Player is loading...

Embed

Copy embed code

Transcriptions

Note: this content has been automatically generated.
00:00:00
ah okay so thanks a full invitation to talk in this workshop
00:00:05
um the organisers asked me to talk about what would you see political science at
00:00:09
e. p. f. l. in particular so maybe plenty of very interesting technical talks
00:00:13
uh today this is not one of them it's a it's a it would be just a talk about policy
00:00:19
but i think policy is very important in these matters and i try to use example
00:00:23
um uh of far institution not that there's anything special but maybe to give you a
00:00:30
uh the point of view of a a manager because in the that's what i am for the
00:00:34
time being a on these questions and and and his point of view is is interesting
00:00:40
okay so that the several parts the first part is do we have a problem okay and the uh
00:00:45
uh uh i don't have to convince you that we have one but it's interesting to
00:00:50
to sense the magnitude of what we're talking about when we say that we need to open science and open research
00:00:57
um the first thing is that by any may take if you look at it just from all numbers science is doing well
00:01:05
okay so we're we're doing more of it um people talk more more about it the number
00:01:12
of papers being published uh is increasing the number of research that is being funded
00:01:18
is increasing but that's the surface of things it's interesting to see actually what happens
00:01:23
behind this process so this is just an example i'm thinking from a medical studies in particular not not that
00:01:30
there is anything special with that i could have put out the same statistics from any of the field
00:01:35
but you can see that the pace at which we producing results seem to be increasing and
00:01:41
that's not a problem per se more science is good for everybody the problem is that
00:01:46
as you see sometimes the metric by which we evaluate the studies and reasons why we
00:01:52
producing so many studies are sometimes fraught and one of the problem is when
00:01:59
what we could call hype uh becomes an academic metric so let me just single out what i mean by that
00:02:06
here is a maybe you've seen this diagram before this is a
00:02:10
make us study on full lips that give or prevent cancer
00:02:16
okay so if you if you open nature or other than set every so often you see that very frequently
00:02:23
there are studies on what what kind of food you should eat if you don't wanna have cancer
00:02:27
okay and each red dot in this diagram is one such paper
00:02:32
no one such studies so we have on the y. axis you have a fruit
00:02:37
and the left x. is a um gives you that show also although the probabilities that this would uh
00:02:43
a half a five arises or prevents cancer okay so each thought is a paper
00:02:49
right and that particular figure the whole figure was taken from a tested it
00:02:52
so it's a study that takes all studies and lets them together
00:02:56
okay and if you look at it's one thing to one conclusion
00:03:01
that that that strikes out is that pretty much any fruit
00:03:06
both caves and prevents can so with the exception i think
00:03:11
of maybe a bacon who which probably always gets cancer
00:03:16
in pretty much any study and the only example made those i don't know which seem to be good for yourself
00:03:23
so at the same time the message that this is sending out is that we're screwed and was saved at the same time
00:03:31
okay and this is all published material by the way any of these for that is that is a paper in a very
00:03:37
uh you know this you use german but you can see that the conclusions
00:03:40
that you have to draw from these studies is basically on them
00:03:47
okay ah i'm afraid i don't have the video because we have only two
00:03:51
technical problem but uh i strongly advise that you look at this i don't know i don't know if you know this show
00:03:56
on h. b. also don't uh last week tonight with john oliver is a very funny show in a lot of people are watching it
00:04:02
they recently either whole twenty minutes on a scientific studies
00:04:09
and his point was that percentage didn't wanna i just met before is that
00:04:13
if you look at studies you basically find anything right so uh everything
00:04:18
and it's complete opposites any people that are in a very funny way so
00:04:22
going you shouldn't look at that but the message behind that is
00:04:28
is very painful in fact because if you think of it coming
00:04:32
in particular from that country at that moment in time
00:04:36
we are facing the situation with the scientific discourse can no longer be taken for granted
00:04:42
and the message that is being sent out by the simple examples that you know every
00:04:46
football cues and prevents cancer is basically an e. getting the notion of proof
00:04:54
right you and i receive an indication what we're being told that a fact
00:04:57
desire true force all we don't know it cannot be true enforce right
00:05:05
