An analysis of the effects of sharing research data, code, and preprints on citations

Posted in OJAp Papers, Open Access with tags , , , , , on May 27, 2024 by telescoper

Whenever researchers ask me why I am an advocate of open science the response that first occurs to me is somewhat altruistic: sharing results and data is good for the whole community, as it enables the proper progress of research through independent scrutiny. There is however a selfish reason for open science, demonstrates rather well by a recent preprint on arXiv. The abstract is here:

Calls to make scientific research more open have gained traction with a range of societal stakeholders. Open Science practices include but are not limited to the early sharing of results via preprints and openly sharing outputs such as data and code to make research more reproducible and extensible. Existing evidence shows that adopting Open Science practices has effects in several domains. In this study, we investigate whether adopting one or more Open Science practices leads to significantly higher citations for an associated publication, which is one form of academic impact. We use a novel dataset known as Open Science Indicators, produced by PLOS and DataSeer, which includes all PLOS publications from 2018 to 2023 as well as a comparison group sampled from the PMC Open Access Subset. In total, we analyze circa 122’000 publications. We calculate publication and author-level citation indicators and use a broad set of control variables to isolate the effect of Open Science Indicators on received citations. We show that Open Science practices are adopted to different degrees across scientific disciplines. We find that the early release of a publication as a preprint correlates with a significant positive citation advantage of about 20.2% on average. We also find that sharing data in an online repository correlates with a smaller yet still positive citation advantage of 4.3% on average. However, we do not find a significant citation advantage for sharing code. Further research is needed on additional or alternative measures of impact beyond citations. Our results are likely to be of interest to researchers, as well as publishers, research funders, and policymakers.

Colavizza et al., arXiv:2404.16171

This analysis isn’t based on astrophysics, but I think the relatively high citation rates of papers in the Open Journal of Astrophysics are at least in part due to the fact that virtually all our papers are all available as preprints arXiv prior to publication. Citations aren’t everything, of course, but the positive effect of preprinting is an important factor in communicating the science you are doing.

General Science at Maynooth

Posted in Education, Maynooth with tags , , , , , , , on May 27, 2024 by telescoper

Following on – sort of – from yesterday’s post – here is a little promotional video about the ‘Omnibus’ Bachelor of Science undergraduate course (codename MH201). I have blogged about this course before (e.g. here) but this gives me an opportunity to repeat the salient points.

Currently, most students doing Science subjects here in Maynooth enter on the General Science programme a four-year Omnibus BSc course that involves doing four subjects in the first year, but becoming increasingly specialized thereafter. That’s not unlike the Natural Sciences course I did at Cambridge, except that students at Maynooth can do both Mathematical Physics and Experimental Physics in the first year as separate choices. I’d recommend anyone who wants to do Physics in the long run to do both of these, as they do complement each other. Other possibilities include Chemistry, Computer Science, Biology, etc.

In Year 1 students do four subjects (one of which has to be Mathematics). That is narrowed down to three in Year 2 and two in Year 3. In their final year, students can stick with two subjects for a Joint Honours (Double Major) degree, or specialise in one, for Single Honours.

I like this programme very much because it does not force the students to choose a specialism before they have had a taste of the subject, and that it is flexible enough to accommodate Joint Honours qualifications in, e.g., Theoretical Physics and Mathematics. It also allows us to enrol students onto Physics degrees who have not done Physics or Applied Mathematics as part of the Leaving Certificate.

Anyway, this video features Oisín Davey, who took Mathematical Physics, Experimental Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics in his first year. As a matter of fact I taught him in Year 1 (Mechanics & Special Relativity) and Year 2 (Vector Calculus and Fourier Series) but, despite that, as he explains, he has decided to persist with Mathematical Physics. He will be in the final year next academic year, after he returns from his summer in CERN, and I’ll be back from sabbatical.

Something in the Air..

Posted in Barcelona, Biographical with tags , , , on May 26, 2024 by telescoper

It’s been a warm and rather humid weekend in Barcelona. Yesterday was particularly stifling, with the heat and lack of breeze making things rather uncomfortable. The Air Quality indicator  reached “Poor” largely due to high levels of NO2, no doubt from vehicle exhaust fumes. It surprises me that so many people sit out at the pavement tables outside  restaurants having meals when it’s hot and the air is thick with nasty stuff. Al Fresco is supposed to mean “in the fresh air”! I much prefer to dine indoors, unless it’s very late at night.

Today was a little better except that there was resurfacing work going on  outside my flat on RambladeCatalunya. I knew it was coming, as they’ve been doing other nearby roads over the past few weekends. It was a little noisy, even on the 6th floor, but that didn’t bother me as much as the tar fumes!

