event: The next 10 years of Open Data, 13th December 2022 | Digital Science

“As 2022 draws to a close, join us for a Figshare webinar that looks ahead to the next 10 years of open data. What should the roadmap of open data uptake look like in academia? Figshare celebrated their 10th anniversary in 2022 and have been reflecting on 10 years of providing leading repository software to universities, publishers, funders, government agencies, pharmaceutical organizations, labs and more. As we embark on the next phase of our journey, this webinar will take stock of the current landscape of Open Data and what the coming years could bring for Figshare and the community as a whole. 2022 also saw the so-called ‘seismic’ OSTP memo and in January 2023, the NIH’s new Data Management and Sharing Policy will take full effect. During our webinar we’ll discuss the rise of national and international open data mandates and what they mean for publishers, universities and importantly researchers themselves….”

Financial Health of Nonprofits in Research and Scholarship: What’s Working and What Needs Improvement? | Invest in Open Infrastructure, 2 December 2022

“As an enabler and a funder in open infrastructure, one of our key goals at Invest in Open Infrastructure (IOI) is to conduct research to better understand and articulate the foundational needs for open infrastructure services, such that they are viable in the short-term and sustainable in the long term. To this end, in this investigation, we worked to design and test measures that will enable us to better understand the financial health of nonprofit providers and enablers in this space. In this report, we outlined key patterns we observed in the nonprofits’ financial risk and strengths and resource allocation, and clarified sector needs for both funders and providers such that resources can be better allocated….”

What we are working on: 2022-12-02 | Invest in Open Infrastructure

“What we are working on: We published a report from our exploration into the financial health of nonprofits in research and scholarship. Using financial ratio analysis, we conducted a baseline assessment on the financial health of nonprofit organizations in the open scholarship and research ecosystem and explored general guidelines for decision makers to improve the financial health of organizations they fund – find out more in this blog post.

We shared a summary and resources from our Funders Summit. Last month, we brought together 80 funders, budget holders, and other key stakeholders involved in the financing and resourcing of open infrastructure to discuss what to fund in open infrastructure for research and scholarship and how to fund it. Access slides, recordings, and other related resources from the Summit from this blog post.

We are hiring a Business Development and Partnership Lead. This role will be instrumental to the next phase of IOI’s growth and development as we look to diversify our funding modes and streams, as well as grow uptake and investment of open infrastructure by institutions and funders globally. More details and application link on this page….”

The Care-ful Reviewer: Peer Review as if People Mattered | Pop!

by John W. Maxwell

For many years now, the open social scholarship community in Canada has examined its practices and capacities for scholarly communication in the digital age, both in terms of making the scholarly discourse richer, more efficient, and more responsive, and with an eye to making scholarly discourse in the humanities more relevant and interesting to audiences outside our specific disciplines and indeed the academy itself. Attention to “new knowledge environments” has proved both fruitful and inspiring, but the scholarly community remains rooted in a set of very traditional scholarly communications forms/practices: conference presentations, journal articles, and books. These traditional forms are rooted in—even arguably constitutionally defined by—peer review practices. Whether these traditional forms have bright futures in the digital age is a topic for another discussion, but it seems fair to argue that peer review itself is and will continue to be a constitutional component of scholarly communications.

What to make of peer review, then? As an artifact largely of the twentieth century and the late age of print, we might expect its role to shift in new, digital formats and genres, and its form and function to be responsive to disciplinary and methodological innovations. And yet, there is a sense in which peer review remains a stubborn, poorly understood, and ritualized practice. We generally lack good conceptual models of the what, the how, and the why of peer review practices, even as we consistently uphold their centrality to scholarly work.

As such, this essay is an exploration of peer review in theory and practice, and an attempt to work out what it might mean in the context of the humanities specifically, and especially in terms of open social scholarship. In this essay, I take the scholarly journal as the fundamental case, and as such much of the discussion that follows is an appraisal and attempted re-imagining of some fairly conventional forms. My aim here is not to praise or condemn peer review itself, nor any particular flavour or format of it in practice. Rather, the goal is to understand what peer review might ideally be for in open, humanities scholarship: how we might think about it, how to identify the precepts upon which our practices might be founded, and indeed, where its heart lies.


