Archive for research

Citations from Beyond the Grave

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , on April 11, 2024 by telescoper

It seems to be widely believed (by those responsible for research assessment) that what is important about research papers and their authors is not the research they describe but how many citations they attract. Thinking about this recently yet another anomaly in this attitude struck me arising from the fact that papers continue to attract citations long after the authors are dead. It seems surprising therefore institutions have not tried harder to use the citations of deceased researchers to boost their research profile. The last Research Excellence Framework in the UK allowed institutions to claim some credit for work by researchers who had moved on to another institution. Why then not allow institutions to claim credit for researchers who passed away?

The obvious problem with this idea is that it might encourage University managers to do even more than they do already to work their staff into an early grave. It seems to me the answer to that is obvious. Researchers should be allowed to stipulate in their last will and testament whom they would like to benefit from post-mortem citations. Or indeed carry some form of donor card…

The free market solution would of course be to set up a market to allow the citations accrued after death of a researcher to be traded.

Another anomaly is that the deceased are generally – though see here for an exception – not allowed to be authors on new papers. I think this is highly discriminatory. You might argue that a dead person can contribute neither to the writing of a paper nor contribute to the scientific discussions that led to it, nor even read a draft of the text, yet I have first-hand experience of many living people who do none of those things yet still manage to appear in the author lists of many papers…

In future the only mark of recognition allowed on a researcher’s headstone will be their H-index

Finally, let me remark that a researcher’s H-index, a quantity often used by institutions to inform decisions about promotion, also continues to increase after the researcher has kicked the bucket. Why, then, should the dead be barred from promotion? Perhaps there should be a new job category of PHR (PostHumous Researcher)? The departed could even take up senior management positions where they could do just as good a job as those in such positions already without incurring any salary costs. This approach could address many of the grave problems facing modern universities.

It is high time institutions adopted a much more inclusive approach to their late researchers who, instead of merely pushing up the daises, could be used to push up the citations.

Changes at the Open Journal of Astrophysics

Posted in Open Access, Maynooth with tags , , , , , , , on April 1, 2024 by telescoper

Regular readers of this blog – both of them – will have noticed that I haven’t posted any new publications from the Open Journal of Astrophysics for a couple of weeks. The reason for this is that we are switching to a new system of publishing that automatically integrates the Scholastica platform with Crossref, the system that (among many other things) keeps track of citations to published articles.

Up to now, I have had to prepare manually an XML file containing the metadata for each paper for upload, then send it to a colleague to register with Crossref. There are two problems with this. One is that transcribing the information from each overlay is prone to errors (made by me), especially if there is a long author list. The other problem is that it is rather slow and inefficient, which wasn’t such a problem when we were only publishing a few papers, but now that we are handling much more it is taking up too much time.

The obvious solution is to cut out the middle man (i.e. me) and register everything with Crossref directly from our platform. That will ensure that what goes to Crossref will be exactly the same as on our website and it will go there much faster. Another advantage is that if there is an error on the platform, such as a spelling mistake in an author name, correcting it there will automatically update the metadata on Crossref. You have no idea how much time and frustration this will save. Up to now we have to raise a ticket with Crossref for their staff to make the change, which can take a while to complete.

Scholastica offers a way to do this integration, but it doesn’t work with our existing Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs), which have the format 10.21105/astro.1234.56789, because it doesn’t allow us to include the “astro” which we need it to do because we share the prefix (10.21105) with another journal, the Journal of Open Source Software and we need to keep the two separate; they use 10.21105/joss at the start of their DOIs. After much to-ing and fro-ing we were unable to persuade Scholastica to change their policy, so to use their integration we have been forced to change prefix. Fortunately, Maynooth University (which runs Maynooth Academic Publishing, the official publisher of OJAp) is registered to mint its own DOIs so we can switch to a new prefix (10.33232) and avoid potential problems with the old one.

This change seems straightforward but it requires Crossref to switch the “ownership” of the journal and give us permission to add new papers with the same journal title “The Open Journal of Astrophysics” from what is effect a new publisher. This is a straightforward process, but has been a bit slower than expected because of the Easter break. I expect it to be completed in a week or so, at the latest.

It is important to stress that this change only affects the DOIs and registration of new papers. Existing papers are not affected at all: they continue with the old DOIs. The DOI is meant to be a persistent identifier so this is as it should be. The name of our website domain (astro.theoj.org) remains unchanged too. In other words, nothing visible to authors will change except for the format of the DOIs and the fact we go from acceptance to publication even faster.

If al this seems rather boring, that’s because it is. But please bear with us while we complete this change. It’s definitely going to be worth it in the long run, for me if nobody else!