Anyway, all this has made me decide not to attempt to extend my stay here beyond my current lease, which expires at the end of June. I’ll take the last two months of my sabbatical somewhere a bit cooler!

Free Atkins!

Posted in Biographical, Education, The Universe and Stuff with tags , , , , , , on May 26, 2024 by telescoper

I took my first degree in the Natural Sciences Tripos at the University of Cambridge. This involved doing a very general first year comprising four different elements that could be chosen flexibly. I quickly settled on Physics, Chemistry and  Mathematics for Natural Sciences to reflect my A-level results but was struggling for the fourth. In the end I picked the one that seemed most like Physics, a course called Crystalline Materials. I didn’t like that at all, and wish I’d done some Biology instead – Biology of Cells and Biology of Organisms were both options – or even Geology, but I stuck with it for the first year.

Having to do such a wide range of subjects was very challenging. The timetable was densely packed and the pace was considerable. In the second year, however, I was able to focus on Mathematics and Physics and although it was still intense it was a bit more focussed. I ended up doing Theoretical Physics in my final year, including a theory project.

My best teacher at School, Dr Geoeff Swinden,  was a chemist (he had a doctorate in organic chemistry from Oxford University) and when I went to Cambridge I fully expected to specialisze in Chemistry rather than Physics. I loved the curly arrows and all that. But two things changed. One was that I found the Physics content of the first year far more interesting – and the lecturers and tutors far more inspiring – than Chemistry, and the other was that my considerable ineptitude at practical work made me doubt that I had a future in a chemistry laboratory. And so it came to pass that I switched allegiance to Physics, a decision I am very glad I made.

(It was only towards the end of my degree that I started to take Astrophysics seriously as a possible specialism, but that’s another story…)

Anyway, when I turned up at Cambridge over 40 years ago to begin my course, and having Chemistry as a probable end point, I bought all the recommended text books, one of which was Physical Chemistry by P.W. Atkins. I found a picture (above) of the 1982 edition which may well be the one I bought (although I vaguely remember the one I had being in paperback). I thought it was a very good book, and it has gone into many subsequent editions. I also found the Physical part of Chemistry quite straightforward because it is basically Physics. I even got higher marks in Chemistry in the first year than I did in Physics but that didn’t alter my decision to drop Chemistry after the first year. When I did so, I followed tradition and sold my copy to a new undergraduate along with the other books relating to courses that I dropped.

Yesterday I found out that Peter Atkins has decided to make one of his books available to download. The book concerned is however not the compendious tome I bought, but a shorter summary called Concepts in Physical Chemistry, which was published in 1995. This is no doubt a very useful text for beginning Chemistry students so I thought I’d pass on this information. You can download it here, although you have to do it chapter by chapter in PDF files.

P.S. Chemistry in Spanish is ‘Química’. Since Physics and Chemistry share the same building in the University of Barcelona, where I am currently working, I frequently walk past rooms with doors marked ‘Quim’ (but I have never taken the opportunity to enter one).

Maynooth University Library Cat Update

Posted in Maynooth with tags on May 25, 2024 by telescoper

I thought I’d share this image of Maynooth University Library Cat, complete with daisy bonnet. He doesn’t look entirely gruntled with his new headgear, and I’m not sure how long it stayed on his bonce, but it’s nice to see him in fine fettle, though he’s getting a few more grey hairs. Aren’t we all?

Three New Publications at the Open Journal of Astrophysics

Posted in OJAp Papers, Open Access, The Universe and Stuff with tags , , , , , , , , on May 25, 2024 by telescoper

After a very busy and unusual week, it’s time to get back to normal with the usual  Saturday roundup of business at the  Open Journal of Astrophysics. If you want to know how many papers we have published so far this year (Vol. 7), the answer is 42. The total published by OJAp is now 157. We’re still on track to publish around 100 papers this year, possibly more, compared to last year’s 50.

All the members of this week’s trio are in the folder marked Cosmology and Nongalactic Astrophysics, and indeed all three relate in one way or another to the topic of weak gravitational lensing.  All three were published on Wednesday 22nd May 2024.

First one up is “Joint constraints from cosmic shear, galaxy-galaxy lensing and galaxy clustering: internal tension as an indicator of intrinsic alignment modelling error” which is by Simon Samuroff (Northeastern U., USA), Andresa Campos (Carnegie Mellon U., USA), Anna Porredon (Bochum, Germany) and Jonathan Blazek (Edinburgh, UK).   A combined statistical approach to the identification of errors arising in cosmic shear analysis due to intrinsic alignments.

Here is a screen grab of the overlay, which includes the abstract:

You can read the paper directly on arXiv here.

