OpenWetWare:Headquarters/Research Pathway Brainstorming061308: Difference between revisions
From OpenWetWare
Jump to navigationJump to search
Barry Canton (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
|||
(6 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Tools to facilitate establishment of collaborations== | ==Tools to facilitate establishment of collaborations== | ||
''This topic seemed like an overarching theme, so I pulled all related ideas. Numbers in brackets indicate which step of the research cycle they came from.'' - '''[[User:Barry Canton|BC]] 14:10, 14 June 2008 (UTC)''' | ''This topic seemed like an overarching theme, so I pulled all related ideas out of the overall list. Numbers in brackets indicate which step of the research cycle they came from.'' - '''[[User:Barry Canton|BC]] 14:10, 14 June 2008 (UTC)''' | ||
*Ideas Marketplace (1) | |||
**Prizes, rewards, and competitions that will motivate people to work together (1 and others) | **[http://www.kluster.com/buy/features Kluster might help here] | ||
*An academic “innocentive” for research: Is there a way to orally ingest perfume?” “I’d like a biobrick vector that does X” Research marketplace; could be a mailing list; Craigslist for research (4) | |||
**System for outsourcing experimentation (4) | *Prizes, rewards, and competitions that will motivate people to work together (1 and others) | ||
*Microcredit for specialists who only want to work on part of the problem -> Attaching your credentials to a chunk of data (4) | |||
**[http://npg.nature.com/ng/journal/v39/n8/full/ng0807-931.html microcredit editorial] | |||
*System for outsourcing experimentation (4) | |||
==General== | |||
*Tools/protocols for choosing what to work on and choosing when to stop | *Tools/protocols for choosing what to work on and choosing when to stop | ||
*Mechanisms for | *Building communities and networks at all steps on the cycle, | ||
*Mechanisms for specialization in communities | |||
==== | ==Ideas (1)== | ||
==Background Research (3)== | |||
*Opportunities for better Referencing | |||
**crowdsourcing for background research. What are the standard set of references/citations for X. DOIs for sets of references; abstraction for references | |||
*What’s the right way to present your data? | *What’s the right way to present your data? | ||
**best practices for reporting data | **best practices for reporting data | ||
Line 21: | Line 24: | ||
*Meta-level tools for finding publications | *Meta-level tools for finding publications | ||
*A way of conducting semantic research of articles and a way of extracting info from them | *A way of conducting semantic research of articles and a way of extracting info from them | ||
== | ==Background Research -> Experimentation (3.5)== | ||
*Open funding and microfunding. Outsourcing in a lab. Lab needs resources, can plug into a microfunding model or network | *Open funding and microfunding. Outsourcing in a lab. Lab needs resources, can plug into a microfunding model or network | ||
*A way to ask research questions and find the right people who can answer | |||
== | ==Experimentation (4)== | ||
*Standardized interfaces for controlling instrumentation via OWW | *Standardized interfaces for controlling instrumentation via OWW | ||
*A reward system for amateur researchers | *A reward system for amateur researchers | ||
*Consensus protocols: Standardized versions of protocols that are easy to find and free; | *Consensus protocols: Standardized versions of protocols that are easy to find and free; | ||
*Different kinds of protocols and methods that provide information and how-tos for all phases and aspects of research; | *Different kinds of protocols and methods that provide information and how-tos for all phases and aspects of research; | ||
*Better ways of getting your activities out in the world; subscribe to your colleagues’ work; | *Better ways of getting your activities out in the world; subscribe to your colleagues’ work; | ||
*Community building in the experimental cycle; example is a feed of “everyone else who’s using this protocol.” | *Community building in the experimental cycle; example is a feed of “everyone else who’s using this protocol.” | ||
== | ==Analysis (6)== | ||
*An easy way to integrate your data into other people’s data sets | *An easy way to integrate your data into other people’s data sets | ||
== | ==Publishing Cycle (8-11)== | ||
*A way to apply peer review earlier than the publication phase; rolling, cycle-wide peer review; PR at the idea stage | *A way to apply peer review earlier than the publication phase; rolling, cycle-wide peer review; PR at the idea stage | ||
