On Science HackathonsDerek Groen

@whydoitweet

About this talk

● About me.● How it all started.● The previous Science Hackathons.● Project Highlights● Experiences and tips for

Science Hackathon projects.

● For more info on #sciencehacks, see:http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.09944

PetaExa?

Derek Groen

How it all started...Academia is challenging for early career researchers.

● Pressure to publish.● Pressure to show “independent research”.● Only a couple of % make it to permanent academic positions.

Independence is great, but most PhD students and post-docs are hired to do work on predefined projects.

What can we do about it?

It all changed in 2014...

● Got a £3000 SSI Fellowship.● ...and joined 2020 Science.

● Game on!

Hackathon vs. #sciencehack

● Aim: create code

● Crowd: coders

● Reward: create better software, build expertise.

● Flexible, little prep req’d.

● Aim: create science/papers● Crowd: researchers

● Reward: create a research object, establish independent collaborations.

● Some prep req’d.

The 1st Science Hackathon● Aim: write 5 draft research papers in 3 days (one per project).● Try to do this in an unusual setting that maximizes creativity and minimizes

distraction.● Setting: “The Real Retreat” in Flore, Northamptonshire.

What it became

The first Science Hackathon

● Goal: Create a (draft) scientific publication in three days.● 5 projects, 22 participants,

2.5 days.● Expected: ~2 draft papers.● Outcomes: 6 draft papers

and 2 software codes.● Led to funding for a second

Science Hackathon.

The second Science Hackathon● Venue: a (dark) ten bedroom

house in Cambridge.● 20 participants.● 5 projects.● www.sciencehackathon.com

Project highlight“Where next for the reproducibility agenda in computational biology?”

BMC Systems Biology 2016 10:52.

Joanna Lewis, Charles E. Breeze, Jane Charlesworth, Oliver J. Maclaren and Jonathan Cooper

Project highlightSoftware development practices in academia: a case study comparison

arXiv:1506.05272

Derek Groen, Xiaohu Guo, James A Grogan, Ulf D Schiller, James M Osborne

Project highlight (from 2nd Science Hackathon)Evaluation Myopia in Science: Evidence from the Research Excellence Framework

Moqi Groen-Xu, Pedro Teixeira, Thomas Voigt and Bernhard Knapp (in preparation).

Some tips from my side

1. Defining projects & forming teams.2. Steam ahead during the event.3. Follow up.

Define a project

● Aim should be concrete, achievable and of value to all participants.○ Avoid 'slave' labour; we made all participants co-authors of the papers, regardless

of outcome.○ Avoid mere planning. Get those hands dirty!○ e.g.: journal paper draft, proposal, data collection.

● The work should be parallelizable.○ Anything that can't be done in parallel should have been done in advance of the

event.

Forming teams

● Best teams have a mix of expertise○ The more unconventional the mix, the more unique the paper/product/dataset will be.

● Avoid hierarchies○ Ensure everyone has ownership of the project by encouraging their creative input.

● Projects topics can start vague○ Scoping can be done later, based on the expertise available in the team.○ But the aim needs to be specific from the start!

● Define a “halfway house” goal, and a designated person to tie-break conflicts.

During the event

● Energy○ Exhausted people make great hackers, but also

poor scientists!○ Provide space for physical and mental relaxation..

● Focus○ Choose a spot with minimal distractions.○ Avoid the Bicycle Shed.

● Creativity○ Keep the schedule breezy.○ Put people who are “stuck” on new tasks.○ Talks like this one are the doom for any #sciencehack!

Following up

● Science Hackathons don't deliver final products → follow-ups are essential.

● If all of you put in sufficient material and creativity, the collaboration will drive itself.

● Don’t be afraid to ask for resources for follow-up meetings when you need them.○ We once asked for £2200, got £5000….

Good Luck!