No subject

The Editorial in the February 11th Issue of Science
(www.sciencemag.org), is marking a line on the sand to make clear that
the REPRODUCIBILITY requirement of the scientific method IMPLIES that
data and source code MUST be made available at the time of publishing
scientific results.



Here are some essential quotes from the Editorial "Making Data
Maximally Available" by Brooks Hanson, Andrew Sugden and Bruce
Alberts:



First, the essence:

=E2=80=9CIt is obvious that making data widely available is an essential
element of scientific research.=E2=80=9D



Second, the challenge:

=E2=80=9CThe scientific community strives to meet its basic responsibilitie=
s
toward transparency, standardization and data archiving [=E2=80=A6] yet
scientists are struggling with the huge amount, complexity, and
variety of the data that are now being produced.=E2=80=9D



Third, the Commitment:

=E2=80=9CScience policy for some time has been that ALL DATA NECESSARY to
understand, assess, and extend the conclusions of the manuscript must
be available to ANY reader of Science (see
www.sciencemag.org/site/feature/contribinfo ) =E2=80=9C

Fourth, the realization that the software used to process the data,
MUST be made available as well:

=E2=80=9CTo address the growing complexity of data and analyses,
Science is extending our data access requirement =E2=80=A6
to include COMPUTER CODES involved in the creation or
=C2=A0analysis of data.=E2=80=9D



Fifth, the acceptance that Journals can=E2=80=99t trigger these changes by =
themselves:

=E2=80=9CAs gatekeepers to publication, journals clearly have an important
part to play in making data publicly and permanently available. But
the most important steps for improving the way that science is
practiced and conveyed must come from the wider scientific community.=E2=80=
=9D



Sixth, YOU HAVE TO DO YOUR PART, Yes YOU !

=E2=80=9CScientists play critical roles in the leadership of journals and
societies, as reviewers for papers and grants, and as authors
themselves. We must all accept that science is data and that data are
science, and thus provide for, and justify the need for the support
of, much improved data curation.=E2=80=9D



Therefore, if you submit papers, review papers or read papers, it is
up to YOU to make sure that the process of scientific publishing truly
serves the purpose of advancing the scientific enterprise.





________________________________



I just did my part.

Yesterday
I declined an invitation to review papers for a conference (that must
not be named), due to the fact that they do not have a reproducibility
requirement (and as a consequence, papers are not required to include
data nor software).

Now it is your turn.

Do your part !