overview of science
description::
· science is a-collection of scientific-knowledge on an-entity|subject AND the-scientists and organizations related to it.
name::
* McsEngl.McsEdu000002.last.html//dirEdu//dirMcs!⇒science,
* McsEngl.dirMcs/dirEdu/McsEdu000002.last.html!⇒science,
* McsEngl.science,
* McsEngl.science'(McsEdu000002)!⇒science,
* McsEngl.entity'science!⇒science,
· "science" from Latin "scientia"-knowledge, from PIE-root "skei"-cut|split, Greek "σκίζειν" [{2021-02-06} https://www.etymonline.com/word/science]
====== langoSinago:
* McsSngo.sio!=science, {2021-12-28}, from Chinese xué,
====== langoChinese:
* McsZhon.kēxué-科学!=science,
* McsZhon.科学-kēxué!=science,
====== langoEsperanto:
* McsEspo.scienco!=science,
====== langoGreek:
* McsElln.επιστήμη!=science,
· "επιστήμη" < (λόγιο) < αρχαία ελληνική ἐπιστήμη < ἐπίσταμαι (γνωρίζω καλά) [https://el.wiktionary.org/wiki/επιστήμη]
01_area-of-study of science
description::
· area-of-study of science is the-entity that researches.
name::
* McsEngl.area-of-study--of-science,
* McsEngl.science'01_area-of-study,
* McsEngl.science'att001-area-of-study,
* McsEngl.science'area-of-study,
* McsEngl.subject-of-science,
* McsEngl.subject-matter--of-science,
02_knowledge of science
description::
· the-scientific-knowledge of a-science.
name::
* McsEngl.sceince'02_knowledge,
* McsEngl.sceince'att002-knowledge,
* McsEngl.sceince'knowledge,
03_nomenclature of science
description::
· the-set of names of concepts used in a-science.
===
"Nomenclature (UK: /nəˈmɛŋkləˌtʃər/, US: /ˈnoʊmənˌkleɪtʃər/)[1][2] is a system of names or terms, or the rules for forming these terms in a particular field of arts or sciences.[3] The principles of naming vary from the relatively informal conventions of everyday speech to the internationally agreed principles, rules and recommendations that govern the formation and use of the specialist terms used in scientific and any other disciplines.[4]
Naming "things" is a part of general human communication using words and language: it is an aspect of everyday taxonomy as people distinguish the objects of their experience, together with their similarities and differences, which observers identify, name and classify. The use of names, as the many different kinds of nouns embedded in different languages, connects nomenclature to theoretical linguistics, while the way humans mentally structure the world in relation to word meanings and experience relates to the philosophy of language.
Onomastics, the study of proper names and their origins, includes: anthroponymy (concerned with human names, including personal names, surnames and nicknames); toponymy (the study of place names); and etymology (the derivation, history and use of names) as revealed through comparative and descriptive linguistics.
The scientific need for simple, stable and internationally accepted systems for naming objects of the natural world has generated many formal nomenclatural systems.[citation needed] Probably the best known of these nomenclatural systems are the five codes of biological nomenclature that govern the Latinized scientific names of organisms."
[{2022-08-24 retrieved} https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nomenclature]
name::
* McsEngl.science'03_nomenclature,
* McsEngl.science'att012_nomenclature,
* McsEngl.science'nomenclature,
* McsEngl.science'terminology,
04_mapping-relation of science
description::
· the-relation between the-scientific-knowledge of the-science and its area-of-study.
* true,
* ...,
* false,
name::
* McsEngl.science'04_mapping-relation,
* McsEngl.science'mapping-relation,
05_scientific-method of science
description::
· scientific-method is the-mapping-method a-science uses to create its model|knowledge.