and now we're just adding more to this me that they are facts and identity facts
00:05:12
and in fact it's our job to just prove we oppose it okay but
00:05:16
in our daily business because of reasons which will try to see
00:05:20
it seems that we've gone very far from the initial objective so go
00:05:25
and watch these twenty minutes it's both funny and also enlightening
00:05:31
okay so now what is the problem coming in so more most of these that's fine
00:05:36
so what what can we see using data by the way from these studies
00:05:41
one thing that you can see is that if you do text mining on most of the scientific studies you see
00:05:46
that the simons of flashy finding and only reporting are making a lot of noise in the sense that
00:05:53
uh this is a a bigger and bigger proportion of
00:05:57
very very positive and flashy words in papers
00:06:00
and so if you open up any people these days you find those words navajo unprecedented breakthrough
00:06:07
it's it's it's hardly knew told anymore right and it's not a negative
00:06:11
we'll go buy yourself try and publish a negative result these days and if you have that right
00:06:17
there's there's there's a few journals and recently i think that uh i was it it needs what's your
00:06:23
there was a a a session on negative results but you know that's the exception so
00:06:30
it's a fact i fink fact the language uh uh of
00:06:35
science and not just the language of p. r. the
00:06:37
language in the papers is becoming overwhelmingly positive and fables hype
00:06:43
okay and in itself that could be a problem
00:06:48
and so there goes the uh the bombshell which i think was one of the initiator of of
00:06:55
of this questioning about science and open sign so maybe you don't know about
00:06:59
this but uh it's an interesting people to between in twenty eleven
00:07:03
i plan basically the the review of his feet we just happen to be oncology but then the same thing was done you know because
00:07:08
so we took fifty free foundational papers so i'm not just talking random papers
00:07:13
he selected you handpicked fifty free of the most important papers and
00:07:17
see all being published in cell major that's it that's it
00:07:22
any charges we produce the results and since this is some clergy bizarre
00:07:27
results will people will just tell you a we now sort
00:07:31
of understand the mechanism of cancer and how we can change things
00:07:35
very significant messages and what badly found out is that
00:07:40
in forty seven out of these fifty three papers those results which is not reproduce it
00:07:46
so the conclusions that that i've been very positively put forth by these papers not
00:07:52
be verified we could be true but it could be false as well
00:07:56
and if you just do the math that's an eighteen nineteen percent uh uh racial of papers
00:08:04
has conclusion we just cannot shows
00:08:08
and since then they see lawmaker studies of been a performing other field so if
00:08:13
you do computer science and if you think your immune to that think again
00:08:18
in in pretty much any field the ratio is between sixty to ninety percent and it's not too difficult i think to
00:08:25
to apply the same tactics to to your field and just discover bias of that you probably fourteen days back
00:08:31
so that's something a little bit fishy something a little bit wrong with
00:08:36
the way science is being done and be not just being reported
00:08:40
the it's not just a question of pushing it to journalist who over emphasise
00:08:44
claims this is coming from papers right out of the p. also
00:08:51
so how did we get to situation where ninety percent
00:08:56
of people's we publish cannot be trusted
00:09:00
so as an institution that's that's a question that we're asking ourselves because
00:09:05
the visual of papers and we have to understand why this
00:09:07
is the case and what we can do so one one set of things i think the most clones on wrong policies
00:09:15
okay so this for automatics everywhere in academia uh you can not church a piece
00:09:23
of work just by the fact that it receives a lot of citations
00:09:27
you can not claim the quality of the paper just because it is published in nature
00:09:34
and she
00:09:35
another set of statistic is this publish or perish mentality just since we judge ourselves by these numbers
00:09:41
we put ourselves in a situation where the only thing that matters is pushing the papers very quickly through
00:09:47
and if you think of it making your work such that others can pick it up and to produce it takes a lot of time
00:09:52
if your we only search all these days it would take or h. to actually do your
00:09:57
work in such a way that you can enjoy everybody can we could use it
00:10:01
and you can read a lot of um analysis all comments on the web which
00:10:04
basically advice not to do the produce a good research if your your research
00:10:10
the problem is that if you're not researcher just like me you just
00:10:14
don't care anymore because there's no there's no stakes right so
00:10:18
