Find research datasets worth reusing
Search datasets from major research repositories and use ShareScore to quickly assess how well each record supports discovery, access, and reuse.
6,025
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
6,025 results for “Science of science”
FSL open science dev dataset
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Recording of a learner of the Dutch language reading a Dutch position paper about Open Science in the Netherlands
<p>This repo contains a recording I made of me reading the position paper "<a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:283.002-Erkennen-en-Waarderen-Position-Paper_NL_web.pdf#%7B%7Bint%3Alicense-header%7D%7D">Ruimte voor ieders talent</a>" (<a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:283.002-Erkennen-en-Waarderen-Position-Paper_EN_web.pdf#%7B%7Bint%3Afiledesc%7D%7D">Room for everyone's talent</a>) upon first contact, albeit after having read the accompanying post "<a href="https://www.scienceguide.nl/2019/11/erkennen-en-waarderen-moet/">Erkennen en waarderen in de wetenschap gaan drastisch veranderen</a>" by Sicco de Knecht, which provides a summary of the position paper and got me interested in knowing more. That post was not openly licensed, so my recording of reading it cannot be shared, but the position paper is available under the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:Creative_Commons">Creative Commons</a> <a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/nl/deed.en">Attribution 3.0 Netherlands</a> license, which thus also pre-determines the licensing of this recording of me reading it.</p> <p>The reason I am putting this out here is that I am interested in sharing knowledge in general, including the process of how it was acquired, which is usually not very visible, even if all the relevant teaching materials are available, which is getting more popular but still remains rare overall. For the same reasons, by the way, I am running a <a href="https://github.com/Daniel-Mietchen/learning2code">GitHub repo</a> about my progress in learning programming and querying languages.</p> <p>I have no training in Dutch but am a native speaker of German and fluent in English, through which I can understand Dutch texts fairly easily, and I have read a good number of them (including books but more frequently Wikipedia articles) silently over multiple years, which gave me some idea about how the language works.</p> <p>What is usually neglected when reading silently is pronunciation, e.g. while I passively know how numbers and letters are pronounced in Dutch, I normally read them in English or German when reading Dutch texts silently, since that is quicker and less effort for me, and most of the reading I do is to learn about content, not the respective languages.</p> <p>With the bit of extra time afforded by the present holiday period, I can give some more attention to the language part, and since the topic of the position paper (open science and how we need to adapt incentive structures in the research landscape around that) is one that I deeply care about, I could also imagine coming back to the text occasionally to track my progress over time.</p> <p>So if you are interested in the process of language acquisition or in second language acquisition (for me, though, Dutch is far from being second) and especially in open education or open science around these topics, I'd appreciate you getting in touch to learn from each other around how such materials can help me and others learn this language or anything else, and how the workflows around that could be streamlined.</p>
Data for Research Assessment in the Transition to Open Science. 2019 EUA Open Science and Access Survey Results
<p>This database refers to the data collected by the European University Association (EUA) for its Open Science and Access Survey 2019, which gathered responses from universities and higher education institutions across Europe. The full report published by the association is available at <a href="https://eua.eu/resources/publications/888:research-assessment-in-the-transition-to-open-science.html">https://eua.eu/resources/publications/888:research-assessment-in-the-transition-to-open-science.html</a>.</p> <p>The data included in this database refers only to those universities and higher education institutions that accepted their data to be available in open access (n=174). All information that could lead to the identification of individual universities and higher education institutions was removed from the database (cf. cells highlighted in red). The following files are available:</p> <ul> <li>2019 EUA Open Science and Access Survey</li> <li>Database in the following formats: .xlsx (Microsoft Excel)</li> <li>Survey Codebook: includes information on all the variables and their coding.</li> </ul>
Science Communication Terminology
<p>You may have already encountered the terms “public engagement”, “knowledge transfer” or “outreach”. Watch this video with Dr. Luiza Bengtsson to get a better understanding of what these terms mean and what the difference between science communication and public engagement is.</p>
Is science self-correcting?