name::
* McsEngl.science'05_scientific-method,
* McsEngl.science'scientific-method,
* McsEngl.scientific-method,
descriptionLong::
"The scientific method is an empirical method of acquiring knowledge that has characterized the development of science since at least the 17th century. It involves careful observation, applying rigorous skepticism about what is observed, given that cognitive assumptions can distort how one interprets the observation. It involves formulating hypotheses, via induction, based on such observations; experimental and measurement-based testing of deductions drawn from the hypotheses; and refinement (or elimination) of the hypotheses based on the experimental findings. These are principles of the scientific method, as distinguished from a definitive series of steps applicable to all scientific enterprises.[1][2][3]
Though diverse models for the scientific method are available, there is in general a continuous process that includes observations about the natural world. People are naturally inquisitive, so they often come up with questions about things they see or hear, and they often develop ideas or hypotheses about why things are the way they are. The best hypotheses lead to predictions that can be tested in various ways. The most conclusive testing of hypotheses comes from reasoning based on carefully controlled experimental data. Depending on how well additional tests match the predictions, the original hypothesis may require refinement, alteration, expansion or even rejection. If a particular hypothesis becomes very well supported, a general theory may be developed.[4]
Although procedures vary from one field of inquiry to another, they are frequently the same from one to another. The process of the scientific method involves making conjectures (hypotheses), deriving predictions from them as logical consequences, and then carrying out experiments or empirical observations based on those predictions.[5][6] A hypothesis is a conjecture, based on knowledge obtained while seeking answers to the question. The hypothesis might be very specific, or it might be broad. Scientists then test hypotheses by conducting experiments or studies. A scientific hypothesis must be falsifiable, implying that it is possible to identify a possible outcome of an experiment or observation that conflicts with predictions deduced from the hypothesis; otherwise, the hypothesis cannot be meaningfully tested.[7]
The purpose of an experiment is to determine whether observations agree with or conflict with the predictions derived from a hypothesis.[8] Experiments can take place anywhere from a garage to CERN's Large Hadron Collider. There are difficulties in a formulaic statement of method, however. Though the scientific method is often presented as a fixed sequence of steps, it represents rather a set of general principles.[9] Not all steps take place in every scientific inquiry (nor to the same degree), and they are not always in the same order.[10][11]"
[{2020-08-08} https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method]
06_school of science
description::
· a-subject[a] is-modeled diferently by scientists.
· a-school is one model of the-area-of-study[a].
name::
* McsEngl.science'06_school,
* McsEngl.science'att003-school,
* McsEngl.science'school,
* McsEngl.school-of-science,
07_theory of science
description::
· theory is knowledge on a-subject, part of a-science, with a-known author.
· and the-theorists and organizations related to it.
name::
* McsEngl.science'07_theory!⇒theory,
* McsEngl.science'att004-theory!⇒theory,
* McsEngl.science'theory!⇒theory,
* McsEngl.theory,
* McsEngl.theory-of-science!⇒theory,
* McsEngl.thr!⇒theory,
====== langoChinese:
* McsZhon.lǐlùn-理论!=theory,
* McsZhon.理论-lǐlùn!=theory,
====== langoEsperanto:
* McsEspo.teorio!=theory,
====== langoGreek:
* McsElln.θεωρία!=theory,
descriptionLong::
"In modern science, the term "theory" refers to scientific theories, a well-confirmed type of explanation of nature, made in a way consistent with scientific method, and fulfilling the criteria required by modern science. Such theories are described in such a way that scientific tests should be able to provide empirical support for, or empirically contradict ("falsify") it. Scientific theories are the most reliable, rigorous, and comprehensive form of scientific knowledge,[1] in contrast to more common uses of the word "theory" that imply that something is unproven or speculative (which in formal terms is better characterized by the word hypothesis).[2] Scientific theories are distinguished from hypotheses, which are individual empirically testable conjectures, and from scientific laws, which are descriptive accounts of the way nature behaves under certain conditions.
Theories guide the enterprise of finding facts rather than of reaching goals, and are neutral concerning alternatives among values.[3]:131 A theory can be a body of knowledge, which may or may not be associated with particular explanatory models. To theorize is to develop this body of knowledge.[4]:46
The word theory or "in theory" is more or less often used erroneously by people to explain something which they individually did not experience or tested before.[5] In those instances, semantically, it is being substituted for another concept, a hypothesis. Instead of using the word hypothetically, it is replaced by a phrase: "in theory". In some instances the theory's credibility could be contested by calling it "just a theory" (implying that the idea has not even been tested).[6] Hence, that word "theory" is very often contrasted to "practice" (from Greek praxis, πρᾶξις) a Greek term for doing, which is opposed to theory.[6] A "classical example" of the distinction between "theoretical" and "practical" uses the discipline of medicine: medical theory involves trying to understand the causes and nature of health and sickness, while the practical side of medicine is trying to make people healthy. These two things are related but can be independent, because it is possible to research health and sickness without curing specific patients, and it is possible to cure a patient without knowing how the cure worked.[a]"
[{2020-03-28} https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory]
subject of theory
description::
· the-referent of theory.
name::
* McsEngl.theory'subject,
author of theory
description::
· one or more humans that created the-theory
name::
* McsEngl.theorist,
* McsEngl.theory'author!⇒theorist,
evaluation of theory
description::
"If you have a theory, you must try to explain what’s good and what’s bad about it equally. In science, you learn a kind of standard integrity and honesty."
