Scrape wikipedia-science: 117 new, 853 updated, 1000 total (kb-cron)

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_of_excellence-0.md

@@ -0,0 +1,53 @@
+---
+title: "Center of excellence"
+chunk: 1/2
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_of_excellence"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:50:32.541036+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+A center of excellence (COE or CoE), also called an excellence center, is a team, a shared facility or an entity that provides leadership, best practices, research, support, or training for a focus area.
+Due to its broad usage and vague legal precedent, a "center of excellence", in one context, may have completely different characteristics from another. The focus area might be a technology (such as the Java software platform), a business concept (such as business process management), a skill (such as negotiation) or a broad area of study (such as women's health). A center of excellence may also be formed to revitalize stalled initiatives. The term may also refer to a network of institutions collaborating with each other to pursue excellence in a particular area. (e.g. the Rochester Area Colleges Center for Excellence in Math and Science).
+
+== Organizations ==
+Within an organization, a center of excellence may refer to a group of people, a department or a shared facility. It may also be known as a competency center, or as a capability center, or as an excellence center. Stephen Jenner and Craig Kilford, in Management of Portfolios, mention COE as a coordinating function which ensures that change initiatives are delivered consistently and well, through standard processes and competent staff. In technology companies, the center of excellence concept is often associated with new software tools, technologies or associated business concepts such as service-oriented architecture or business intelligence.
+
+== Academia ==
+In academic institutions, a center of excellence often refers to a team with a clear focus on a particular area of research; such a center may bring together faculty members from different disciplines and provide shared facilities.
+
+=== South America and Asia ===
+The governments of Guyana and India jointly formed the Centre for Excellence in Information Technology (CEIT) at the University of Guyana in 2019.
+
+=== Australia ===
+In Australia, the Australian Research Council (ARC) funds a competitive grant program for centres of excellence which link a number of institutions within the country and internationally in a specific field of research. New centres are funded every three years and each run for seven years.
+
+=== Philippines ===
+In the Philippines, a center of excellence (COE) is a certification given by the Commission on Higher Education to departments within a higher education institution (e.g. a college within a university) which "continuously demonstrates excellent performance in the areas of instruction, research and publication, extension and linkages and institutional qualifications". Candidates for this certification are referred as centers of development (CODs) by the education body.
+
+=== Russia ===
+
+In Russia, the Center of Excellence status (in Russian it is used notion Scientific School) is granted by the Council for Grants of the President of the Russian Federation since 1996. To obtain the COE status, a group of scientists, usually based on a department at a university or a laboratory at an academic institute, and its leader should have a high scientific reputation and should submit an application, which presents a plan of scientific and educational work for the period of two years, to the council. The council issues a special certificate of the COE status to the leader of the group.
+
+=== United Kingdom ===
+In the United Kingdom, schools and sixth forms specialising in an area of curriculum are known as specialist schools. These schools are recognised as centres of excellence in their specialist subject areas. Schools that attained Beacon status were also recognised as centres of excellence, however this status has been discontinued.
+
+== Business and technology ==
+Walmart is designating certain employee healthcare venues as centers of excellence. In 2013, several regions of the country (Dallas-Fort Worth; Northern Arkansas; Orlando, FL) Walmart is offering employees free treatment when they use the designated CoEs. Treatments are administered to covered employees, who travel to the centers, along with a caregiver, for a course of treatment at the center. Depending on the budgetary outcome, Walmart will be sharing its operational results with other employers, as a method of controlling its healthcare costs.
+Ford Motor Company opened its Ford Ion Park battery center of excellence, meant to centralize a cross-functional team to accelerate the development of battery and battery cell technology. Electrical batteries would then serve as the basis for all-electric vehicles.
+Northrop Grumman has invested in a manned aircraft design center of excellence in Melbourne, Florida. It uses modeling and simulation tools at the center of excellence which predict the performance of its test-bed aircraft, as a method for reducing risk during the process of developing the B-21. In 2013, it designated five centres for excellence in the U.S.
+Huntington Ingalls Industries is building out an Unmanned Systems center of excellence, which is working on Boeing's project for the Navy's Extra Large Unmanned Undersea Vehicle.
+Asda's merchandising centre of excellence in Leeds contains "a full-size model store for mocking up different shelf layouts and a state-of-the-art virtual reality lab, where Asda and its suppliers can test store layouts and construction plans".
+Unum opened its IT centre of excellence in Carlow, Ireland in 2008, expanding it in 2020 promoting business technology in the U.S. and abroad
+IBM Consulting launched its center of excellence for transformative generative AI in 2023.
+Alliant Techsystems, Otis Elevator, Alcoa, Greatbatch, and GE have each used centers of excellence as organizational mechanisms to gain economies of scale, when discovering and sharing efficiencies of operation.
+
+== Healthcare ==
+In the healthcare sector, the term often refers to a center that provides sufficient and easily accessible medical services to patients.
+The National Institutes of Health (NIH) of the United States, in 2023, allocated $24 million to create 10 maternal health research centers of excellence.
+In the British NHS, the term is almost always used sarcastically, following its popularisation by Dr Peter Gooderham on the Doctors.net.uk fora. It can often be heard being used to describe tertiary centres by staff working in district general hospitals.
+
+== Defence ==
+
+=== NATO ===

