For those of you outside of the U.S., the community college system is a two-year college that, in our particular case, we try to fulfill the lower division requirements for students to enter into the four-year institutions.

A lot of our students tend to do this because it's, one, it's a lot cheaper, and then, two, it's in a less pressured environment compared to the undergraduate four-year institutions. My colleague, Julia Gelfand, who apologizes in advance for not being here,

comes from an academic research library, tier one institution. So it's kind of an interesting partnership of a library having almost every single resource out there to my library having, well, you know, a fraction of what the University of California, Irvine has.

So with that, let me get on with the show. Okay, so to start off, did you know that this week is the international celebration of Open Access Week? You did? Okay, well, I didn't know that.

So, but it is. So this comes at a very appropriate time, and, you know, as we've heard from the previous speakers on some of the ways open science has impacted grey literature. So as part of our research, we identified six open relationships perceived

as being both a disruptor and a mediator in bringing access and practices. These are available to communities across the globe, regardless of different socioeconomic strata and conditions. In addition to open access, there's also open data, open source, open methodology,

open peer review, and open educational resources. So Frisk and colleagues shared a significant set of initiatives that became products that have informed, led open science culture in creative ways

that they characterize as philanthropic, reflectionary, constra, oh my goodness, that's hard to say, constrativistic, and explorative. And some of these examples are in this world.

They're commonplace, such as the Creative Commons, which a lot of us are familiar with, and they not only support information generation and dissemination, but they also inform the work of libraries and librarians. So some of these other products include Altmetrics, Archive, CERN, the DOAJ Libre,

the Open Science Project, the Open Science Framework, SHERPA, and Zotero. So in terms of grey literature, we see that open science impacts in the following ways.

First of all, less will be grey as more open science is released and disseminated into open formats. More content will be available in open access. Methods of publication will continue to evolve as the review process for both submissions

and academic review will undergo change. Indicators such as impact factors and other descriptors already showing how open access content is cited sooner after publication and the reward systems will adapt accordingly going forward.

The scope of grey literature will continue to expand but may not always be so grey. The cloudiness or haziness of grey will continue to depend on functionality, timeliness, and sourcing. Grey will be characterized as less organization centric and more outcome or product defined.

This may reduce the challenges in identifying and accessing grey literature and already this is evident with theses and dissertations, preprints, technical reports, data sets, and other once well-defined grey literature

that is now eligible for DOIs and other defining elements. Interdisciplinarity will continue to blend. The grey will become greyer and the rest will become easier to identify and access. Functional areas will have computational elements such as foundation data

and its metadata will be common and applications, new findings will be shared across disciplines. New ideas will form emerging fields as openness invites more participants to collaborate and challenge the status quo. Examples of this are systems biology defined through the 20th century

and entered the academy in 1966 with the first international symposium at Case Institute of Technology which today is the Case Western Reserve University and by 2003 many academic departments were formed with that name.

Today's systems biology is central to the study of intersections of many subjects where computational work addresses massive amounts of data generated by the explosion of the omics such as genomics, epigenomics, phenomics, proteomics, and economics.

We see established centers for cancer systems biology dedicated to the studying of complex molecular systems of cancers such as leukemia, melanoma, and others. Clearly this is a catalyst for change and this is transformational

in how open science approaches new applications and makes scientific breakthroughs. Transparency will be a central issue in conducting science as well as publishing science. This may translate into more quality control measures that allow for greater participation in citizen science activities

that encourage establishing greater collaboration, community credibility, and other participation in research. Crowdsourcing requires greater openness and funding will be critical for open science. And last but not least as something that Doby mentioned earlier, we want to note the impact

of the internet of things such as Alexa, Siri, and things of that nature, artificial intelligence, so the internet of things is not only in kitchens and living room parlors but now Amazon has announced that the voice assistant will be a companion to nearly everywhere with connections

to smart devices that will allow us to communicate about nearly everything. Whether considered internal or external, Alexa and related products will have a role in how we find out about all things whether we want to or not.

Moving on to our philanthropic partners, we want to mention the philanthropic partners who contribute to the impacts on grey literature. Some of these examples include the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative in San Francisco that calls out for open source developments to cure diseases, the Allen Institute in Seattle

that just launched its second round of open scope competition in neurosciences, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation in Seattle that has been adamant about open publishing, and finally the Stewart and Linda Resnick that gave the California Institute of Technology, Caltech,

its largest gift to address climate change. Next we move on to the responsibilities of openness such as repurposing content, data management, rights, et cetera. This was based off of the Fosters Best Principles from the European Commission,

foster being facilitate open science training for European research. And the diagram on your left represents the process of open data curation from hypotheses, data collection, processing, storing, and results, long-term preservation, publication

and distribution, reuse, and as you can see, the cycle continues. As you can see from the right, some of those are examples of products that may go

through this process including, you know, your open notebooks, open peer review, open access, and so on. Next is the Fosters Taxonomy on Open Science. So this workflow covers open access, open data, open, a lot of opens here, open reproducible research, open science definitions, open science evaluation,

open science guidelines, open science policies, open science projects, open science tools that lead into other areas shown on the screen which are more open products as you can see there.

And then we have the European Open Science Cloud which I have to say is very, very impressive. The European Open Science Cloud, probably a lot of you are involved in open air or the European Open Science Cloud, so I won't go over this too much.

It's an overarching framework that encompasses several components to support and promote science in the European Union at a national, regional, and institutional level. The European Open Science Cloud aims to do a lot of the heavy lifting that allows scholars to concentrate on their own work rather than the process of making their work open.

The YASK Hub also operates alongside Open Air, an open access scientific repository that links peer review literature to associated data. The diagram on the upper left represents where open air begins and the YASK takes over.

One of the advantages that the European Open Science Cloud has is that they have the human connection. So in addition to providing all of the expertise within the Open Science as a Service,

they also have human facilitators in all of the European countries to help researchers curate their data. So that brings us to Open Science in the US which was briefly covered.

The best way to describe Open Science in the US is that it's a patchwork of diverse players from government, nonprofits, research university corporations, and partnerships. There's a dizzying array of options for services, platforms,

storage options, and data management. So although it's possible for a researcher to bootstrap an open data system based on the current infrastructure, the time investment needed to find appropriate elements to coordinate all of this into a cohesive system doesn't come easy because the scholar has

to put all the pieces of the puzzle together. And as you can imagine, this takes a lot of time, effort, and energy. So that brings me to the conclusion which is the analogy

of the Open Science Band or the Song of Open Science. So this is from the Copyright Clearance Center podcast that explored science, technology, and math tech trends over the next five years. And the analogy they used was of a band. So you have a drummer, you have a guitarist, you have a singer,

and all these people come together, they create music, and they all partner together to create something beautiful. And let's see here. Band members are needed to represent all stakeholders to tone down some

of the competition, raise the volume on concern for the customer experience. And this is how we can best call out Open Science principles to fuel a host of new products, applications, and methods of dissemination by promoting more openness and greater collaboration.

So with that, that's my presentation. Any comments or questions?