[Richard Feynman https://twitter.com/ProfFeynman/status/1274023269734047744]
name::
* McsEngl.theory'evaluation,
08_scientist of science
name::
* McsEngl.hmnWorker.021-scientist!⇒wkrScience,
* McsEngl.hmnWorker.scientist!⇒wkrScience,
* McsEngl.scholar!⇒wkrScience,
* McsEngl.science'08_scientist!⇒wkrScience,
* McsEngl.science'att005_scientist!⇒wkrScience,
* McsEngl.science'scientist!⇒wkrScience,
* McsEngl.scientist!⇒wkrScience,
* McsEngl.wkrScience, {2021-06-21},
===
"The 19th century saw the birth of science as a profession; the term scientist was coined in 1833 by William Whewell,[21] which soon replaced the older term of (natural) philosopher."
[{2021-03-02} https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/19th_century#Science_and_technology]
description::
· scientist is a-human that contributes to a-science.
09_organization of science
description::
· an-organization related to a-science.
name::
* McsEngl.oznScience,
* McsEngl.science'09_organization!⇒oznScience,
* McsEngl.science'att006_organization!⇒oznScience,
* McsEngl.science'organization!⇒oznScience,
relation-to-society of science
description::
"The saddest aspect of life right now is that science gathers knowledge faster than society gathers wisdom."
-- Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)
[{2020-08-29} https://twitter.com/PhysInHistory/status/1299762470123315200]
name::
* McsEngl.science'att009-relation-to-society,
* McsEngl.science'relation-to-society,
* McsEngl.society'relation-to-science,
relation-to-religion of science
description::
"Science is a culture of doubt; religion is a culture of faith."
[{2020-12-07} https://twitter.com/ProfFeynman/status/1335771943593594882]
name::
* McsEngl.science'att011-relation-to-religion,
* McsEngl.science'relation-to-religion,
* McsEngl.religion'relation-to-science,
info-resource of science
addressWpg::
* arXiv is a free distribution service and an open-access archive for 1,661,988 scholarly articles in the fields of physics, mathematics, computer science, quantitative biology, quantitative finance, statistics, electrical engineering and systems science, and economics: https://arxiv.org/,
* https://brushingupscience.com/about/,
name::
* McsEngl.science'attResource,
* McsEngl.science'Infrsc,
evaluation of science
description::
"If you find science boring, you're learning it from a wrong teacher!"
[{2020-07-06} https://twitter.com/ProfFeynman/status/1280186442174480384]
name::
* McsEngl.science'att008-evaluation,
* McsEngl.science'evaluation,
philosophy-of-science
description::
"Philosophy of science is a branch of philosophy concerned with the foundations, methods, and implications of science.[1] The central questions of this study concern what qualifies as science, the reliability of scientific theories, and the ultimate purpose of science. This discipline overlaps with metaphysics, ontology, and epistemology, for example, when it explores the relationship between science and truth. Philosophy of science focuses on metaphysical, epistemic and semantic aspects of science. Ethical issues such as bioethics and scientific misconduct are often considered ethics or science studies rather than philosophy of science."
[{2020-07-31} https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science]
name::
* McsEngl.science'att010-philosophy-of-science,
* McsEngl.science'philosophy-of-science,
* McsEngl.philosophy-of-science,
DOING of science
description::
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.
When someone says 'science teaches such and such', he is using the word incorrectly.
Science doesn't teach anything, experience teaches it."
[https://twitter.com/ProfFeynman/status/1276571176144265217-{2020-06-26}]
name::
* McsEngl.science'doing,
specific-tree-of-science'doing::
* educating,
* learning,
* researching,
* teaching,
researching of science
description::
"Research is "creative and systematic work undertaken to increase the stock of knowledge, including knowledge of humans, culture and society, and the use of this stock of knowledge to devise new applications."[1] It involves the collection, organization, and analysis of information to increase our understanding of a topic or issue. At a general level, research has three steps:
* 1. Pose a question.
* 2. Collect data to answer the question.
* 3. Present an answer to the question.
This should be a familiar process. You engage in solving problems every day and you start with a question, collect some information, and then form an answer. Research is important for three reasons.
* 1. Research adds to our knowledge: Adding to knowledge means that educators undertake research to contribute to existing information about issues
* 2.Research improves practice: Research is also important because it suggests improvements for practice. Armed with research results, teachers and other educators become more effective professionals.
* 3. Research informs policy debates: research also provides information to policy makers when they research and debate educational topics.[2]"
[{2020-07-02} https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research]
name::
* McsEngl.research!⇒researching,
* McsEngl.researching,
* McsEngl.science'att007-researching!⇒researching,
* McsEngl.science'researching!⇒researching,
* McsEngl.scienticif-research!⇒researching,
info-resource of researching
description::
* https://www.rd-alliance.org/, "The Research Data Alliance (RDA) builds the social and technical bridges to enable the open sharing and re-use of data"
name::
* McsEngl.researching'Infrsc,
EVOLUTING of science
name::
* McsEngl.science'attEvoluting,
* McsEngl.science'evoluting,
{time.2019-12-21}::
=== McsHitp-creation:
· creation of current concept.
