ebi is an outstation of the european molecular biology laboratory. bibliography 2.0: a case study...
TRANSCRIPT
EBI is an Outstation of the European Molecular Biology Laboratory.
Bibliography 2.0: A case study from the Wellcome Trust Genome Campus
Dr. Duncan Hull
http://twitter.com/dullhunkEuropean Bioinformatics Institute, EBI.ac.uk
e-Science workshop: The influence and impact of Web 2.0 on various applications
11th-12th May 2010, Edinburgh
10.04.232
Overview
• Introduction: Wellcome Trust Genome Campus• The European Bioinformatics Institute (ebi.ac.uk)• The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute (sanger.ac.uk)• The Library
• Problem: economics and “freakonomics” of publishing• The unintended consequences of “publish or perish”• Burying data in publication silos• Obscuring identities and obstructing social applications
• Solution? Bibliography 2.0 with citeulike• Incentives• Disincentives• Case study: What we’ve learnt
• Conclusions and future work
EBI is an Outstation of the European Molecular Biology Laboratory.
Wellcome to the Genome Campus
Home of The European Bioinformatics Institute The Sanger InstituteJust outside Cambridge, UK
EBI: a data hub for bioinformatics in EuropeLiterature
ebi.ac.uk/citexplore
DNA +RNA sequencesebi.ac.uk/ena
Genomes: ensembl.org
Transcriptomese.g. ArrayExpress
Protein structureebi.ac.uk/pdbe
Protein domains, familiesebi.ac.uk/interpro
Pathways reactome.org
Systemsbiomodels.net
Small moleculesebi.ac.uk/chebi
andebi.ac.uk/chembl
Protein sequenceuniprot.org
Protein protein interactionsebi.ac.uk/intact
~400 staff (research/services), publishing data on the web
10.04.235
e.g. Chemical Entities of Biological Interest (ChEBI)Free database /ontology of 500,000 small molecules (many drugs)
The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute
10.04.236 Alex Bateman ~900 Sanger staff (total)
Shared Library
10.04.237
Annual Journal subscription
budget £500,000
(modest compared to multi million pound journal budgets of
university libraries)
More later
• )
10.04.238
“People respond to incentives, although not necessarily in ways that are predictable and manifest.
Therefore, one of the most powerful laws in the universe is the law of unintended consequences. This
applies to schoolteachers and Realtors and crack dealers as well
as expectant mothers, sumo wrestlers, bible salesman, and the
Ku Klux Klan…”
…and scientists too…
Unintended consequences, an example
• Incentive: “publish or perish”• Publications are rewarded with recognition, hiring, promotion,
tenure, fame, funding, fortune, prizes, job satisfaction etc
• Unintended consequences:• Valuable data gets damaged, destroyed or “buried” (see later)• Inaccessible to data and text mining on the Web
• Copyright and toll-access journals• Luddite scientists
• Minimal exploitation of social software for sharing data• Minimal exploitation of Web 2.0 for sharing data
10.04.239
• Gene names: e.g. Hexokinase, HK1, HK2, HK3• Protein names: e.g. Hexokinase, HK1, HK2, HK3• Chemical names: e.g. Glucose-6-phosphate, G6P, Glu, Gluc • Author names: e.g. Mark Baker (see next slide)• Poor precision and recall
10.04.2310
Why bury it [data] first and then mine it again?
Barend Mons, Wikiproteins http://proteins.wikiprofessional.org
Which gene did you mean?BMC Bioinformatics. 2005 Jun 7;6:142
DOI:10.1186/1471-2105-6-142
Identity crisis: Mark Baker
http://pubmed.gov?term=Baker+M[author]
http://pubmed.gov?term=Mark+Baker[author]
etc
10.04.2311
Until we have unique author identifiers, it is difficult or impossible to reliably find the papers published by a particular person
Open Researcher and Contributor ID http://orcid.org
“Tell me whenever Mark Baker publishes a paper”
Social information (need identity for this)
• Socialisation: (e-science > “we-science”)• How many other people have read this paper?• What are my friends / enemies reading?• What other papers did they also read?
• Personalisation (e-science > “me-science”)• These are my publications• This is my bibliography (stuff I’m reading / have read)• Digital libraries “document-centred” rather than “people-centred”
Author name disambiguation in MEDLINE by: Vetle I. Torvik, Neil R. Smalheiser ACM Trans. Knowl. Discov. Data, Vol. 3, No. 3. (2009), pp. 1-29. DOI:10.1145/1552303.1552304
10.04.2312
A solution, citeulike.org?
• http://www.citeulike.org• Lack of personalisation of library data• Lack of socialisation of library data
• Works a lot like http://www.delicious.com
10.04.2313
10.04.2314
Click Post to Citeulike
10.04.2315
Tag it (optional) e.g. author tags
10.04.2316
Journal picks is a group of 40+ invited users on campus, who select interesting papers
10.04.2317
2,016 unique articles in journal picks
(less than one year)
3,880,055 unique articles total
10.04.2318
Citeulike + ZeitGeist = CiteGeist
http://www.citeulike.org/citegeist
Citeulike incentives
• Selfish scientist (just organise my reference mess) • What’s popular (interesting stuff CiteGeist)• Serendipity (find papers you wouldn’t find normally)• Increase visibility and PageRank of papers?• Person-centred access points into first / second page of
Google results
e.g. http://www.google.com/search?q=carole+goble
Has result below fairly high up list,
http://www.citeulike.org/group/10570/tag/carole-goble
10.04.2319
Citeulike disincentives
• Privacy, don’t want to share with rivals• (but can make collections private)
• Citeulike might go bust? • But Springer sponsored
• Parsers are fragile• easily (and deliberately) broken by publishers
• Valuable data in the hands of a commercial company?• But Facebook? LinkedIn? Twitter etc?
• No academic reward for using it • publication = “finished”
• Social software works best with network effects• There are LOTS of other tools that do this…
10.04.2320
10.04.2321
And the rest…
www.mendeley.com
www.zotero.org
www.connotea.org
www.mekentosj.com
www.hubmed.org
www.refworks.com
“iTunes for PDF files”
“Last.fm of research”
Giant corporate commercial competitors
• With significant vested financial interests• Scopus http://www.scopus.com/ • ISI WOK http://isiknowledge.com
Wrote a review of these systems: Hull, D., S. R. Pettifer, and D. B. Kell (2008). Defrosting the digital library: Bibliographic tools for the next generation web. PLoS Comput Biol 4 (10), e1000204+. DOI:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000204
10.04.2322
Conclusions
• “Publish or perish” has some unfortunate and unintended consequences in science
• Citeulike is an interesting Web 2.0 tool• We’ve had some success using it (typical “long tail”)• Weak incentives for use by many cultural barriers to adoption• Technical barriers to adoption, many tools, messy data
• Future work• Social network analysis, clickthroughs, tag analysis• Any other ideas…
• But the times they are a changin’• Citeulike or something like it will work much better if/when
“publishing” incentives change over time…
10.04.2323
Acknowledgements
• Mark Baker for organising this workshop• EBI, Christoph Steinbeck (laboratory head)• Carole Goble, University of Manchester• The Sanger, Alex Bateman, Frances Martin, Tim Hubbard
and all the contributors to the Journal Picks group• Richard Cameron, Kevin Emamy and the rest of the
citeulike team• BBSRC for funding• Any questions?
10.04.2324