Retro- and Prospectives on Open Science

Video in TIB AV-Portal: Retro- and Prospectives on Open Science

Formal Metadata

Retro- and Prospectives on Open Science
Title of Series
CC Attribution - NoDerivatives 4.0 International:
You are free to use, copy, distribute and transmit the work or content in unchanged form for any legal purpose as long as the work is attributed to the author in the manner specified by the author or licensor.
Release Date

Content Metadata

Subject Area
Interview with Ian Bruno, Stuart Chalk, Martin Hicks, Carsten Kettner, Leah McEwen, recorded at the BEILSTEIN OPEN SCIENCE SYMPOSIUM (22 – 24 May 2017). At the end of the Beilstein-Institut’s symposium on Open Science in Chemistry, Carsten Kettner interviews the panel of Ian Bruno, Stuart Chalk, Martin Hicks and Leah McEwen on themes and perspectives for open science in chemistry that came out of the meeting. Listen to the answers on the following themes: 1) Open science and chemistry. Is it a contradiction? 2) Are chemists behind other disciplines, because for example in physics or biology, the projects are often bigger and require collaboration? In chemistry, the projects are often sufficient for one group to carry out. 3) What is the perspective for the chemistry lab of the future? The panel, each an expert from a different area of communicating chemical science information, gave some fascinating insights on how chemistry research might move to become more open, with more collaboration, and a higher degree of digitization in the laboratory. It will be interesting to see how many of these predictions come true.
Keywords open science databases
Germanic peoples Chemistry Thermoforming Host (biology)
Physical chemistry Area Sense District Kreide <Gestein> Organische Chemie Recreational drug use Spectrometer Growth medium Oven Chemistry Molecule Island Fire Infrastructure Functional group Lactitol Chemical compound Library (computing) Zunderbeständigkeit Pharmacy Stuffing Hope, Arkansas
Cheminformatics River delta Recreational drug use Korngrenze Chemistry Machinability Ageing Data conversion Controller (control theory) Tool steel Active site Sea level Process (computing) Setzen <Verfahrenstechnik> Area Man page Chemical reaction Chemische Industrie Electronic cigarette Volumetric flow rate Gesundheitsstörung Materials science Chemical compound Base (chemistry) Pharmacy
three. so over the last two and a half days about twenty to host its.
symposium on the open signs and it comes to level the future almost fifty per to supplement assembled at the notary archdiocese avoid in busan germany and the speaker us came from the diverse edges from phorm form funding agencies publishers from data host earth's researchers in the industry and.
academia and they have somebody sure to discuss the issue of open signs open data are often of data sharing in life sciences and particular arm chemistry subsequent panel discussions are provided the audience's the opportunity to come to god.
in more detail watch as a stand points or for example the publishers of the funding agencies some reason and own with regards to talk and science so um yeah let's let's talk about organ science social science and chemistry is a contradiction stewart. i don't think it's a contradiction i think it's inherent in what chemist to their supposed to be spare scientists are supposed to share the research that they generate and of course a lot of that these days is based on data so if if if they're going to do good science and help the community i think they have to share their data. a year it's doing anything so are you asking about open fire date and sharing. so open is the angle than i don't think it's ad business model that functions you know historically in chemistry. i think it it's. think it's been a very interphone biggest the environment however when we look at chemistry collaborating across disciplines with say that biological area we can start seeing some of the values and practices shift more towards an open environment and sharing and and realizing values that come with with broadening the conversation and and pulling to. for people to the table. so yes is a contradiction of them all the mostly contained is the question is what about the distance the might be to open science and chemists catalyst to cooperate chemist do you publish that data to support a science think it's just a question as to what. since and in what ways they publish the results from where the way we could help them published as more effectively so they can be more readily shed and built on by other people. i think chemistry slightly different from from some of the others like ball into your home and physics in chemistry producing often their own new molecules. i hope hatch there's going to be turned out to be important drugs or something about that and we value so i think other areas of science have a little bit easier to share things because your precious and analyzing stuff so you get data coming out of a lock spectrometer something which one group could use in one way but another. you could use another way so i think chemistry needs to learn that lee said from these other disciplines and open up a little bit more and had some very good talks here where it's been shown it can be done differently and you do benefit from collaboration and being open. as ways to. still do your work great discoveries and also provides the the basis for shall we say industrial products so this means that in general we agree that he is not into a contradiction lights come see little is a little bit behind the other disciplines. can the weasel before that it's a barge as a pharmacist i used to work in chicago way shun projects and that requires data sharing where it's chemists let's say. it's a little bit smaller own and it is sufficient to irk rest in one leg up to synthesize new compounds are what they are most not the big projects stewart was agreed that in the sense that some from academic perspective when you look at a chemist they are somewhat introspect. if they are you thinking about their their piece of the bigger puzzle and in a general sense that was just articulate probably haven't felt a need to reach out to other scientists even clear even close in the area that they're working in to necessarily i'm collaborate because maybe historically also to some extent that's more of a. the company competition between other chemists that are maybe doing research in a similar area so yeah i think it's just the way in which chemistry has evolved and has it has been the island acolytes terrorists as an act of small scale an approach to it and to researching chemistry probably is a big part. and why it's kept separate now everything is is done at a very small scale i'm sad and i think also an part of that reinforces kind of again that interest focus and and that chemists not thinking about what happens beyond their laboratory. i'm except you know with their particular research thread going out into the world's so in fact as i was thinking about this data chemist do love to search the literature and look at data profiles across a lot of chemicals as the as they do their research but they don't think that that act about that that actually comes from all of. their colleagues and it you know isn't is compiled into these into these major databases that they search so it i don't think they're aware of the community that they participate in even though they're actually engaging that community indirectly. they could make two points thing because of the media the dispensers bowed to physics to share data across most projects has been much more investment in infrastructure that has enabled dr hofmann and support for the free sharing of data but i think is also worth of the keen back those. world says sort of like the eighteen hundreds were and chemists were actually starting to generate tater time before the internet the full we have the technological possibilities that we do people did start collecting data together and compiling resources and it was just a very different way of sharing intended to be much more to the oven and of course post on its cheetos degree was founded.