WHOLE-PART-TREE of science
name::
* McsEngl.science'whole-part-tree,
whole-tree-of-::
* human-society,
* Sympan,
part::
* field,
* theory,
* school,
GENERIC-SPECIFIC-TREE of science
name::
* McsEngl.science'generic-specific-tree,
generic-tree-of-::
* knowledgeBrain,
* infoBrain,
* infoBio,
* model,
* entity,
science.SPECIFIC
name::
* McsEngl.science.specific,
specific::
* biology,
* chemistry,
* economics,
* linguistics,
* mathematics,
* philosophy,
* sociology,
science.specifics-division
description::
· any specifics-division of science.
name::
* McsEngl.disciplines-of-science,
* McsEngl.branches-of-science,
* McsEngl.fields-of-science,
* McsEngl.classification-of-science,
* McsEngl.science.specifics-division,
* McsEngl.science-classification,
* McsEngl.sciences,
* McsEngl.scientific-disciplines,
* McsEngl.scientific-fields,
science.specifics-division.FOS-2007
description::
"About Field of science and technology classification
1. Definition
This classification is the Eurostat standard code list for the classification of fields of science and technology (FOS 2007). The classification of field of science is based on the nomenclature suggested by UNESCO: Recommendation concerning the International Standardisation of Statistics on Science and Technology.
2. Objectives
Classification of all the field of science and technology
Approved by consensus by experts
Used in Pan-European and Worldwide organisations
3. Owner
FOS 2007 has been developed under the supervision of the OECD.
4. Intended audience
FOS 2007 has been developed in order to provide to all persons and organisations that may need to have a classification of the field of science and technology such a tool. The main target was the statistical institutes or organisations that may need to create statistics on the topic. This classification should be used for the R&D expenditure of the government, higher education and PNP (Private Non-Profit) sectors and if possible of the BE (Business enterprise) sector and for personnel data in all sectors.
5. Long description
FOS 2007 defines six fields of science, which are:
natural sciences,
engineering and technology,
medical sciences,
agricultural sciences,
social sciences, and
humanities.
6. Known implementations
UNESCO and Eurostat both use this classification, as well as countries that have to deal with or provide information to them. Furthermore, United Nations’ UNstats has implemented FOS 2007 as well.
7. History / Key milestones
The previous FOS classification from the Frascati Manual in 2002 did not fully reflect changes in the science and technology area, especially with regard to emerging technology fields such as ICT, biotechnology and nanotechnology. Therefore, in 2002, the Working Party of National Experts on Science and Technology Indicators (NESTI) decided to set up a Task Force to work on this specific issue. They provided the current version of FOS in 2007. This Task Force was led by OECD and had on board the Netherlands, Australia, Norway, Portugal, as well as Eurostat and UNESCO.
8. Additional documents
UNESCO: Recommendation concerning the International Standardisation of Statistics on Science and Technology: http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=13135&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html
Revised Field of Science and Technology (FOS) Classification in the Frascati Manual: http://www.oecd.org/science/inno/38235147.pdf"
[{2022-08-24 retrieved} https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/collection/eu-semantic-interoperability-catalogue/solution/field-science-and-technology-classification/about]
name::
* McsEngl.FOS-2007,
* McsEngl.field-of-science-and-technology-classification,
* McsEngl.science.specifics-division.FOS-2007,
addressWpg::
* SciNoBo: A Hierarchical Multi-Label Classifier of Scientific Publications: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2204.00880.pdf,
science.specifics-division.wikipedia
description::
"The branches of science, also referred to as sciences, scientific fields or scientific disciplines, are commonly divided into three major groups:
* Formal sciences: the study of formal systems, such as those under the branches of logic and mathematics, which use an a priori, as opposed to empirical, methodology.
* Natural sciences: the study of natural phenomena (including cosmological, geological, physical, chemical, and biological factors of the universe). Natural science can be divided into two main branches: physical science and life science (or biology).
* Social sciences: the study of human behavior in its social and cultural aspects.[1]
Scientific knowledge must be based on observable phenomena and must be capable of being verified by other researchers working under the same conditions.[2] This verifiability may well vary even within a scientific discipline.[3][4]
Natural, social, and formal science make up the fundamental sciences, which form the basis of interdisciplinarity- and applied sciences such as engineering and medicine. Specialized scientific disciplines that exist in multiple categories may include parts of other scientific disciplines but often possess their own terminologies and expertises.[5]"
[{2022-08-24 retrieved} https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Branches_of_science]
name::
* McsEngl.science.specifics-division.wikipedia,
science.field-004
description::
· field-of-science is a-(widely)-recognized INSTANCE of science.
name::
* McsEngl.branch-of-science,
* McsEngl.discipline-of-science,
* McsEngl.field-of-science,
* McsEngl.science.004-field,
* McsEngl.science.branch,
* McsEngl.science.discipline,
* McsEngl.science.field,
science.open-002
description::
"Open science is the movement to make scientific research (including publications, data, physical samples, and software) and its dissemination accessible to all levels of an inquiring society, amateur or professional.[2] Open science is transparent and accessible knowledge that is shared and developed through collaborative networks.[3] It encompasses practices such as publishing open research, campaigning for open access, encouraging scientists to practice open notebook science, and generally making it easier to publish and communicate scientific knowledge.