Academic Publishing: Never Mind the Quality…

Posted in Open Access with tags , , , , , , , , on March 16, 2024 by telescoper

I was interested to see that the latest issue of Private Eye contains a short item about academic publishing:

I’ve heard many stories of this type, with publishers putting pressure on their Editorial Boards to allow more papers to be published. This is undoubtedly motivated by the Gold Open Access model in which authors or their institutions are forced to pay thousands of dollars upfront to publish papers. Since the publisher makes an eye-watering profit on every article, why not publish as many as possible? The recent decision by the Royal Astronomical Society adopt this model is highly likely to have a similar effect there, as its journals will be able to increase revenue at the expense of quality. Under the older subscription-based system, publishers could sell their product to libraries on the basis of quality but they no longer need to do that to make a profit.

The academic publishing industry is perverse enough without adding this obvious incentive to lower editorial standards. There are far too many low quality papers being published already, a situation driven not only by the profiteering of the publishing industry but also by the absurd policies of academia itself which require researchers to churn out huge numbers of papers to get promotion, win research grants, etc.

This part of the academic system is definitely broken. To fix it, academic publishing must be taken out of the hands of commercial publishers and put into the care of research institutions whose libraries are perfectly capable of publishing and curating articles on a non-profit basis. But that won’t be enough: we need also to overhaul how we do research assessment. The principles outlined in the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment would be a start.

My First Maynooth PhD!

Posted in Maynooth, The Universe and Stuff with tags , , , , , , on March 14, 2024 by telescoper

Today saw the viva voce examination of the first PhD student at Maynooth to have completed their degree under my supervision, although in this case the student started his postgraduate degree under another supervisor and I only took over responsibility when that person retired, a few years ago.

Anyway, I delayed my return to Barcelona so I could be present today. It’s not normal practice for the supervisor of a PhD to be present at the examination of the candidate. The rules allow for it – usually at the request of the student – but the supervisor must remain silent unless and until invited to comment by the examiners. I think it’s a very bad idea for both student and supervisor, and the one example that I can recall of a supervisor attending the PhD examination of his student was a very uncomfortable experience. My presence today was limited to supplying a couple of anticipatory bottles of champagne and then waiting nervously for the examination to finish.

I always feel nervous when a student of mine is having their viva voce examination, probably because I’m a bit protective and such an occasion always brings back painful memories of the similar ordeal I went through thirty-odd years ago. However, this is something a PhD candidate has to go through on their own, a sort of rite of passage during which the supervisor has to stand aside and let them stand up for their own work.

The examination turned out to be quite a long one – about three and a half hours – but ended happily. Unfortunately, I had to leave the celebrations early in order to do yet another Euclid-related Zoom call but when that was over I was able to find the pub to which everyone had adjourned and had a pint there with them. I have a feeling the celebrants might make a night of it tonight, but I’m a bit too tired after recent exertions to join them.

The student’s name, by the way, is Aonghus Hunter-McCabe and the title of the thesis is Differential geometric and general relativistic techniques in non-relativistic laboratory systems. If you’re looking for a postdoc to work in related areas then Aonghus might just be the person you want!

P.S. About a decade ago I did a post on the occasion of the PhD examination of another student of mine, Ian Harrison. I found out recently that Ian now has a permanent position at Cardiff University. Congratulations to him!

On “Purpose-Led Publishing”

Posted in Open Access with tags , , , , , , , , , , on March 6, 2024 by telescoper

I was flabbergasted by the cheek of an article that recently appeared in Physics World by Michael Brooks announcing that:

I can’t speak about the American Institute of Physics or the American Physical Society but in the context of the Institute of Physics – of which I am a Fellow and in whose house magazine the article appears – I draw your attention to the last sentence of the above excerpt which contains a commitment to “invest funds generated from publishing back into research” (my emphasis).

Really? The IOP invests in research? That’s news to me. How do I apply for a grant? Will they fund my next PhD student?

The IOP invests its funds in many things – many of them worthy – but it does not spend a significant part of the vast income it generates from its publishing house on research. The claim that it does is just dishonest. There’s point in mincing words.

This is an important distinction, particularly so that publishing in most IOP journals now requires the payment of a hefty Article Processing Charge (APC; Artificial Profit Charge would be more apt) which often has to be paid for out of research grants. Previously the revenue of IOP Publishing was appropriated from library budgets through subscriptions, so physicists were less aware of just how much the IOP was raking in. Now that researchers are having to find the funds themselves from research grants it has become more obvious that the IOP is actually a drain on research funds, not a source of them. The APC is a levy on research, designed to generate funds for other things. I think this model is indefensible. What gives the IOP the right to impose charges that far exceed the cost of disseminating scientific results in order to appropriate funds for its other activities?

Moreover, even if the IOP did fund research, what benefit would that be to a researcher in Spain, South Korea or Singapore or indeed anywhere outside the UK and Ireland?