(Dotted line to …) | (Dotted line to …) | ||
Line 51: | Line 51: | ||
**Metric of error correction for each publication – finer-grained metrics | **Metric of error correction for each publication – finer-grained metrics | ||
== | ==Publication -> Ideas (11->1)== | ||
Research is not conducted in vacuum; there’s a need to couple conclusions and publications with the next set of questions. | Research is not conducted in vacuum; there’s a need to couple conclusions and publications with the next set of questions. | ||
*Need a mechanism for going from a publication back into to the idea pool | *Need a mechanism for going from a publication back into to the idea pool | ||
Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
==Actionable tasks from the above== | ==Actionable tasks from the above== | ||
*[[OpenWetWare:ProjectDevelopment]] |
Latest revision as of 17:01, 29 July 2008
Tools to facilitate establishment of collaborations
This topic seemed like an overarching theme, so I pulled all related ideas out of the overall list. Numbers in brackets indicate which step of the research cycle they came from. - BC 14:10, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
- Ideas Marketplace (1)
- An academic “innocentive” for research: Is there a way to orally ingest perfume?” “I’d like a biobrick vector that does X” Research marketplace; could be a mailing list; Craigslist for research (4)
- Prizes, rewards, and competitions that will motivate people to work together (1 and others)
- Microcredit for specialists who only want to work on part of the problem -> Attaching your credentials to a chunk of data (4)
- System for outsourcing experimentation (4)
General
- Tools/protocols for choosing what to work on and choosing when to stop
- Building communities and networks at all steps on the cycle,
- Mechanisms for specialization in communities
Ideas (1)
Background Research (3)
- Opportunities for better Referencing
- crowdsourcing for background research. What are the standard set of references/citations for X. DOIs for sets of references; abstraction for references
- What’s the right way to present your data?
- best practices for reporting data
- open data conventions; examples for presenting data; (e.g. error bars and statistics)
- Meta-level tools for finding publications
- A way of conducting semantic research of articles and a way of extracting info from them
Background Research -> Experimentation (3.5)
- Open funding and microfunding. Outsourcing in a lab. Lab needs resources, can plug into a microfunding model or network
- A way to ask research questions and find the right people who can answer
Experimentation (4)
- Standardized interfaces for controlling instrumentation via OWW
- A reward system for amateur researchers
- Consensus protocols: Standardized versions of protocols that are easy to find and free;
- Different kinds of protocols and methods that provide information and how-tos for all phases and aspects of research;
- Better ways of getting your activities out in the world; subscribe to your colleagues’ work;
- Community building in the experimental cycle; example is a feed of “everyone else who’s using this protocol.”
Analysis (6)
- An easy way to integrate your data into other people’s data sets
Publishing Cycle (8-11)
- A way to apply peer review earlier than the publication phase; rolling, cycle-wide peer review; PR at the idea stage
(Dotted line to …)
- Mechanism for capturing the value of negative results; collecting all the stuff that doesn’t make it into the paper like peer review; deleted scenes, the director’s cut; alternate endings
- Implement CVS for publication: from submission to publication;
- Design a publication process where the author has control; a centralized document with continuous version control. (As you hit a point in the review process should be less back and forth between you and the publisher, fewer publication delays.)
- Build tools for writing: Drew envisions “A sea of unreviewed manuscripts” where the editor comes to you. A manuscript marketplace. Allows for …
- feedback on rougher manuscripts
- less stigma for having an error
- Metric of error correction for each publication – finer-grained metrics
Publication -> Ideas (11->1)
Research is not conducted in vacuum; there’s a need to couple conclusions and publications with the next set of questions.
- Need a mechanism for going from a publication back into to the idea pool
- Need a mechanism for others (possibly nonresearchers) to pose questions, problems, ideas for research