Open Science can be seen as a continuation of, rather than a revolution in, practices begun in the 17th century with the advent of the academic journal, when the societal demand for access to scientific knowledge reached a point at which it became necessary for groups of scientists to share resources[4] with each other so that they could collectively do their work.[5] In modern times there is debate about the extent to which scientific information should be shared.[6] The conflict that led to the Open Science movement is between the desire of scientists to have access to shared resources versus the desire of individual entities to profit when other entities partake of their resources.[7] Additionally, the status of open access and resources that are available for its promotion are likely to differ from one field of academic inquiry to another.[8]"
[{2020-07-02} https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_science]
name::
* McsEngl.open-science!⇒sciOpen,
* McsEngl.sciOpen,
* McsEngl.science.002-open!⇒sciOpen,
* McsEngl.science.open!⇒sciOpen,
descriptionLong::
"Open Science is a system change allowing for better science through open and collaborative ways of producing and sharing knowledge and data, as early as possible in the research process, and for communicating and sharing results. This new approach affects research institutions and science practices by bringing about new ways of funding, evaluating and rewarding researchers. Open Science increases the quality and impact of science by fostering reproducibility and interdisciplinarity. It makes science more efficient through better sharing of resources, more reliable through better verification and more responsive to society’s needs."
[{2020-07-02} https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/research_and_innovation/knowledge_publications_tools_and_data/documents/ec_rtd_factsheet-open-science_2019.pdf]
===
"Η Ανοικτή Επιστήμη είναι το νέο πρότυπο πρακτικών, μέσων και συνεργασίας για την παραγωγή και διάθεση επιστημονικού έργου και αποτελεσμάτων της έρευνας, με άμεσο επιστημονικό, οικονομικό και κοινωνικό αντίκτυπο. Η Ανοικτή Επιστήμη είναι κρίσιμη προτεραιότητα της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης (ΕΕ) για τη βιώσιμη ανάπτυξη, την καλύτερη παραγωγή και αξιοποίηση ερευνητικών αποτελεσμάτων, τη συνεργατικότητα, καθώς και τον εκδημοκρατισμό της γνώσης."
[{2020-07-02} https://oer.ellak.gr/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2020/06/OSP-v1.0-pub.pdf]
attribute of sciOpen
description::
"There are six commonly accepted pillars of open science: open data, open access, open methodology, open source, open peer review and open education."
[{2022-08-23 retrieved} https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-015-0669-2]
name::
* McsEngl.sciOpen'attribute,
open-data of sciOpen
description::
"Open data is the process of releasing both raw and processed data from your experiments, enabling others to analyse it without restriction. That data should be released is obvious; but which data? In my opinion, all raw data generated in the pursuit of your experiment should be released (especially the data you discarded), and at least enough to regenerate completely the analysis you yourself performed. As important as the data are the metadata; releasing raw data with poor metadata is just another way of obfuscating the scientific process.
We should consider the data to be the main publication, and the paper a secondary, less important part; the data will outlive the paper, as others re-analyse within the context of new scientific discoveries. Imagine if the human genome project had only released the ‘interesting parts’ of the genome? So many scientific discoveries would have been delayed.
Alongside the scientific argument is the moral argument; as Hannay alludes to, it is no longer acceptable for scientists to hold on to data until they have extracted every last possible publication from it. The data do not belong to the scientist, they belong to the funder (quite often the taxpayer). Datasets should be freely available to those who funded them. Scientists who hoard data, far from pushing back the boundaries of human knowledge, instead act as barriers to discovery.
Of course, we should always be careful to ensure appropriate consent is given, and that data cannot result in the harm of any given individual or group. However, it is ironic that many of us are careless about personal data every day, yet demand that scientific data are held up to a higher standard."
[{2022-08-24 retrieved} https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-015-0669-2#citeas]
name::
* McsEngl.open-data-of-sciOpen,
* McsEngl.sciOpen'open-data,
open-access of sciOpen
description::
"Open access is the model under which papers are available for anyone to read without having to pay, and that license allows secondary use such as text-mining. Others have spoken about this at great length, but some points are worth re-iterating: it is immoral to expect those who funded the research (taxpayers) to pay to access the results of that research; it is illogical that researchers (who work for the journals for free) have to pay; or that institutions who employ those authors have to pay. Nothing about the current closed-access publication model makes sense. Who should pay? The funder, of course; and when there is no funder, or there are no funds, then there are preprint servers (such as arXiv and bioRxiv) and institutional repositories.