<p><strong>Episode Summary:</strong></p> <p>In this episode we are discussing whether science is broken or whether it is self-correcting, and whether the Open Science movement is evidence that science does in fact self-correct. Our interview guest will be Daniel Engber who is a science journalist from Slate magazine. We will cover problems and challenges in the practice of science, what can be done to improve the situation, and how Open Science principles are helping to change things.</p> <p><strong>Resources and Links:</strong></p> <ul> <li>Engber Articles <ul> <li><a href="https://slate.com/technology/2017/05/science-is-broken-how-much-should-we-fix-it.html">Science Is Broken. How Much Should We Fix It?</a></li> <li><a href="https://slate.com/technology/2018/01/in-defense-of-the-replication-movement.html">For Better Science, Bring on the Revolutionaries</a></li> <li><a href="https://slate.com/health-and-science/2017/06/daryl-bem-proved-esp-is-real-showed-science-is-broken.html">Daryl Bem Proved ESP Is Real Which means science is broken</a></li> <li><a href="http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/future_tense/2016/04/biomedicine_facing_a_worse_replication_crisis_than_the_one_plaguing_psychology.html">Cancer Research Is Broken</a></li> </ul> </li> <li>Discover Magazine article: <a href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/neuroskeptic/2017/06/19/science-broken-self-correcting/#.W_5us2hKhPY">Is Science Broken, Or Is It Self-Correcting?</a></li> <li><a href="https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.28699.001">Pressure for Novelty</a> article</li> </ul> <p><strong>Episode Quotes:</strong></p> <p>“Science is only self-correcting if people take the trouble to correct it”</p>
FIG. 5 in Early illustrations of Aepyornis eggs (1851 - 1887): from popular science to Marco Polo's roc bird
FIG. 5. — Comparative dimensions of various bird eggs. From Capus (1885). Aepyornis egg (4) compared with eggs of an ostrich (3), a hen (2) and a hummingbird (1). Photo E. Buffetaut.
FIG. 4 in Early illustrations of Aepyornis eggs (1851 - 1887): from popular science to Marco Polo's roc bird
FIG. 4. — "The Ruc's egg". Colour lithograph, frontispiece of The Book of Ser Marco Polo, the Venetian, Concerning the Kingdoms and Marvels of the East. Volume 2 (Yule 1871). Photo E. Buffetaut.
FIG. 6 in Early illustrations of Aepyornis eggs (1851 - 1887): from popular science to Marco Polo's roc bird
FIG. 6. — "Egg of the Epiornis" [sic]. From Scientific American, March 12, 1887. Photo E. Buffetaut.
FIG. 1 in Early illustrations of Aepyornis eggs (1851 - 1887): from popular science to Marco Polo's roc bird
FIG. 1. – Egg of Aepyornis maximus Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, 1851, from Rowley (1878). The original plate shows the egg (from Rowley's collection) at its actual size. This appears to be the first illustration of an Aepyornis egg in a scientific paper. Photo E. Buffetaut.
FIG. 3 in Early illustrations of Aepyornis eggs (1851 - 1887): from popular science to Marco Polo's roc bird
FIG. 3. — Egg of Aepiornis [sic] maximus, compared with a hen's egg. From Ward (1866). Photo E. Buffetaut.
An Ignoble Pursuit: Laughing and Thinking about Science Communication and the Ig Nobel Prize
<p><strong>Episode Summary:</strong></p> <p>In this episode we are discussing the relationship between science and being funny. Science communication relies on grabbing attention, making science relatable and exciting, and humanising scientists, we talked to Marc Abrahams founder and emcee of the Ig Nobel Prize and editor of Annals of Improbable Research about the role humour plays in this.</p> <p><strong>Resources and Links:</strong></p> <ul> <li><a href="https://improbable.com/about/people/MarcAbrahams.html">Marc Abrahams</a></li> <li><a href="https://www.improbable.com/ig-about/">Ig Nobel Prize</a></li> <li><a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/19N4X5aNWEBLyjHl54EmlVm1w2SqPlKRK/view?usp=sharing">Public engagement factsheet</a></li> </ul> <p><strong>Episode Quotes:</strong></p> <p>‘If you spend five seconds really looking at it, there’s something funny about it, and that’s what makes it interesting, and once you're interested, if only for five seconds, now you’re paying attention’</p> <p>‘All of us were looking at each other and thinking: at any moment now some ‘grown up’ person is going to stop us’</p>
Data Science in Biomedicine - Web of Science datasets
<p>Datasets from the Web of Science search for the number of publications associated with the topics "Data Science", "Big Data" and "Cloud Computing" from 2004 to 2019 in 9 different countries.</p>
Hubei STEC Data through CORS stations for DOY 059 and 061 of the year 2018 which used in (Using Real GNSS Data for Ionospheric Disturbance Remote Sensing Associated with Strong Thunderstorm over Wuhan City, manuscript submitted to Earth and Space Science Journal AGU)