if we don't do something fairly fundamental and the problem is not going to solve itself
00:10:24
the second thing which i think we have to talk about is the preview system
00:10:28
right this is the central tenet by which we still turn the quality of what we
00:10:32
do but i claim that the peer review system these days is completely flaw
00:10:38
and i'll give you an example but the most striking things is whenever
00:10:42
you write a paper on sunday to journal how many papers
00:10:45
would get on the people would actually judge the quality of your paper if you send it would journal will be three
00:10:52
right
00:10:54
one of whom will probably not read the paper
00:10:57
then and and and the this the size of the comments you receive for any of your paper
00:11:02
is anywhere between five lines in one page and more often on the five lines side
00:11:07
okay if you go to very serious conference there would be
00:11:11
up to seven or eight reviewers but very short comes
00:11:17
on the other end this hundred so maybe thousands of people out there what you have access should have access
00:11:22
to your paper and comment on it but whatever they do in your paper is nowhere to be seen
00:11:29
the first thing is that there is no incentives for usable data or even reusable code
00:11:34
right now i mean uh i understand a lot of people in this room
00:11:38
um have to subtract it's all try to have this practical for usable data and code but
00:11:43
that's almost a personal choice on so that's something to be done there as well
00:11:49
and so this place for the fact that research should be more open but if
00:11:53
we just say it's better not be you know the problem we'll just stick
00:11:58
so what are the incentives and what can we do such that we
00:12:02
can get rid of these problems and and actually solve the issue
00:12:08
so that's part to the top part one is uh your relies there is a problem
00:12:13
you sort of understand why the problem is there are two is what can we
00:12:19
so there's a number of things and and this is the list of things that are more at the level of my institution
00:12:27
so what we are doing this we're acting on two levels one is the short term one is the long but the first
00:12:34
one which i think is very important is that it should not be just a question of choice of the individual researchers
00:12:41
there should be an institutional message that these practised says on not negotiable
00:12:48
okay so i deeply for work you we have a new president and the new president just said
00:12:53
uh implementing open signs as that on a daily basis in the institution is is piloting
00:13:00
so is just slowly changing institutions such that uh we could practically daily basis and that's not on the ship
00:13:08
one thing you have to do in order to a lowly structures trashy but
00:13:12
in this is ease of implementation tools that would be talks about
00:13:17
simple cool so efficient but simple to use tools to actually do the producing research
00:13:22
in this workshop so that's very important i think we have two major force to the bodies too
00:13:27
institutions actually to buy an anti chlorine these tools on their campuses the second thing is the words
00:13:34
so um take the example of e. p. f. l. we
00:13:38
have awards for the best speech teaches us for instance
00:13:43
so that's good but nothing in the the what the certain that the work is what what usable
00:13:48
or that the data can be accessed or that the code can be accessed so starting
00:13:53
from this year there will be an award for the most people use abilities
00:13:58
and little by little all these that produce even work have to have
00:14:03
a pad off explaining how all the data all the colds all
00:14:07
the techniques in the work can actually be reproduced by others otherwise
00:14:11
they would not qualify as a solid teases valid for no
00:14:18
the last thing guess what we're doing here which i think we should also do it
00:14:21
to a very institutional level is systematic workshops so people should hear this message
00:14:25
to see what the tools are that would be them was here for instance finishes the important at that university for instance
00:14:33
there is a whole you're twenty seventeen is the year of open and so fraud
00:14:38
all your entire university is running activities on open signs and we put usability
00:14:45
and so that's that's the strength of institutional message that is the longer to
00:14:50
so that these are couple of things we can do right away
00:14:53
and that we are doing right now there's the longer term which are things we can do and things that's which we need help
00:15:00
the first thing is not whenever someone is shooting for promotion in
00:15:05
an institution and that would be the case in ours
00:15:09
you should not just document how many papers that published so now we're asking
00:15:13
volume researchers to documents their contribution to open signs in the promotion deals
00:15:19
so they have to tell us how the implemented this ethics in the
00:15:23
way they did signs during their tenure targeted p. f. l.
