Ginsparg, Ph.D. ’81, arXiv founder, receives physics award | Cornell Chronicle

“Paul Ginsparg, Ph.D. ’81, professor of physics and of information science and founder of arXiv, has been named the recipient of the American Institute of Physics 2020 Karl Taylor Compton Medal for Leadership in Physics.

Named after prominent physicist Karl Taylor Compton, the medal is presented every four years to a distinguished physicist. Ginsparg was cited by the selection committee “for his paradigm-changing contributions to physics information sharing by inventing, developing and managing the arXiv system for electronic distribution of pre-publication (or preprint) papers.” …

ArXiv remains the largest manuscript repository of its type. It surpassed 1 million submissions in 2014, and its submission rate has increased by 40% in the past three years.”

Ginsparg, Ph.D. ’81, arXiv founder, receives physics award | Cornell Chronicle

“Paul Ginsparg, Ph.D. ’81, professor of physics and of information science and founder of arXiv, has been named the recipient of the American Institute of Physics 2020 Karl Taylor Compton Medal for Leadership in Physics.

Named after prominent physicist Karl Taylor Compton, the medal is presented every four years to a distinguished physicist. Ginsparg was cited by the selection committee “for his paradigm-changing contributions to physics information sharing by inventing, developing and managing the arXiv system for electronic distribution of pre-publication (or preprint) papers.” …

ArXiv remains the largest manuscript repository of its type. It surpassed 1 million submissions in 2014, and its submission rate has increased by 40% in the past three years.”

The first SHARE Open Science Award | Open Access | University of Groningen Library | University of Groningen

“One of the highlights of the day was the presentation of the first SHARE Open Science Award. With this initiative, SHARE wants to stimulate the shift to more openness and transparency in science. Its first two winners were PhD students Stefania Barzeva and Yoram Kunkels, from the Interdisciplinary Center Psychopathology and Emotion Regulation (ICPE). They received the award for integrating Open Science principles in their work, such as pre-registration, sharing of data sets and publishing in Open Access journals. Both early career researchers are also advocates of Open Science in their networks and active members of the recently founded Open Science Community Groningen (OSCG)….”

Knowledge for all: A decade of open access at uOttawa | Gazette | University of Ottawa

“This month marks the 10th anniversary of uOttawa’s OA program—the first of its kind in Canada. By helping to make research freely available online, the University has positioned itself as a global leader in the transformation of scholarly communication….”

Knowledge for all: A decade of open access at uOttawa | Gazette | University of Ottawa

“This month marks the 10th anniversary of uOttawa’s OA program—the first of its kind in Canada. By helping to make research freely available online, the University has positioned itself as a global leader in the transformation of scholarly communication….”

Open Science Prize goes to software tool for tracking viral outbreaks | Livingston Ledger

“After three rounds of competition—one of which involved a public vote—a software tool developed by researchers at Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center and the University of Basel to track Zika, Ebola and other viral disease outbreaks in real time has won the first-ever international Open Science Prize.

Fred Hutch evolutionary biologist Dr. Trevor Bedford and physicist and computational biologist Dr. Richard Neher of the Biozentum Center for Molecular Life Studies in Basel, Switzerland, designed a prototype called nextstrain to analyze and track genetic mutations during the Ebola and Zika outbreaks. Using the platform Bedford and Neher built, anyone can download the source code from the public-access code-sharing site GitHub, run genetic sequencing data for the outbreak they are following through the pipeline and build a web page showing a phylogenetic tree, or genetic history of the outbreak, in a few minutes, Bedford said….”

Open Science Prize goes to software tool for tracking viral outbreaks | Livingston Ledger

“After three rounds of competition—one of which involved a public vote—a software tool developed by researchers at Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center and the University of Basel to track Zika, Ebola and other viral disease outbreaks in real time has won the first-ever international Open Science Prize.

Fred Hutch evolutionary biologist Dr. Trevor Bedford and physicist and computational biologist Dr. Richard Neher of the Biozentum Center for Molecular Life Studies in Basel, Switzerland, designed a prototype called nextstrain to analyze and track genetic mutations during the Ebola and Zika outbreaks. Using the platform Bedford and Neher built, anyone can download the source code from the public-access code-sharing site GitHub, run genetic sequencing data for the outbreak they are following through the pipeline and build a web page showing a phylogenetic tree, or genetic history of the outbreak, in a few minutes, Bedford said….”

Pondering the arrival of the Open Publishing Awards | FORCE11

“This year, Coko’s Founder Adam Hyde organized and launched the Open Publishing Awards with a stated mission to celebrate all things open and publishing. The initial ‘launch’ of the awards via social media and a website debut was in August, and somehow the organization managed to assemble a panel of judges, solicit nominations, plan an event and deliver on a shortlist of winners, all within a few weeks. After the awards ceremony last week at FORCE 2019, it is a good time to stop and think: were the awards successful? How can we assess the success, failure, or utility of awards programs, in general? Is there room for another?

First, we can take a look at the ‘why’ behind the awards. The Open Publishing Awards website makes it clear: they aim to celebrate and raise awareness about all things open and publishing. This year, that meant open software and open content, as those were the two categories that nominations were solicited within. Is it enough to “celebrate” and announce a “shortlist” – or are we really hungry to create single category “winners” the way that other awards programs tend to?

Next, who is ordained to decide a) what is open, and/or b) how open is ‘open’? This is a semantic and ideological discussion that occurs on an ongoing basis. My open may not be open enough for you or vice versa. The category descriptions offered some help, but was it enough? …”