I have no problem with publishers making money from the scientific process. However, I believe that in order to do so, they should add value. Many will say that they add value; and some do; but many more do not. Typesetting and PDF generation are not ‘adding value’. A good example of ‘adding value’ are the ‘living figures’ introduced by F1000Research [3], figures within papers that update in real-time as more data become available. Rather tellingly F1000Research is an open-access publisher."
[{2022-08-24 retrieved} https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-015-0669-2#citeas]
name::
* McsEngl.open-access-of-sciOpen,
* McsEngl.sciOpen'open-access,
repository of open-access
description::
"An open repository or open-access repository is a digital platform that holds research output and provides free, immediate and permanent access to research results for anyone to use, download and distribute. To facilitate open access such repositories must be interoperable according to the Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting (OAI-PMH). Search engines harvest the content of open access repositories, constructing a database of worldwide, free of charge available research.[1][2][3]
Open-access repositories, such as an institutional repository or disciplinary repository, provide free access to research for users outside the institutional community and are one of the recommended ways to achieve the open access vision described in the Budapest Open Access Initiative definition of open access. This is sometimes referred to as the self-archiving or "green" route to open access."
[{2022-08-24 retrieved} https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-access_repository]
name::
* McsEngl.open-access-repository,
* McsEngl.open-repository,
addressWpg::
* https://www.openrepositories.org/,
specific-tree-of-::
* arXiv,
* mdpi,
* zenodo,
open-repository.arXiv
description::
· https://arxiv.org/,
"arXiv (pronounced "archive"—the X represents the Greek letter chi ⟨χ⟩)[1] is an open-access repository of electronic preprints and postprints (known as e-prints) approved for posting after moderation, but not peer review. It consists of scientific papers in the fields of mathematics, physics, astronomy, electrical engineering, computer science, quantitative biology, statistics, mathematical finance and economics, which can be accessed online. In many fields of mathematics and physics, almost all scientific papers are self-archived on the arXiv repository before publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Some publishers also grant permission for authors to archive the peer-reviewed postprint. Begun on August 14, 1991, arXiv.org passed the half-million-article milestone on October 3, 2008,[2][3] and had hit a million by the end of 2014.[4][5] As of April 2021, the submission rate is about 16,000 articles per month.[6]"
[{2022-08-24 retrieved} https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ArXiv]
name::
* McsEngl.arXiv-open-repository,
* McsEngl.open-repository.arXiv,
open-repository.bioRxiv
description::
· https://www.biorxiv.org/,
"bioRxiv (pronounced "bio-archive"[1][2]) is an open access preprint repository for the biological sciences co-founded by John Inglis and Richard Sever in November 2013.[3][4] It is hosted by the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory (CSHL).[5] As preprints, papers hosted on bioRxiv are not peer-reviewed, but undergo basic screening and checked against plagiarism. Readers may offer comments on the preprint. It was inspired by and intends to complement the arXiv repository, which mostly focuses on mathematics, physics and connected disciplines, launched in 1991 by Paul Ginsparg (who also serves on the bioRxiv advisory board). It received support from both the CSHL and the Lourie Foundation.[6] Additional funding from the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative was confirmed in April 2017.[7][8]"
[{2022-08-24 retrieved} https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BioRxiv]
name::
* McsEngl.bioRxiv-open-repository,
* McsEngl.open-repository.bioRxiv,
open-repository.Figshare
description::
· https://figshare.com/,
"Figshare is an online open access repository where researchers can preserve and share their research outputs, including figures, datasets, images, and videos.[1] It is free to upload content and free to access, in adherence to the principle of open data. Figshare is one of a number of portfolio businesses supported by Digital Science,[2] a subsidiary of Springer Nature.[3]"
[{2022-08-24 retrieved} https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Figshare]
name::
* McsEngl.Figshare-open-repository,
* McsEngl.open-repository.Figshare,
open-repository.Zenodo
description::
"Zenodo is a general-purpose open repository developed under the European OpenAIRE program and operated by CERN.[1][2][3] It allows researchers to deposit research papers, data sets, research software, reports, and any other research related digital artefacts. For each submission, a persistent digital object identifier (DOI) is minted, which makes the stored items easily citeable.[4]"
[{2022-08-24 retrieved} https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zenodo]
name::
* McsEngl.open-repository.Zenodo,
* McsEngl.Zenodo-open-repository,
open-repository.Mdpi
description::
"A pioneer in scholarly, open access publishing, MDPI has supported academic communities since 1996. Based in Basel, Switzerland, MDPI has the mission to foster open scientific exchange in all forms, across all disciplines.