Publizieren in der Medienwissenschaft — Andreas Kirchner über Open Access als Standard | Open Media Studies

by Andreas Kirchner

englisch version via gTranslate:

I recently noticed that the editors of the journal MEDIENwissenschaft: Reviews | Reviews has started to specifically mark Open Access publications that are subject to review – a clear indication of a change in media studies publication practice. In book list 4/22, 64 out of 186 titles, a third of all publications listed there, bear the new “OA” abbreviation. This is not a bad rate, especially considering that the open access transformation of books has only picked up speed in recent years. The spectrum of the 19 publishers that published the books is enormous: imprints from the multinational publishing groups SpringerNature and Taylor & Francis are represented as well as various university presses or small scientific and non-fiction publishers such as Büchner or Frank & Timme. The Bielefelder transcript-Verlag occupies a special position, which in recent years has been particularly committed to establishing Open Access in German-language media studies: 17 OA books on the “Book List” have been published there alone. In this illustrious circle, the name of a publishing house can be found – and that at least four times -meson press .


Open Call: Machine translation evaluation in the context of scholarly communication (proposals invited by Dec 23, 2022) | OPERAS

In 2020, the French Ministry of Higher Education and Research (MESR) launched the Translations and Open Science project with the aim to explore the opportunities offered by translation technologies to foster multilingualism in scholarly communication and thus help to remove language barriers according to Open Science principles.

During the initial phase of the project (2020), a first working group, made up of experts in natural language processing and translation, published a report suggesting recommendations and avenues for experimentation with a view to establishing a scientific translation service combining relevant technologies, resources and human skills.

Once developed, the scientific translation service is intended to:

address the needs of different users, including researchers (authors and readers), readers outside the academic community, publishers of scientific texts, dissemination platforms or open archives;
combine specialised language technologies and human skills, in particular adapted machine translation engines and in-domain language resources to support the translation process;
be founded on the principles of open science, hence based on open-source software as well as shareable resources, and used to produce open access translations.

Project Goals

In order to follow up on recommendations and lay the foundation of the translation service, the OPERAS Research Infrastructure was commissioned by the MESR to coordinate a series of preparatory studies in the following areas:

Mapping and collection of scientific bilingual corpora: identifying and defining the conditions for collecting and preparing corpora of bilingual scientific texts which will serve as training dataset for specialised translation engines, source data for terminology extraction, and translation memory creation.
Use case study for a technology-based scientific translation service: drafting an overview of the current translation practices in scholarly communication and defining the use cases of a technology-based scientific translation service (associated features, expected quality, editorial and technical workflows, and involved human experts).
Machine translation evaluation in the context of scholarly communication: evaluating a set of translation engines to translate specialised texts.
Roadmap and budget projections: making budget projections to anticipate the costs to develop and run the service.

The four preparatory studies are planned during a one-year period as of September 2022. 

The present call for tenders only covers the (3) Machine translation evaluation in the context of scholarly communication.

De Gruyter launches not-for-profit foundation: De Gruyter eBound | De Gruyter

De Gruyter, independent scholarly publisher and founder of the University Press Library distribution model, is launching De Gruyter eBound, a not-for-profit foundation, in the United States. The initiative’s goal is to support the publishing, sustainability, and accessibility of mission-driven scholarly monographs for not-for-profit and Open Access publishers.

Among other planned activities, De Gruyter eBound will offer grants for new publications as well as fund original studies that help key actors in the industry to develop new solutions for and insights on the future of the mission-driven scholarly monograph.

De Gruyter’s eBound Advisory Board consists of leading figures in the academic library and scholarly publishing community: Curtis Brundy (Associate University Librarian for Scholarly Communication and Collection, Iowa State University), Jane Bunker (Director, Cornell University Press), Steve Fallon (Vice President, Americas and Strategic Partnerships, De Gruyter), Mary Francis (Director, University of Pennsylvania Press), Alan Harvey (Director, Stanford University Press), Bill Maltarich (Head, Collection Department, New York University), Frances Pinter (Executive Chair, Central European University Press and Founder, Knowledge Unlatched), Emily Poznanski (Director, Central European University Press), Nicola Ramsey (CEO, Edinburgh University Press), and Brigitta van Rheinberg (Associate Director and Director of Global Development, Princeton University Press).


A systematic literature review on research data management practices and services | Emerald Insight

Abstract:  Purpose

Research data management (RDM) has been called a “ground-breaking” area for research libraries and it is among the top future trends for academic libraries. Hence, this study aims to systematically review RDM practices and services primarily focusing on the challenges, services and skills along with motivational factors associated with it.


A systematic literature review method was used focusing on literature produced between 2016–2020 to understand the latest trends. An extensive research strategy was framed and 15,206 results appeared. Finally, 19 studies have fulfilled the criteria to be included in the study following preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis.


