's fine. Be interesting to hear your experience in trying to get consensus around some of those things. If if you've had any trouble around some of these topics when dealing with such a large geographic area, as you were talking about, with the difficulties of agreeing on, you know, certain issues that happen in one area of Africa but not others.
Yeah, I wouldn't speak much of this because as a practitioner of this, Joe is more in charge of this. So I think what we are seeing is that when we actually I've been involved and I've been trying to actually step out of a workshop. When I brought up the issue, we have a grant cutting grant grant council's initiatives in South Africa, in Africa with the NRF in South Africa actually hosted 17 other countries for four funds.
So we were discussing these issues of persistent identifiers. And I can tell you. All of them are saying we have to go back and discuss. So you can't really discuss norms because in Africa they have to discuss everything with their government, their researchers, and it's a bit complicated. So I think Joe will probably when they run their workshops, they probably at this moment are working on norms and standards that are globally.
But this is why we need to figure out what are these, some of them, that that may only apply to things in the region that we think maybe not in Africa and other regions that we think is important. Joe, can you comment? You are the most suitable, qualified person. I'm not sure, but I think that reminds me also of the principles and the aspect of authority. And also, again, they don't want to ship and an authority to how to handle the data, how to also assign business identifiers that are of national or regional relevance and specificity, and then to also connect that to a global network instead of imposing some, again, something Western onto various world regions, including like we have some other discussions in Europe like again, are trying to match different standards that have been also in research per se, like trying to standardize workflows and protocols across disciplines.
I think there's a need for both or as we now use English to communicate with people from different parts of the world. So I think we need both local and global to interact and communicate with each other as well as recognize and acknowledge and foster local infrastructure and local ownership. I'm sorry.
Is also taken in June, you can tell. I made my point. Well, I think there's a lot to learn here in terms of. Ways in which we can build systems that are not, you know. While I run a standards organization, and I appreciate the idea of everyone doing the same thing the same way.
I also can appreciate the value of distinction and difference as long as there are ways in which interoperability can happen. So you can cross walk from this system to that system and move from one, one community to another, you know? Universal translators. I mean, all of science shouldn't be happening in English. There are other languages and there are ways to.
Do translation and mapping to build awareness and knowledge across cultures and across communities. Jazz adds, all of science is respectfully not happening. Only in English we are veritable lingua Franca. I don't know what. Just so for everyone here in us to keep that in mind, there's a huge research chorus in China and Russia.
People are studying in Russian and researching Spanish, Portuguese and then also in Africa, French as well. And there's huge language barriers between the different communities which we're trying to bridge in Africa. And that's. And then also there was also like one of my favorite topics, but the difficulty to practice and conduct research in a foreign language or then to have to publish in a different language.
But I think there's a huge opportunity for sure to embrace multilingualism also for the native English speakers here to by default provide translations into other languages. But I personally like to hear also from other people in the audience what their views are and the conversation so far as we're coming towards the end already. And if we're still on topic, I think we are very much, but also to meet everybody's interests and questions.
Is that OK? Sure anyone have any questions or comments? Want to join in the conversation? Please do. Yeah I think I will pick up on a thread that I saw here from Christina on the role of Andrea and I. It is my belief, especially in Africa, that the entrance. Was universities and researchers already belong to this type of networks.
It's easy, as Owen has said, we already have three big ones based on the region. So to try and simplify the complexity, the Indians play a big role. But I think the biggest role in of the entrance in Africa is that we had a big issue of connectivity. Yes, it's at some point it has been solved, not completely, but the shift from the entrance in into moving now into actually big data here is very important and I think it will move or provide some solutions that we are looking for in an open science and an open data.
When I give workshops, I sometimes call on people when they're shy. Go, do you want to call on people? So and there are some questions or opinions of what was discussed. So far. Please it's supposed to be a conversation.
But it is, in a way. And it's an interesting this is an interesting lens on what's happening in the US as well in that. While we have some more consistency in some areas imposed by coordination amongst publishers for things like data duis, we are in the US very far from having consistent practice.
As much as we like to think with when it comes, particularly when it comes to metadata, when it comes to tracking scholarly outputs that are not journal articles, tracking data sets, what happens with them? So this conversation does have a lens into the United States and does have a lens into US practice. You know, we don't have quite you know. I would say most people are not having the problems of month long data transfers, but discovery is still a problem.
Interoperability is still a problem. You know, we are very far from a world that is fair, findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable. Owen Yeah. Thanks, Todd, and apologies for my outburst. But considering what you were just saying, Todd, I was kind of curious.
I came into the session a little bit late, but I caught the end of Dan's presentation where he was sort of talking about, I think it was about policies of being able to map your metadata to where your actual data sets or data actually resides, or having policies, potential policies where it's mandated that your outputs or publishing outputs sort of mapped to your actual research data.
So that can be accessed. I was just trying to sorry, I would just like to ask Dan, if you could just sort of summarize that again for a moment and potentially, does that mean we're looking at having the actual research data stored somewhere in some kind of repository or database? And then you have the actual metadata elsewhere that links to that data and then the policies around the accessibility to such data.
What, what seems to be the trend global trends with that, I don't know if that's Dan yeah, I can speak to the US side of things because there's been a whirlwind of activity, especially in the last year really. But it all started kind of back in 2013 with the Holdren OSTP memo, the then director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy in the US. And that was the first one of these policies put forth that focused on federal agencies in the United States and how they handled the dissemination of content after they were funded by these major federal agencies.
So if you were an ANSI operating over $100 million in research and development, you had to come out with a policy for publications as well as for research data. And that was I don't know, what is it like eight years, 9 years ago now? And so last year with the new updated OSTP memo, what this essentially the Nelson memo, what this essentially says is any federal agency, regardless of how much funding they do in R&D, has to have a policy for to make the publications openly available and make the research data openly available.