Our 408 diverse and open access journals, including 399 peer-reviewed journals and 9 conference journals, are supported by more than 115,000 academic experts who share our mission, values, and commitment to providing high-quality service for our authors. We serve scholars from around the world to ensure the latest research is freely available and all content is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY).
MDPI publishes over 98 journals that are ranked as high impact within their fields. To view the current impact factors for MDPI journals (according to the Journal Citation Reports), please visit our yearly announcement page here.
With additional offices in Beijing, Wuhan, Tianjin and Nanjing (China), Barcelona (Spain), Belgrade and Novi Sad (Serbia), Manchester (UK), Tokyo (Japan), Cluj and Bucharest (Romania), Toronto (Canada), Kraków (Poland), Singapore (Singapore) and Bangkok (Thailand), MDPI has published the research of more than 330,000 individual authors and our journals receive more than 25 million monthly webpage views."
[{2022-08-24 retrieved} https://www.mdpi.com/about]
name::
* McsEngl.Mdpi-open-repository,
* McsEngl.open-repository.Mdpi,
open-repository.Dryad
description::
· https://datadryad.org/stash,
"Dryad is an international open-access repository of research data, especially data underlying scientific and medical publications (mainly of evolutionary, genetic, and ecology biology). Dryad is a curated general-purpose repository that makes data discoverable, freely reusable, and citable. The scientific, educational, and charitable mission of Dryad is to provide the infrastructure for and promote the re-use of scholarly research data."
[{2022-08-24 retrieved} https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dryad_(repository)]
name::
* McsEngl.Dryad-open-repository,
* McsEngl.open-repository.Dryad,
APC-BPC of open-access
description::
"Article Processing Charges (APCs)/Book processing charges (BPCs) are publication fees charged to authors - but often covered by their institution or funder - to make publications immediately open access, and should not be confused with other costs such as page charges or colour print fees. APCs can vary widely, however many Open Access journals do not charge these author fees. So you can avoid APCs and still make your work open access by publishing in such a journal, or by providing open access through self-archiving."
[{2022-08-24 retrieved} https://www.openaire.eu/faqs#article-id-1156]
name::
* McsEngl.APC'Article-Processing-Charges,
* McsEngl.Article-Processing-Charges,
* McsEngl.BPC'Book-Processing-Charges,
* McsEngl.Book-Processing-Charges,
info-resource of open-access
description::
* open access journals & articles: https://doaj.org/,
* https://explore.openalex.org/,
* https://open-access.network/en/home,
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Open_Science,
name::
* McsEngl.open-access'Infrsc,
open-methodology of sciOpen
description::
"An open methodology is simply one which has been described in sufficient detail to allow other researchers to repeat the work and apply it elsewhere. Isn’t that simply ‘the methods section’? Of course, there are times when researchers may have access to unique resources - a cell line, or specific computer hardware - which means that others cannot repeat what they did. That doesn’t matter. One of the major reasons we publish is so that others can learn from what we have done, and revealing how you carried out an experiment is at the heart of any publication."
[{2022-08-24 retrieved} https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-015-0669-2#citeas]
name::
* McsEngl.open-methodology-of-sciOpen,
* McsEngl.sciOpen'open-methodology,
open-source of sciOpen
description::
"Open source generally refers to open and free access to the blueprint of a product; applied to software, it refers to the source code. There are hundreds of different open-source software licenses, and the arguments for and against are detailed and nuanced. However, I refer you to ‘Open methodology’ above; if you use software as part of the scientific method, then the source code should be available to read (preferably via a website such as GitHub or SourceForge), the software should compile and run and there should be a description of the core algorithms. The software you develop is part of the methods section, and it is the easiest part to share. One can distribute software throughout the world at the push of a button; the same cannot be said of a laboratory. Software should be (and in fact is) driving the open-science movement."
[{2022-08-24 retrieved} https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-015-0669-2#citeas]
name::
* McsEngl.open-source-of-sciOpen,
* McsEngl.sciOpen'open-source,
open-peer-review of sciOpen
description::
"I have written extensively about this [4, 5], as have others [6]. The point of open peer review isn’t removing anonymity, though that’s part of it. Open peer review is about transforming the peer review process; it is about making peer review a collaborative process between authors and reviewers; it is about constructive criticism, but with the goal of helping the authors to get published. More than all of that, it’s about doing the right thing. The British Medical Journal gathered convincing evidence that open review did no damage to the quality of peer reviews [7]; yet still they insisted that they introduced open peer review for ‘ethical reasons’, believing that removing anonymity would help bring an end to the worst abuses of peer review, and transform the entire process from one of judgement to one of open, scientific discourse [7]. When reading those words, doesn’t it make you wonder why peer review was ever anything else?"