<p>Manuscript submitted to Earth and Space Science AGU entitled with <br> (Using Real GNSS Data for Ionospheric Disturbance Remote Sensing Associated with Strong Thunderstorm over Wuhan City)<br> by: Mohamed Freeshah, Xiaohong Zhang, Xiaodong Ren, Jun Chen, and Zhibo Zhao</p> <p>The STEC data inside two compressed folders named as stec059 and stec061, respectively.<br> The STEC file name has the CORS station name for the first forth letters and next three numbers epresent the Day of the year.<br> For example:<br> ES010590.18STEC<br> ES01 is the station name<br> 059 is the day of year (DOY), 2018</p>
Data Release: Aurorasaurus Science Products Inventory & Survey Results (2014-2019)
<p>Aurorasaurus is an eight-year-old project: the first and only citizen science initiative that tracks auroras around the world via reports on our website, mobile apps, and social media. (See Kosar et al., (2018). Aurorasaurus Real-Time Citizen Science Aurora Data (Version v1.0) [Data set]. Zenodo. <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1255196">http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1255196</a>.)</p> <p>At the American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting 2019, MacDonald and Brandt (2019) gave a talk entitled "Towards developing appropriate and diverse metrics for citizen science – a case study." In the presentation, they examined our 2015 user survey, used more recent metrics to assess Aurorasaurus' current status, and began to lay a framework for their next round of evaluation. </p> <p>In order to frame the process, MacDonald and Brandt (2019) utilized the Science Products and Data Practices inventories created by Wiggins et al., (2018). The authors constructed lists of items and practices that should be present in citizen science projects. While the Science Products and Data Practices inventories are excellent for quantitative analysis, MacDonald and Brandt (2019) wanted to include qualitative analysis of past evaluation as well. To that end, they informally and retrospectively mapped Aurorasaurus' 2015 survey questions to the BASIK framework.</p> <p>Aurorasaurus is publishing this dataset as a case study for how the Wiggins et al. framework can be applied and combined with other systems.</p>
Dataset: Whole blood count, used in: "AIDeveloper: deep learning image classification in life science and beyond"
<p>Real-time deformability cytometry (RT-DC) data of whole blood measurements.<br> Data was used to train and validate a neural net to perform a blood count based on brightfield images of RT-DC.</p> <p>01_Model: Contains the final model as well as an AIDeveloper meta-file that allows to reproduce the training procedure. The metafile preciesely defines which dataset was used for training and which for validation as well as all parameters that were set in AIDeveloper.</p> <p>The following folders contain data that was used for training (and validation):</p> <ul> <li>Cambr</li> <li>KIK</li> <li>20190306_DextranBlood_AI_DataSet</li> <li>Gs_Blood_Train</li> </ul> <p>Testing data is stored on figshare:<br> https://figshare.com/articles/Krater_et_al_2020_Data_zip/9902636</p>
Austrian Science Fund (FWF) Open Access Compliance Monitoring 2019
<p><strong>I. Executive summary</strong></p> <p>The Austrian Science Fund (FWF), which is Austria's main funding organisation for basic research, encourages and helps all project leaders and project staff members to make their peer-reviewed research results freely available on the Internet. Any exceptions must be clearly indicated and justified. For projects that started after 1 January 2015, open access has been compulsory for all peer-reviewed publications. All principal investigators in FWF-funded projects are obliged to submit a final report within three months of completing their projects.</p> <p>In 2019 all in all 565 final reports were submitted to the FWF, 44 out of them couldn't report publications by now. The publications and other data mentioned in those reports are archived and analysed by the FWF. This report examines the state of compliance with open access requirements on the basis of final project reports submitted in the year 2019.</p> <p>Main findings:</p> <p>-A total of 9.353 publications were listed in the final project reports submitted in 2019.</p> <p>-Of those publications, 7.326 were conclusively identified as peer-reviewed.</p> <p>-Regarding compliance with the FWF's Open Access Policy, the analysis shows that 89% of the peer-reviewed publications that are listed in the submitted final reports of FWF projects in 2019 are openly accessible (2015: 83%, 2016: 92%, 2017: 90%, 2018: 92%).</p> <p>-The most frequently chosen option is hybrid open access (40%). The share of old open access is 19%, the share of green open access 22% and other open access 8%.</p> <p>-The majority of peer-reviewed publications submitted are journal articles (91%), 91% of which are openly accessible.