00:15:27
and only if they show have you record of methods than it would be uh that would be promoted
00:15:34
it sounds trivial if you think of it but it's not because that puts a
00:15:38
lot of buttons on the researchers so we actually is a message that
00:15:43
somehow it would be easier to get promoted elsewhere because you would not have to do this extra work
00:15:49
but if we don't if this message nothing's gonna change
00:15:53
a second thing is and i think that's maybe the most important thing you can not just to promote people like me
00:16:00
okay so you have to act on the younger generation so those who
00:16:04
get promoted but also i think those who start their research period
00:16:08
so if you take uh if you if you if you go for p. h. d. t. the city p. affair
00:16:13
the one thing you have to do is of course but which papers but you have to follow lectures or
00:16:17
lessons and in credits and if you look at them these are lectures in all the technical very specific
00:16:23
starting in twenty seventeen there would be lectures on the fundamentals
00:16:27
of open signs mandatory for every p. h. d. student
00:16:31
so no one will stop each teaches at the p. f. l. without obese and background
00:16:35
on what it means to do good usable research and what tools are available
00:16:40
and i think that's key to actually having these practised is diffuse in the way the whole institution discussed
00:16:48
the last thing does not only depend on us but it's already
00:16:51
on on on the way it's a strict uh funding regulations
00:16:56
the forest or not if you're looking for money before nationals implementing more and more plastic
00:17:01
policies on open access and soon data management plan the you is doing the same
00:17:09
and the you at the moment we use be nice but i'm just telling you okay
00:17:13
your research should be open access and you should have a data management plan
00:17:19
but the way you have to show it is just about often your report well we have one
00:17:24
but believe me trust me on this one in the next few years it would be much more strict than than that
00:17:29
right so you would have to probably demonstrate that all your data is accessible
00:17:37
and if you take large organisations like the gates foundation of the what caldwell contrast the from
00:17:42
the law research they have this year that's the gates foundation last month in fact
00:17:48
could very strict rules on uh the fact that every thing that is funded by the money has
00:17:55
to go through open access and what controls implementing the same think down to open data
00:18:00
it's all very significant messages because if you ought to receive money from these foundations you have to abide by the policies
00:18:08
so things are moving uh this beach in fact if you pick up the economist
00:18:14
that's not something you do very often as a scientist to you if you pick up the economist the editorial isn't open signs
00:18:22
so i think this year in particular is is is key this is the year with thinks things will start to change
00:18:30
so open data management open access code oppose it always apply just just a few words
00:18:38
about colour repositories because this seems to be the most review part of it
00:18:43
and and in this community in particular you use data and you put you scott
00:18:49
and we like to think of us because i'm part of the same community as you know we are light years ahead of
00:18:54
the others because we use get you know our code is up there and then write a paper with the link inside
00:18:59
is there a good let me give you a few examples where things are not that easy so
00:19:09
even if you actually release code with your paper
00:19:15
a recent study showed that after five years
00:19:21
i think it was eighty percent of the gold was not just gonna go in the sense that someone
00:19:27
would just pick up the code even if it's still available now could not reverted or recombine it
00:19:34
and if you think of it yeah of course it's trigger and there's a lot of
00:19:36
dependencies into go that it's not easy to do something that is completely self contained
00:19:41
and so just the fact of putting called online is okay but that's the that's barely enough
00:19:48
and the the the time the time live the time span of these goodies the evaluation walls
00:19:53
there is a a big initiative informs that you may have or the school
00:19:56
the uh uh uh a sustainable software one to something where they're actually
00:20:02
uh huh what what you're doing is crazy but what it said in a yeah well
00:20:06
the other thing is that the others it basically stocking up the whole get up
00:20:10