The slogan for the initiative described in the article is “Purpose-led Publishing”. That reminds me of an old saying from systems theory: the Purpose Of a System Is What it Does (POSIWID). What the system does in this case is to raise funds for the IOP. That’s its purpose. Everything else is just marketing spiel.

The claim that IOP Publishing does not make a profit is disingenuous too. It does make a substantial profit. The only difference between it and the likes of Elsevier is where the profits go. A true not-for-profit publisher would charge only at the level to cover the costs of publication. The Purpose that should be leading Publishing in physics is the dissemination of scientific results, not the generation of revenue for sundry other things.

I have avoided publishing in IOP journals for many years because I think the approach of IOP Publishing is unethical. Now I have decided that I no longer wish to be associated with the IOP in any way. I have paid the subscription for 2024 but when that lapses I won’t renew it. Enough is enough.

The Little Book of Irish Research

Posted in Euclid, Maynooth, The Universe and Stuff with tags , on January 30, 2024 by telescoper

A few months ago, I blogged on the occasion of the launch by Simon Harris TD, Minister for Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science, of the Little Book of Irish Research. This book, which is aimed at school students, so is written at an elementary level, gives quick summaries of areas of research that the general public said that they were interested in, grouped into sixteen themes, and it will be distributed to schools all round Ireland.

if you want to read it here is a PDF file of the whole thing for you to download at your leisure. When I posted about it last time I hadn’t actually seen a hard copy, but I finally got my hands on one:

I can now confirm that it is indeed a little book. I think we’ll find it useful for our own outreach events, open days, etc, in the Department of Theoretical Physics, and so will the many colleagues in other Departments in other universities and research institutes whose work is also featured.

I was very gratified to see myself get a mention (on page 41), though it’s not really about me but about Euclid which has generated considerable interest in the general public already and is set to continue doing that for many years. As you can see, there’s also a double-page spread of JWST, though unfortunately it does not name the scientists involved; Paddy Kavanagh is the main man at Maynooth for matters JWST.

IOAP Diamond Open Access Awards 2024

Posted in Open Access with tags , , , , , , , , , , on January 17, 2024 by telescoper

A week or so before Christmas I posted about a new organization called Irish Open Access Publishers whose mission statement is as follows:

Irish Open Access Publishers (IOAP) is a community of practice driven by Irish open access publishers for Irish open access publishers.  The IOAP promotes engagement with the Diamond Open Access publishing model (free to publish and free to read) as well as indexing on the Directory of Open Access Journals and the Directory of Open Access Books. The aim of this dynamic community of practice is to promote publishing activity that is free of pay walls and publication embargoes to further the dissemination of high quality scholarly output to all in society.

These aims are laudable and I support them wholeheartedly. I should also mention that the Open Journal of Astrophysics is listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals here, where you will find details of all the papers we have published so far. This index is all part of the service. We have also been accepted for inclusion in Scopus, in case that matters to you.

Anyway, I thought I would remind readers of this blog (both of them) about the fact that the IOAP is offering a new set of awards, for which nominations are now open:

(Unfortunately the links in the above image are not clickable, but you can the award details here…)

Nominations for the first three categories are by self-nomination only. I will of course, on behalf of Maynooth Academic Publishing, the Editorial Board, the authors, and everyone who has helped behind the scenes, be nominating the Open Journal of Astrophysics.

Nominations for the final category, Outstanding Contribution to the OA Field are described thus:

Category 4 welcomes third party as well as self nominations from academics, students, librarians, research managers, academic leaders, publishers and other stakeholders across further and higher education for an individual who has made an outstanding contribution to open access publishing in Ireland. Nominations from scholarly societies and other scholarly organisations are also welcome. Nominations for individuals based in Northern Ireland are also invited.

Self nominations are restricted to individuals based in Ireland including Northern Ireland. Third party nominations are invited from individuals based in Ireland including Northern Ireland as well as individuals based overseas. All third party nominations must be for individuals practising in the field of open access publishing in Ireland including Northern Ireland solely.

Notice that nominations are not restricted to individuals based in Ireland. So, wherever you are, if you can think of any individual based in Ireland who has done enough to merit being described as having made an “outstanding contribution”, perhaps not only for being a long-term advocate of Diamond Open Access but also for setting up and being Managing Editor of a successful Diamond Open Access journal in the field of astrophysics, then please feel free to nominate me them. I hope you get the message. If you want subtle, you’ve come to the wrong place!

The nomination form is here. The closing date for nominations is 1st February 2024.