The second paper to present is “A unified linear intrinsic alignment model for elliptical and disc galaxies and the resulting ellipticity spectra” by Basundhara Ghosh (Bangalore, India), with Kai Nussbaumer, Eileen Sophie Giesel & Björn Malte Schäfer (Heidelberg, Germany). It presents a discussion of the physical origin of intrinsic alignments of both elliptical and disk galaxies and the implications for cosmological studies

The overlay looks like this:

 

You can read this paper directly on the arXiv here.

The last paper of this batch is entitled “Neural style transfer of weak lensing mass maps”  and proposes a generative model for the mass-production of weak-lensing maps. The authors are Masato Shirasaki and Shiro Ikeda (both of the University of Tokyo, Japan)

Here is a screengrab of the overlay:

 

To read the accepted version of this on the arXiv please go here.
That’s all for now. I will do another update next week.

 

 

Searching for Luminous High-Redshift Galaxies with Euclid’s Early Release Observations

Posted in Euclid, The Universe and Stuff on May 24, 2024 by telescoper

As it’s Friday afternoon I thought I would share one of the little videos I mentioned in the previous post. It’s only just over a minute long but it is worth listening to, not least for the dulcet tones of Henry Joy McCracken as he explains the science.

The Euclid preprint related to this work can be found here.

Euclid Paper Day!

Posted in Barcelona, Euclid, Maynooth, The Universe and Stuff with tags , , , , , , , , on May 24, 2024 by telescoper

This morning’s arXiv update brought the expected deluge of preprints from Euclid. You can find details of all fifteen of the new articles here. Ten of them relate to the Early Release Observations of which five were announced yesterday and five last November. These are essentially byproducts of the testing and calibration phase of the Euclid mission rather than the main cosmological survey. ESA is making a series of short videos about these results which I will share on here from time to time.

Of more direct relevance to cosmologists such as myself are the following five reference papers:

The overview paper, led by Yannick Mellier (Euclid Consortium Lead), giving a general description of the mission capabilities and science goals, will be the main reference paper and just about every active member of the Euclid Consortium is on the author list (including myself). That’s over a thousand people, not quite at the level of the Large Hadron Collider but getting there. I do think we need to find a better way of giving credit to work in large collaborations than through authorship, but until someone comes up with a workable scheme, and people responsible for hiring researchers adopt it, we’re stuck with what we’ve got. At least I can say that I’ve read that paper (which is 94 pages long, including the author list)

Papers II-IV are technical articles relating to Euclid’s instruments and their calibration, which will also be important references for the survey part of the Euclid mission. Paper V is about the Flagship simulations and the mock catalogues produced therefrom; I discussed these a while ago here. It is led by Francisco Castander of Institut de Ciencies de l’Espai, who organized the meeting I attended recently here in Barcelona.

These papers now now be peer-reviewed and, assuming they are accepted, published in a special issue of Astronomy & Astrophysics (A&A).

New Results from Euclid

Posted in Euclid, Maynooth, The Universe and Stuff with tags , , , , on May 23, 2024 by telescoper

As it was foretold, exciting new results from the European Space Agency’s Euclid mission have now been released.

You can read more about these images here.

Together with the five images released last November that makes a total of ten Early Release Observations from the pre-survey phase of Euclid. It’s not all about the pictures, however. Today also saw the release of ten scientific papers to go with these images, as well as five reference papers for the main survey. You can find them all, with accompanying information here. They will be announced on arXiv tomorrow.

You might also be interested to read my Euclid piece on RTÉ Brainstorm which has just appeared. This is not just about the new images, but gives an update on what Euclid has been up to since launch, and what we can expect in the future. There’s also a version adapted for Maynooth University PR purposes here. It includes this quote:

Today’s release of new data and technical papers from Euclid is exciting in itself but also marks the start, after months of painstaking calibration and testing of the instruments, of Euclid’s main cosmological survey. We are on the threshold of a new era in cosmology. Maynooth is the only University in Ireland to be involved in this mission and it is very exciting to be at the forefront of such an important scientific development.

I’m also quoted in a piece in the Irish Times. You’ll probably find the article blocked by a paywall but my bit is:

Relativistic Hurling?

Posted in GAA with tags , , , on May 22, 2024 by telescoper

I was intrigued to see this graphic accompanying an article about hurling. Notice that the left hand side shows the field equations of Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity and some expressions to do with quantum mechanics. Hurling is indeed an extraordinary – and extraordinarily fast – sport but is the article implying that classical physics is inadequate to describe it? Perhaps it is implying that through hurling we will at last arrive at a Theory of Everything?