okay and crew and and creating the all the whole dependency tree of everything that is on the top
00:20:17
and and just making sure that in ten years from now you can basically a single
00:20:21
out any piece of go out and have a way to you on it
00:20:25
okay why is it important that's the second example is that more and more of what the others do this computation
00:20:33
you could always claim you know why it's okay someone cannot one might you want networking five years no that's okay i'll just
00:20:38
pick up the paper and then there will be implemented in the other way i think of it this way no
00:20:43
a lot of what people do in materials science although discovering is computer based
00:20:48
right and a lot of it is inside puppy it away softwares
00:20:53
so if in ten years from now you cannot he won the new
00:20:57
medical experiment that led to the discovery of a particular material
00:21:02
all that led to the discovery of a particular way of folding
00:21:05
to pull thing and you cannot physically do the experiment anymore
00:21:10
right and there's many scenes that are being produced today based on a numerical drug design
00:21:18
so if you can not access just a cold that is the backbone
00:21:22
of these experiments thing you could not could use the molecule anymore
00:21:27
okay so you could imagine no you you could make astral fee scenarios for instance where twenty years from now
00:21:33
a a a simple drag that we designed the ten years ago when no we're not be able to just
00:21:38
put use it anymore because would not be able to be on the experiment that critically depend on call
00:21:45
another more trivial example from an institution uh you probably all know
00:21:51
the the software called so it works
00:21:54
right it's something that a lot people used to do three d. models uh every university i
00:22:00
guess or every instead of technology buys these licenses and and and you buy a
00:22:07
educational licenses because other people use it in class
00:22:12
that's interesting by the way so it's a proprietary software but ninety
00:22:16
percent of engineering students are trained using it so we train
00:22:20
student to be locked with appropriate or the software already interesting
00:22:25
but it becomes fairly a funny in the sense that
00:22:30
you're not supposed to do research with that software if you have an indication license but if you have a
00:22:35
little research project in your lap the boundary between research and teaching is that because now what happens
00:22:44
certainly your in a situation where things that you have produced on a proprietary format so it work
00:22:53
that you may not be able to access if you cannot pay the license these companies for
00:22:57
instance now they have a new business models that they run off to universities and startups
00:23:03
and say well we know that you use our software but we also know that you don't have
00:23:06
the license that's because they used to take action what and this in on was money
00:23:12
so what happens is that these small universities and companies what they do is well you know we just ditch started work
00:23:19
but if you just ditched only work you cannot access back to the pfizer put just with his puppet away
00:23:25
there's only a fraction of a that you can export and then you well we've legacy that
00:23:30
you cannot access anymore and you just shoot yourself from things you have done just with
00:23:37
okay bob free i think this one is also important i think we have to rethink jointly the paper
00:23:45
so ah that's all too and the p. d. v. that's all the to the tool for community
00:23:53
so for one let's just consider things which are fact
00:23:58
science is a collaborative endeavour and it's more more collaborative
00:24:03
and the reason is very simple right it's it's getting more and more difficult to
00:24:06
actually produce results so it it it's it's better to actually team up
00:24:11
so teams get extremes so this is the teams that discover that expose on then they
00:24:15
they they have a nice paper which i strongly advise read in physical review letters
00:24:20
but if you wanna read it you first have to go for the twenty five first pages which are just the names of
00:24:24
the people on the experiments right it's five thousand or five thousand two hundred people that's what i mean by corporate
00:24:30
so that it someplace extreme you may lawfully but just look at the the other
00:24:33
numbers so this is your your average numbers that you can see that um
00:24:39
on the left you half the growth of articles we've uh a single authors and uh many authors you can
00:24:46
see the the the number of articles with several causes going faster and on the right track g. c.