And so the way that you get the authors and researchers themselves thinking about this is mandating data management plans at point of grant proposal. So saying I'm applying for this grant to do this type of research and this is what I plan on doing with my data. And then at the end of my research, as I'm publishing the results, I'm also going to have a plan to make my data openly available.
And so the idea is to really encourage anyone who's federally funded to be thinking about ways to make not only their manuscripts open access, but their data open. And the, you know, all of the agencies that followed with updated plans on how they plan on ticking these boxes. And, you know, they the White House also published an updated, desirable characteristics of data repositories.
So at least from our perspective, it's trying to create these standardized nations around the different providers of infrastructure. And so we work with the NIH, and it's really great because they're working with a number of different generalist repositories. These are repositories that accept you can kind of think of it as the long tail of research. If your discipline doesn't have a place to store data, then you can use a generalist repository and assign metadata to it, receive a digital object identifier, make sure it's, you know, have a license for re-use and make sure it's discoverable.
And so one of the things that if you think about this from trying to work more closely towards fair, findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable data is making sure that these different infrastructure tools tick these boxes, that researchers are more aware of them, that it's not just the gene banks of the world that is making data openly available, but also researchers who have raw outputs or clean data that historically lived on a hard drive or wasn't available.
So it's creating this sea change in how researchers think about it. And thus publishers also have to have policies in place to kind of ensure that they're remaining compliant. And the funders are also having policies and infrastructure discussions to make sure that the policies that they're coming out with, their grantees can actually. Fly with it. So the fact that the people who have the money are making everyone think about this in a very different way that has gained a ton of traction can only be a good thing.
And so I hope that, you know, I know that we're getting close to time, but I just wanted to provide a little summary there and if anyone wants to tack on to that. Welcome to Monroe. Feinstein that was quite, quite helpful. Thank you. All right.
Can I also maybe follow up on that? Because that's a challenge we are constantly facing with Epic archive. Then again, also again for them within the gray initiative, we were working or have had discussions for the NIH together with our staff and others, and try it and other repository systems. Did you come to an agreement in terms of inter-operability of the repositories or what's the roadmap there?
Because that would be highly interesting also for us. Yeah and that's one of the key tenants of it, right? Standardizing metadata practices, or at least how that data is Fed to the central indices. Like how if we're all using data idea wise, do we all have the necessary fields needed for people to ask good questions of the data across different repositories? So that's one of them in trying to make sure that that information is standardized.
But not only that, but also the usage statistics, you know, somebody mentioned counter before and if we're only talking about your ones and zeros like tabular research data, then yes, that is something that you can have counter compliant. There's a program called make data count. People should check that out. But if you're hosting software and videos and other like various type formats of data, it becomes a little bit more complicated than just one counter compliance checkbox.
So still something that we're working on. But hopefully that is one of the things that you can, will be closer to through the gray initiative. All right. Well, fantastic. Thank you so much, Dan Knox. Joe, thank you for participating in today's session. We will be having the NISO awards ceremony in about 15 minutes with our miles Conrad lecture, Dr. Safiya Noble.
That will be one of the highlights of the conference. I hope you all join in that session. We have a bit of a break before we do that, so we will draw this session to a close. Thank you all for participating. And we will see you shortly. Thank you. Thanks, everyone. Thanks
Form Title Download
Transcript
Form Title Bookmark
Entire Media
Segment(s)
Custom Clip
Start At:
End At:
Form Title Share
Entire Media
Segment(s)
Custom Clip
Start At:
End At:
Form Title Accessibility and Keyboard Shortcuts
The cadmore media player is a professional video and audio player experience designed to deliver media as well as relevant transcript, segmentation, and metadata. On the screen is a traditional html video player with buttons such as play, pause, forward, captioning, language and play speed selection and more. Adjacent to the video player are generally tabs, one of which shows a scrolling transcript of the video and the other shows any segmentation of the media, sometimes referred to as chapters. At the top of the video is a menu bar containing an Explore button and Tools button. The Explore button allows you to dig deeper into the video by opening up an explore dialog which contains tabs for a visual navigation of the video using thumbnails, an about tab which contains rich metadata about the media, a segments tab which contains further information about the video, and a related tab which contains links to other media related to this media. The tools button opens a menu with options for sharing the media on social media, creating bookmarking links, creating embed codes for your website, generating citations, and more.
Keyboard Shortcuts
Keyboard shortcuts only work while you are in forms mode. By entering forms mode, you will be able to quickly access portions of the media player with single key commands.
Spacebar: Play/Pause Toggle
I: Info Menu,
O: Tools Menu
T: Transcript Tab,
S: Segments Tab
F: Forward 15,
R: Rewind 15
L: Languages,
P: Playspeed
M: Mute Toggle,
V: Volume Bar
N: Video Only Toggle,
B: Full Screen Toggle
C: Captions Toggle
Escape: Closes dialogs and menus / Exits Player
Z: Next Transcript Chapter
X: Previous Transcript Chapter
Q: Next Transcript Paragraph
W: Previous Transcript Paragraph
Entire Media
Segment(s)
Custom Clip
Start At:
End At:
Embed Size
-
You Size - Responsive
-
We Size - Responsive
-
Picture Overlay Popup
-
400 x 225
-
512 x 288
-
400 x 700
-
768 x 1024
-
1024 x 512
-
1280 x 608
Form Title Cite
No citation provided.
Info
Segments
Related
Thumbnails
Exit Clip Mode
You have requested to see a portion of the video outside of the clip.
Click OK to switch to the full video or click if you would like to stay inside the clip. You can always go back to the clip with Tools and Clip Mode