[{2022-08-24 retrieved} https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-015-0669-2#citeas]
name::
* McsEngl.open-peer-review-of-sciOpen,
* McsEngl.sciOpen'open-peer-review,
open-education of sciOpen
description::
"Open education refers to the open and free availability of educational resources. This does not mean that you cannot charge for education - no one can make the tutor work for free - but the resources that are used to educate can be made freely available. Why would you do that? So that others can use and improve them, and so that standards can be set and reached. In my own field, bioinformatics, this is being driven by movements such as GOBLET [8, 9] and Software/Data Carpentry [10]. More widely, massively open online courses (MOOCs) are increasingly popular. Open education brings science and education to everyone, regardless of social class, and that can only be a good thing."
[{2022-08-24 retrieved} https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-015-0669-2#citeas]
name::
* McsEngl.open-education-of-sciOpen,
* McsEngl.sciOpen'open-education,
evaluation of sciOpen
description::
"Η Ανοικτή Επιστήμη αποτελεί πυλώνα του Ευρωπαϊκού οικοσυστήματος Υπεύθυνης Έρευνας και Καινοτομίας [10], καθώς:
• επισπεύδει τις επιστημονικές ανακαλύψεις, μέσα από τη συνεργατικότητα, την επέκταση και επανάχρηση των αποτελεσμάτων της έρευνας
• επιτρέπει την επαλήθευση των ερευνητικών συμπερασμάτων, οδηγώντας στην εξάλειψη του ανορθολογισμού της έρευνας
• συμβάλλει στην καλύτερη και ταχύτερη εμπορική αξιοποίηση των αποτελεσμάτων της έρευνας και αυξάνει την καινοτομία
• συνεισφέρει στην κατάρτιση του ανθρώπινου δυναμικού με ανταγωνιστικές δεξιότητες στο χειρισμό, ανάλυση και αξιοποίηση δεδομένων
• ενισχύει την ακεραιότητα των ερευνητών και της παραγόμενης επιστημονικής γνώσης, συμβάλλοντας στην ερευνητική αριστεία και τη σύναψη αξιόπιστων συνεργασιών
• ενισχύει την εμπιστοσύνη των πολιτών στην επιστημονική γνώση
• ενισχύει την επιστημονικά τεκμηριωμένη χάραξη βιώσιμης πολιτικής σε διάφορους τομείς που άπτονται της λειτουργίας του κράτους και της ζωής του πολίτη (π.χ. υγεία, κλίμα, καινοτομία)
• προωθεί την εξωστρέφεια των ερευνητικών και χρηματοδοτικών οργανισμών "
[{2020-07-02} https://oer.ellak.gr/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2020/06/OSP-v1.0-pub.pdf]
name::
* McsEngl.sciOpen'evaluation,
info-resource of sciOpen
description::
* Watson, M. When will ‘open science’ become simply ‘science’?. Genome Biol 16, 101 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-015-0669-2,
* https://zenodo.org/, "Built and developed by researchers, to ensure that everyone can join in Open Science",
* https://www.openaire.eu/,
* https://ec.europa.eu/research/openscience/index.cfm?pg=open-science-cloud,
===
* https://oer.ellak.gr/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2020/06/OSP-v1.0-pub.pdf,
name::
* McsEngl.sciOpen'Infrsc,
science.citizen-003
description::
"Citizen science (CS; also known as community science, crowd science, crowd-sourced science, civic science, volunteer monitoring, or online citizen science) is scientific research conducted, in whole or in part, by amateur (or nonprofessional) scientists.[1] Citizen science is sometimes described as "public participation in scientific research," participatory monitoring, and participatory action research whose outcomes are often advancements in scientific research, as well as an increase in the public's understanding of science.[2][3] Based on Alexa rankings[4] iNaturalist is currently the most popular citizen science website[5] followed by eBird[6] and then Zooniverse[7] in second and third place respectively.[needs update]"
[{2020-07-02} https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen_science]
name::
* McsEngl.sciCitizen,
* McsEngl.science.003-citizen!⇒sciCitizen,
* McsEngl.science.citizen!⇒sciCitizen,
* McsEngl.citizen-science!⇒sciCitizen,
science.philosophy-001
name::
* McsEngl.science.001-philosophy!⇒sciPhilosophy,
* McsEngl.science.philosophy-001!⇒sciPhilosophy,
* McsEngl.Sympan'science!⇒sciPhilosophy,
* McsEngl.entitty'science!⇒sciPhilosophy,
* McsEngl.philosophy!⇒sciPhilosophy,
* McsEngl.philosophy,
description::
· philosophy is the-science of entity|Sympan.