00:24:52
the average number of authors spoke paper and you see that we'll know over three
00:24:58
and so we are we are more and more collaborating on tape so the number of water should spur article is increasing
00:25:04
and the number of articles of many many older is also increasing which is a sign of things to come
00:25:11
but at the same time the formats so the way we all we're doing all this the way we interact on the paper
00:25:17
is is there a different it used to be fifty years ago but the or it's not it's not change a lot
00:25:23
point in case last year there was the discovery of the first have additional ways
00:25:29
right so on the left hand side you have a einstein's calculation and paper where the
00:25:36
solution of the understand the question leading to gravitational wave was this was was
00:25:40
published that's the paper on the left a bit on the right that's the paper
00:25:45
where uh do you like to experiment was reported what's the difference between both
00:25:52
hardly any fact right right it's pretty it's the other one is a p. d. f. that's it
00:25:58
that's the only thing nice change in exactly a hundred years right if you want to print
00:26:04
the p. d. f. any would just be back to the situation on the left
00:26:07
just printed on old bay on hold your wish paper anybody could pretend you understand
00:26:12
so only the medium exchange and there's a there's a point to be made that academic publishing
00:26:19
schools extremely low on innovation right so we bred ourselves as the most of the people the most
00:26:26
innovative one if you look at the way we actually put a shoddy search all the way
00:26:31
people publish all the search because well a little bit slides that it's extremely innovative it has
00:26:37
not changed in twenty years and whatever else changes due to the very strong pressure
00:26:45
but on the other hand he should take again the example of gravitational wave that's much more you can
00:26:49
do if you look at the like the website instead of just going to the physically do letters
00:26:54
a website that you'll discover that paper as a link to to be double box
00:27:01
and the typical box contained or the process almost role data of the
00:27:05
experiments so you can't really run the legal pipeline or by yourself
00:27:11
and so everything is in there it's just not there anymore it's a paper
00:27:15
it's the coat good isn't bad and the data is accessible via
00:27:19
the should be done with book and everything is a single package this is very far from the people we had fifteen years ago
00:27:27
and so that's the way we should go more more often in the future
00:27:35
now
00:27:36
the second thing with the paper is the way the paper is evaluated and there i think that the p. did you
00:27:42
system which is rightfully at the heart of what we do somebody else to double check that we're doing things right
00:27:49
i think this one is really really really float i'd let picked up this little cartoon
00:27:54
that says you know most scientists we got the new streamlined peer review process has quite an improvement
00:28:01
and this is really how you feel right you have to when you when you finally put the last line you only take fine you're about
00:28:06
to send your paper you do feel on that whole with people you know just waiting to have you with whatever argument they have
00:28:13
the the only difference with reality is that the there will be six people they're just maybe three
00:28:20
okay let me let you process
00:28:24
s. not other people that's either oh um i was just criticising the the publishers
00:28:30
on the way they actually uh allow us to uh send our results not
00:28:35
but the way we collectively and by other provisions evaluate our research is also very very bad
00:28:42
and then we just take an example besides you pointed reviewers those
00:28:46
three guys know what does this say about your paper
00:28:51
right absolutely no one whereas if you go and buy music online or book on amazon
00:28:56
no you see the opinion that everybody who bought the same book in the same the same uh the
00:29:02
same the same music right you can check if they have the same taste as you are
00:29:06
right to by just looking at all the reviews that they have done and you can read that and you can decide by the circus
00:29:11
you know this is a deal good broke because this and that and that's what it's about and i went to just three people
00:29:18
also if you go to amazon all these websites you you have to be recommended
00:29:21
some content rather than just being a weighting the the reins on you
00:29:29
there as well there's a there's good news for the things which are progressing
00:29:32
uh you may have you may know of of the puppy or
00:29:35
a website we should although that's a very interesting but it's a collective
00:29:39
