Predicting the future of publishing

My slides from ReCon 2015 in which I attempt to make some predictions about the future of publishing software and data products in academia.

1. Predicting the future of publishing Arfon Smith @arfon Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License
7. !
15. 4,000,000 8,000,000 12,000,000 16,000,000 20,000,000 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Repositories
16. 0 3,000,000 6,000,000 9,000,000 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Users
17. not doing this
18. Software & Data Services
19. Three assumptions
20. 1. Open is the new normal
21. 2. The PDF is an increasingly unsatisfactory way of sharing research
22. 3. We are generally unprepared to share data and software in a useful (and creditable) way
23. Software & Data Services
28. BIG SCIENCE
29. New tools. New ways of working.
30. New tools. New ways of publishing.
31. Reproducibility Data intensive
32. Complex (unpublished) things Numbers, data Science!
33. Should academia behave more like open source?
37. Verification & benchmarking services Likely thing #1:
51. Software is an unforgiving medium
52. Automating processes
53. “open source is… reproducible by necessity” Fernando Perez http://blog.fperez.org/2013/11/an-ambitious-experiment-in-data-science.html
54. Benchmarking services
64. Most innovation around shared challenges/data products Likely thing #2:
65. 10 ? n Level 1 (continual) Level 2 (periodic)
66. Software composed of many components
67. Your software is the thing that is different
68. Open Source: Ubiquitous culture of reuse
69. Ecosystem around data products
70. Stars Rocks SN WR NEOs Josh Bloom’s Type Ia supernovae Level 1 (continual) 10 n
74. ‘Normal’ citations won’t be sufficient for software Likely thing #3:
75. “Academic environments of today do not reward tool builders” Ed Lazowska, OSTP event http://lazowska.cs.washington.edu/MS/MS.OSTP.pdf
79. “publishing a paper about code is basically just advertising” David Donoho http://www.stanford.edu/~vcs/Video.html
80. Transitive Credit
81. Paper Author 1 Author 2 Paper Software Data 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.1 0.1 Paper Software Software Author 1 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.1 http://arxiv.org/abs/1407.5117, Katz & Smith
82. Authorship isn’t static
91. Where does progress come first?
92. Where do communities form?
93. Around a shared challenge?
94. Around shared data?
95. Be more exact
96. Where peers can most easily recognise value
97. Open source has solved much of what academia needs
98. The challenge is to adapt and evolve the academy in this new collaborative age
99. Thanks. arfon@github.com @arfon "