the next to it. the i think a lot of the sort of issues we're talking about in the comparison site so a chemistry lang little bit behind they are historical in nature and i think. so many say twenty five thirty years ago i really wasn't possible to share in the way that we can do now with the internet and i think we need to develop new ways of working together and i think it's probably going to be something much more the younger chemist products are more open to find. new ways and exchanging information very readily. and ok people did this previously been to write a letter and eight weeks to get their nowadays you can never video stream from the lab and watch and in the experimental the blogs and whatever so all these opportunities are there just a little time for them to soar to percolate through and have an impact so. martin was a perspective for the chemistry of the future. why i think the it was difficult to simon we trying to. to get to the bottom of that this meeting because of the others going on as well but i think the what we're seeing now is that the. whitman in the lab or trees is becoming much more. nobody else a digitized sixteen becoming interoperable. and the control of that equipment is usually done by computers so i do we need to move up a level where the machines are talking to each other more readily and that the data is becoming more readily exported the moment it's it's even if people are. willing or wanting to shed a tear is often a lot of man who work involved in doing it times a if we can or to make these processes we will know start to digitise chemistry age will be coming in various ways i think in part many to be looking at chemistry in different ways to. to to create new reactions which were very well in an automated environment we haven't got that far along those lines jetty the so as a lot to do but i think there's it serve quite clear that within the new been in the next few years with the interoperability increasing with the internet of things and when these. devices which in part was seeing more of an at home and i with our small bases in that circle communicating with each other animals that are happening things have changed a little once you come and on this think i have a natural martin said their thing we had a paterson eighteen a's new and exciting ways of. doing science try much based on this automation and kind of continuous flow types of chemistry and i think we got the opportunity to that to look at how we can also take a bunch of those technologies to capture the sort of conditions in which an experiment is done the parameters of been used on the instrument. this package of those up in a way that enables just too much more efficiently and effectively communicate the data that underlies the science is being built. i'm still reflecting are talking about a very lack of discipline in chemistry and that at this conference three primarily focused on one facet of that and that's the faster the tense interface of biological end of things and there's still a very large chemical industry and also very large engineering industry. graham over those so it's kind of hard to see one and one and a future for that but to trend that i.c.m. and working with the scientists that i do have are now are one and the funders not only are mandating more open but they're actually mandating were. the focus in in research projects on how this how this work that you're doing with this public money will translate out to value for society you know so they have to have some kind of outreach programs and other things like that and in part of the result of this actually is that chemists have been collaborating a lot more with other disciplines. delta sort of show the value to characterize their compounds in different contexts and show the value of the potential their compounds not just for drugs but also for materials and different applications and so that's that's one shift that i see i think again as those collaboration is happen more they have to open their conversations more they have to open their work and. firemen it's more the other thing that we've that's already been talked about quite a lot is the technology is becoming more and more distributed and so it's kind of inserting itself sent to the chemists workflow more and more and i do think some of the processes that are have already cropped up an industry in that are cropping up in like the flow chemistry areas will start percolating into the academic. environment is that they need to stay ahead and they're not going to be taken seriously if the if their workload is and isn't up to speed. oh i think at this point are you always hope that we are just about the tipping point where maybe that's a traditional chemists to have their certain set of ways of doing things. will hopefully see the advantage of automation of using the myriad of resources that are going to come in online are already online and so that that maybe there can be a a a pretty good shift towards focusing more in the lab on actually you know obviously. according the science is being done at a really as detail if not more details level than has historically been done but the that is done using tools that make make it much easier for them to do that and which means they can actually spend more time actually doing the signs i think that's where we all hope it's going to go and i think we're very close to that tipping point. things so you see were the part of the organizing team of the serb symposium notes the to be off martin i like to thank you very much for giving us a hand for identifying the speakers sorting or the top weeks or are willing to those sessions and. for being here thank you very much and i think this was a wage discussion find a discussion want looking back on what we're after his cars were lost to an hour days i'm so why have done a lot of interviews certain the previous days and if you're interested to watch more what people want others stand.
point one overs perspectives of the of the people plays have a look into all the other movies in a long and all such.