believe you side so uh it's it's mostly for the um um
00:29:46
my life science and a little bit of the competitions and says that that those are
00:29:51
just being the probably there and then you can uh review the paper is
00:29:56
of course you have to be extremely careful because if you go there and if you just open comments to everybody
00:30:03
there should be a quality system you know what it means to covent there and if you actually
00:30:07
go to to appear you see that sometimes it just calls nonlinear all the other end
00:30:13
this website i think there's some less than four euros existence
00:30:18
it has already the brunt hundreds of fake claims in paper and in particular little of claims of forgery
00:30:26
and sometimes the the bait even if if if if it's not all wrong paper the because very healthy
00:30:31
uh if you want to see how she did it take this paper the heroes of crisper
00:30:36
so crisp or is that really the most important technology can live signs in the you know in
00:30:40
the tickets to come and there's a very big fight on who owns the crystal patent
00:30:45
it's genie think so full but sake it's green it's it's with billions and billions of dollars
00:30:51
so what happens is that people from one institute which kept the patent decided to publish review on crisp
00:30:58
right and since uh that guy a calendar is very very well don't go to be published it's yeah
00:31:04
but when dealing is review it just the facts towards the fact
00:31:09
that most of the work to be done in his institute
00:31:14
given the uh giving everybody out there the impression that in fact that then should be going
00:31:19
to the broad institute because they had on the research so says the broad institute
00:31:24
but the paper was published in nowhere else that sell right which
00:31:29
is one of the most uh impact full journals on or
00:31:33
but if you go and check the the peer review the open to reduce side on that paper you see
00:31:39
that's some of the cool discover a if you look at the comment on the on your down
00:31:44
a journey filled now is one of the cool discover of crisper and she clearly mentions well you know in the paper they say
00:31:50
that they came to my lavender speed is that they didn't so they just blatantly lied about what they say they expect
00:31:57
right if there's no such platform there's no way of saying that everything
00:32:01
is cute in the spectrum and that's a very important issue
00:32:06
and the good thing is if if if you look at what's going on now we
00:32:10
are collectively moving out of the system and archive has been there for years
00:32:14
the biology suddenly woke up to use ago they sent by log i've
00:32:19
you probably don't publish an by archive go check it it's already much better now okay
00:32:25
uh there's links to other web site like this one thousand will can also
00:32:29
put on a lot of data so things are slowly slowly moving
00:32:35
and i'll i'll i'll just finish here i think if we have to also so
00:32:39
this problem we have to get into these shoes it also start realising that
00:32:44
the paper itself and the way we review working the way we publish work
00:32:48
this can change right now in in our disciplines the most complication ones
00:32:53
it's just not such a fun such of of an effort right tools like a jupiter notebooks where you can link
00:32:59
text colour which data this is that it is just
00:33:04
a question off the institutions and us collectively sending out the right message pants
00:33:10
we just have to embrace these tools and use them in our everyday research
00:33:17
yeah

Share this talk: 


Conference Program

Welcome
Sébastien Marcel, Senior Researcher, IDIAP, Director of the Swiss Center for Biometrics Research and Testing
March 24, 2017 · 9:17 a.m.
473 views
Keynote - Reproducibility and Open Science @ EPFL
Pierre Vandergheynst, EPFL VP for Education
March 24, 2017 · 9:20 a.m.
250 views
Q&A: Keynote - Reproducibility and Open Science @ EPFL
Pierre Vandergheynst, EPFL VP for Education
March 24, 2017 · 9:54 a.m.
Reproducible Research with Bob and the BEAT Platform
André Anjos
March 24, 2017 · 10:03 a.m.
230 views
VISCERAL and Evaluation-as-a-Service
Henning Müller, prof. HES-SO Valais-Wallis (unité e-health)
March 24, 2017 · 11:35 a.m.
109 views
Q&A - VISCERAL and Evaluation-as-a-Service
Henning Müller, prof. HES-SO Valais-Wallis (unité e-health)
March 24, 2017 · 12:07 p.m.
Making experiments on remote heart-rate measurement reproducible
Guillaume Heusch
March 24, 2017 · 12:30 p.m.
149 views
138 views

Recommended talks

Frontiers
Stefano Battaglia, Frontiers
March 16, 2017 · 5:19 p.m.
349 views
Why "no cars"
Paola Viganò, Architecte-urbaniste, professeure EPFL et IUAV, directrice du laboratoire Lab-U/ EPFL, membre fondateur de l’agence Studio 16, Milan
March 22, 2018 · 7 p.m.
341 views