IOAP Diamond Open Access Awards 2024

Posted in Open Access with tags , , , , , , , , on December 18, 2023 by telescoper

Last week I found out about a new organization called Irish Open Access Publishers whose mission statement is as follows:

Irish Open Access Publishers (IOAP) is a community of practice driven by Irish open access publishers for Irish open access publishers.  The IOAP promotes engagement with the Diamond Open Access publishing model (free to publish and free to read) as well as indexing on the Directory of Open Access Journals and the Directory of Open Access Books. The aim of this dynamic community of practice is to promote publishing activity that is free of pay walls and publication embargoes to further the dissemination of high quality scholarly output to all in society.

These aims are laudable and I support them wholeheartedly. I should also mention that the Open Journal of Astrophysics is listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals here, where you will find details of all the papers we have published so far. This index is all part of the service.

The reason I found out about the existence of IOAP is that they are offering a new set of awards, for which nominations are now open:

(Unfortunately the links in the above image are not clickable, but you can the award details here…)

Nominations for the first three categories are by self-nomination only. I will of course, on behalf of Maynooth Academic Publishing, the Editorial Board, the authors, and everyone who has helped behind the scenes, be nominating the Open Journal of Astrophysics.

Nominations for the final category, Outstanding Contribution to the OA Field are described thus:

Category 4 welcomes third party as well as self nominations from academics, students, librarians, research managers, academic leaders, publishers and other stakeholders across further and higher education for an individual who has made an outstanding contribution to open access publishing in Ireland. Nominations from scholarly societies and other scholarly organisations are also welcome. Nominations for individuals based in Northern Ireland are also invited.

Self nominations are restricted to individuals based in Ireland including Northern Ireland. Third party nominations are invited from individuals based in Ireland including Northern Ireland as well as individuals based overseas. All third party nominations must be for individuals practising in the field of open access publishing in Ireland including Northern Ireland solely.

Notice that nominations are not restricted to individuals based in Ireland. So, wherever you are, if you can think of any individual based in Ireland who has done enough to merit being described as having made an “outstanding contribution”, perhaps not only for being a long-term advocate of Diamond Open Access but also for setting up and being Managing Editor of a successful Diamond Open Access journal in the field of astrophysics, then please feel free to nominate me them. I hope you get the message. If you want subtle, you’ve come to the wrong place!

The nomination form is here. The closing date for nominations is 1st February 2024.

The Little Book of Irish Research

Posted in Euclid, Maynooth, The Universe and Stuff with tags , on November 18, 2023 by telescoper

Yesterday, the last day of Science Week, saw the launch by Simon Harris TD, Minister for Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science, of the Little Book of Irish Research. This book, which is aimed at school students, so is written at an elementary level, gives quick summaries of areas of research that the general public said that they were interested in, grouped into sixteen themes, and it will be distributed to schools all round Ireland.

I was very gratified to see myself get a mention (on page 41), though it’s not really about me but about Euclid which has generated considerable interest in the general public already and is set to continue doing that for many years. As you can see, there’s also a double-page spread of JWST, though unfortunately it does not name the scientists involved; Paddy Kavanagh is the main man at Maynooth for matters JWST.

I understand The Little Book of Irish Research will be the focus of a social media campaign over coming weeks, which will hopefully make more people more aware of the research going on in all disciplines in Ireland. I think we’ll find it useful for our own outreach events, open days, etc, in the Department of Theoretical Physics, and so will the many colleagues in other Departments whose work is also featured.

I haven’t seen hard copies of the book yet, as I’m in Barcelona, but if you want to read it here is a PDF file of the whole thing for you to download at your leisure.

Notes to Future Self

Posted in Biographical, The Universe and Stuff with tags , on July 28, 2023 by telescoper

Yesterday I was tidying up a bit and came across the old notebooks I used when I was a research student. As I suppose is the case with everyone else, there’s quite a lot in them that never went anywhere. If you can read the example above, about 3/4 of the way down the right-hand page I left a note saying “This is a pointless task”. I can’t remember if that referred to that particular integral or my research in general!

Some people who have seen this picture remarked on the size of my integral signs. That’s because I had to do quite a lot of integrals with complicated integrands, so I got into the habit of drawing big integral signs as a prelude to writing down what I assumed would be a horrible formula.

The way I worked in those days (1985-88) was to do a lot of rough scribblings on scrap paper. When I got to something I thought was promising I would write up a “neat” version in the notebook and throw away the workings. I know younger folks these days do most of their work on a screen but, as an old fogey, I still write a lot down on paper or on a blackboard. I didn’t have my own blackboard when I was a PhD student, but I did have plenty of notebooks – most of which I have kept. I think that I’ll always find an essential part of the mathematical thought process involves a pen or piece of chalk in my hand, moving around and guiding my brain.

Looking through these books I remember that I also wrote down ideas for follow-up projects. I managed to do very few of these, but some were done by other people elsewhere independently of me, so at least they were reasonable ideas!