RDM is gradually gaining importance among researchers and academic libraries; however, it is still poorly practiced by researchers and academic libraries. Albeit, it is better observed in developed countries over developing countries, however, there are lots of challenges associated with RDM practices by researchers and services by libraries. These challenges demand certain sets of skills to be developed for better practices and services. An active collaboration is required among stakeholders and university services departments to figure out the challenges and issues.

Research limitations/implications

The implications of policy and practical point-of-view present how research data can be better managed in the future by researchers and library professionals. The expected/desired role of key stockholders in this regard is also highlighted.


RDM is an important and emerging area. Researchers and Library and Information Science professionals are not comprehensively managing research data as it involves complex cooperation among various stakeholders. A combination of measures is required to better manage research data that would ultimately move forward for open access publishing.

Library Coalition agreement with Elsevier results in lower costs, greater access – Odessa American

“All TLCUA members will receive a discount on journal subscriptions–some as high as 30%–while still maintaining significant amounts of access to journals and combined, will realize a savings of over $4.75M annually. Beyond initial cost savings, Elsevier agreed to a maximum annual increase of 2% over the course of the license agreement, with some years as low as 0%, which is significantly lower than industry standard.

TLCUA and Elsevier have agreed to partner on a pilot project to revert ownership of journal articles back to original authors—and not just those at TLCUA-member institutions. Currently, authors transfer copyright of their work in exchange for that work being published. This pilot will provide for rights to go back to authors after a period of time that will be collaboratively determined with Elsevier. A subset of Elsevier journals will be chosen to study the impact of the copyright reversion pilot for authors and its applicability more broadly to STEM (scientific, technical, engineering and medical) publishers, the release said….”

2023 Unconference on Open Scholarship Practices in Education Research

“The 2023 Unconference will be a virtual participation event featuring participant-led sessions analyzing the current state of open scholarship practice seeking solutions to identified problems. Participants will assess barriers to adoption of open scholarship practices unique to the education community and brainstorm strategies for promoting greater awareness….”

Antibiotic discovery in the artificial intelligence era – Lluka – Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences – Wiley Online Library

Abstract:  As the global burden of antibiotic resistance continues to grow, creative approaches to antibiotic discovery are needed to accelerate the development of novel medicines. A rapidly progressing computational revolution—artificial intelligence—offers an optimistic path forward due to its ability to alleviate bottlenecks in the antibiotic discovery pipeline. In this review, we discuss how advancements in artificial intelligence are reinvigorating the adoption of past antibiotic discovery models—namely natural product exploration and small molecule screening. We then explore the application of contemporary machine learning approaches to emerging areas of antibiotic discovery, including antibacterial systems biology, drug combination development, antimicrobial peptide discovery, and mechanism of action prediction. Lastly, we propose a call to action for open access of high-quality screening datasets and interdisciplinary collaboration to accelerate the rate at which machine learning models can be trained and new antibiotic drugs can be developed.


Preprints em CSP

From Google’s English:  “CSP [Cad Saúde Pública] is a journal that guarantees public and free access to its entire collection for the reading public, an essential part of the principles of Open Science. In addition, CSP recognizes the importance of preprints in today’s scientific publishing scenario and, since 2020, accepts articles previously deposited in non-commercial preprint repositories (eg: arXiv, bioRxiv, medRxiv, Zenodo and SciELO Preprints), before submission to the journal or during the peer review process.


In these two situations, it is necessary for the author to notify the journal’s editorial team and inform the name of the preprints server and the DOI assigned to the article.two?? However, the practice of publishing preprints of an article already approved in CSP on a server is not recommended. In this case, the participation of the scientific community debating with the author will not contribute to the improvement of the article and the duplicate DOI can harm the authors and the journal….

It is emphasized that the deposit of the article in the preprints server is a decision of the author. It is worth noting, however, the implications for the double-blind peer review system adopted by CSP, since it makes it possible to identify authorship.”

Release of the English Version of the Rights Retention Strategy Guide

The Mettre en œuvre la stratégie de non-cession des droits sur les publications scientifiques a tool for researchers is now also available in English : Implementing the rights retention strategy for scientific publications.

The rights retention strategy is part of France’s Second National Plan for Open Science. The strategy’s conclusions on the evaluation of research and the implementation of open science are also supported by the Council of the European Union. Finally, it enables researchers to align with certain funding agencies’ open science policies.