</p> <p>-The lowest rate of compliance with the FWF's Open Access Policy can be found in editions, contributions to edited volumes and monographs (42%).</p> <p>-Although open access is not compulsory for non peer-reviewed publications, 43% of those publications are freely available through the internet.</p> <p>-The absolute number of publications listed in final reports in 2019 includes 565 publications that are mentioned several times in different projects; however, those repetitions do not ultimately affect the relative share of open access publications (89%).</p> <p><strong>II. Bias</strong></p> <p>Half of the publications were entered in the FWF’s database manually and with utmost care when the final project reports were received. Nevertheless, it is not possible to rule out minor errors entirely. The other half has been submitted to the FWF via a research documentation system (provided by ©Researchfish) in which FWF-funded researchers are able to enter and update their research data on an ongoing basis. The last check of the open access status was performed in January 2020. In some cases, the embargo period may have already expired, and publications labelled other open access in the FWF’s database may now be accessible through green open access.</p> <p>Whenever the status "peer-reviewed" could not be clearly identified according to FWF guidelines, the publications were classified as non peer-reviewed.</p> <p>Openly available non peer-reviewed publications were entered as 'openly available'.</p> <p> </p>
Les dimensions de l'autorité dans la littérature : synthèse de 26 travaux (et 72 propositions) issus des sciences de l'éducation, de la sociologie, de la philosophie, de la psychologie et de la psychologie sociale, classés en cinq dimensions de l'autorité.
<p>Matériel électronique supplémentaire associé au texte "Modélisation de l’exercice de l’autorité dans la relation d’enseignement "</p>
Science Communication Webinar Series: Taking Risks in Science Communication
<p>Blue-Action are coordinating a series of webinars on climate science communication in 2020. These are aimed at early-career researchers, but anyone who wishes to engage people with their research at any stage will find them valuable.</p> <p>This webinar was delivered on 18th September 2020 by <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/mcoath/?originalSubdomain=uk">Martin Coath</a>, who is a Senior Affiliated Researcher at the University of Lapland. Martin is an experienced science communicator, and here explains how sometimes you need to take risks to make an impact. </p>
Silene seeds from the laboratories of the Institute of Biophysics (Academy of Sciences) of Brno (Czech Republic)
<p>Seeds of <em>Silene </em>for the analysis of morphology (Martín Gómez et al.) obtained from the laboratories of the Academy of Sciences of Brno (Czech Republic). Photos contains 40 seeds of:</p> <p><em>Silene acutifolia; S. colpophylla; S. conica; S. diclinis; S. dioica; S. gallica; S. italica; S. latifolia; S. noctiflora; S. nutans; S. otites; S. pendula; S. saxifraga; S. schafta; S. tatarica; S. viscosa; S. vulgaris; S. wolgensis; S. zawadzkii</em></p>
Open Science Café
<p>Event for Berlin Science Week 2020: a series of 20 minute talks on Open Science topics by graduates of the ORION Open Science Train-the-Trainer course and guests. </p> <p>Talks: </p> <ul> <li>Open Science: A History </li> <li>Citizen Science</li> <li>‘SMOVE’: A Citizen Science Project</li> <li>Open Data</li> <li>Open myDNA: Become your own genome hacker</li> <li>Open Content and Licensing</li> <li>Open Hardware</li> <li>Open Source</li> <li>Open Access</li> <li>Science Communication</li> </ul> <p> </p>
ScienceDex guides
Understand access before you commit
These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.
Allen Brain Atlas
Allen Brain Atlas is an Allen Institute collection of brain map atlases, datasets, APIs, and analysis tools covering mouse, human, and non-human primate brain resources.
Annotated Behaviour and Observability Dataset (ABODe)
ABODe is a University of Edinburgh DataShare dataset for behavior classification in group-housed mice using home-cage video, identities, bounding boxes, ground-plate positions, and annotator labels.
DANDI Archive for NWB datasets
DANDI is a BRAIN Initiative archive for publishing and sharing neurophysiology data, including electrophysiology, optophysiology, and behavioral data packaged as NWB and related standards.
International Brain Laboratory public data
The International Brain Laboratory public data releases expose standardized mouse decision-making experiments, including Neuropixels recordings, widefield calcium imaging, behavior, and session metadata accessed through the ONE API.
OpenNeuro
OpenNeuro is a free, open platform for sharing neuroimaging datasets, with public search, dataset pages, and download paths for web, S3, DataLad, and the OpenNeuro CLI.