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_of_excellence-1.md

@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
+---
+title: "Center of excellence"
+chunk: 2/2
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_of_excellence"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:50:32.541036+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+=== Europe ===
+In the European defense community, the European Centre of Excellence for Countering Hybrid Threats is a response to hybrid warfare on its periphery; the COE seeks to inform, and also protect its non-NATO components, as well as its non-PESCO members. The US Department of Defense (DoD) intends to use CoEs that focus on key technologies, such as drones, and commercial satellite imagery.
+
+=== United States Army ===
+
+The Army maintains numerous Centers of Excellence (CoE) at major universities, training installations, and other locations:
+
+Acquisition COE - Huntsville, Alabama
+Aviation COE - Fort Novosel, Alabama
+Cyber COE - Fort Gordon, Georgia
+Fires COE - Fort Sill, Oklahoma
+Human Resource COE - Fort Knox, Kentucky
+Initial Military Training COE - Fort Eustis, Virginia
+Intelligence COE - Fort Huachuca, Arizona
+Maneuver COE - Fort Moore, Georgia
+Maneuver Support COE Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri
+Medical COE - Joint Base San Antonio (JBSA), Texas
+Mission Command COE - Fort Leavenworth, Kansas
+NCO Leadership COE - Fort Bliss, Texas
+Space and Missile Defense CoE - Peterson Space Force Base, Colorado
+Special Operations COE - Fort Bragg, North Carolina
+Sustainment COE - Fort Gregg-Adams, Virginia
+TRADOC oversees ten of these Centers of Excellence, each focused on a separate area of expertise within the Army. These centers train over 500,000 Soldiers and service members each year.
+
+== See also ==
+
+Homeland Security Centers of Excellence
+Center for Excellence in Disaster Management and Humanitarian Assistance, U.S. Pacific Command
+Rochester Area Colleges Center for Excellence in Math and Science
+Center of Excellence for Stability Police Units
+European Centre of Excellence for Countering Hybrid Threats
+Cross-functional team (CFT)
+
+== References ==

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florimontane_Academy-0.md

@@ -0,0 +1,50 @@
+---
+title: "Florimontane Academy"
+chunk: 1/2
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florimontane_Academy"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:50:33.671470+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+The Florimontane Academy, originally established as the Florimontane Society, is a learned society founded in Annecy in 1606–1607. The society ceased to operate in 1610 and was reestablished in 1851.
+
+== History ==
+
+=== Foundation ===
+
+During the winter of 1606–1607, the Florimontane Academy was established in Annecy, taking inspiration from the Italian academies of the 16th century. The society was founded by two prominent Savoyards: Antoine Favre, Baron of Pérouges and President of the State Council of Genevois, and François de Sales, Prince-Bishop of Geneva. The academy sought to encourage and develop activity across theological, philosophical, scientific, and literary fields. Meetings were held at the Hôtel Bagnoréa on Rue Sainte-Claire in Annecy, the residence of Antoine Favre, which Galeazzo Gegald had constructed.
+The first Florimontane Academy benefited from the prominence of its founders and enjoyed considerable prestige. It was one of the earliest French-speaking academies, predating the French Academy by 29 years.
+The society comprised 40 members and operated under the patronage of Henri I of Savoy-Nemours, Duke of Geneva.
+The name “Florimontane” was selected to reflect the idea that “the muses flourished among the mountains of Savoy.”
+In 1610, the Florimontane Academy ceased to function following the departure of Antoine Favre from Annecy to Chambéry to assume the position of President of the Senate of Savoy. François de Sales, occupied with his pastoral duties, was unable to sustain the Academy on his own, and the society subsequently became inactive, remaining absent from the cultural landscape of Savoy until the 19th century.
+
+=== Reactivation ===
+
+In January 1851, a group of Savoyard notables—Jules Philippe (1827–1888), the scholar Éloi Serand (1826–1891), Dr. Louis Bouvier (1819–1908), and Étienne Machard (1824–1887)—established the Florimontane Association, which led to the reactivation of the former academy. Meetings were held in Éloi Serand’s store on Rue Filaterie in Annecy.
+The Florimontane Association defined its purpose as conducting research and highlighting all the living resources of the region, making accessible to the public ideas considered just, reasonable, useful, and practical, promoting improvements in the fields of economy, hygiene, and public health, providing courses for the education of the population, and gathering efforts to document and publicize the history of Savoy. The first meeting of the association took place on 7 July 1851. Subsequent meetings were held in Annecy’s old town hall, before being relocated to the new town hall, rooms of the Chamber of Commerce, or the city’s tourist office.
+The association adopted statutes in 1893 and was officially recognized as a public utility institution by decree on 17 December 1896.
+In 1911, it revised its statutes and was reconstituted as the Florimontane Academy. By 1913, its membership comprised 60 full members, 80 associate members, and 25 corresponding members.
+In 1916, following the bequest of Léon Marès (1854–1916), the academy acquired ownership of Montrottier Castle.
+It is a member of the National Conference of Academies of Sciences, Letters, and Arts.
+As of 2007, the academy had approximately 350 members, with around one-fifth classified as active members.
+
+== Publication ==
+The society initially published a bulletin from 1851, which continued for 152 volumes and was renamed the Revue savoisienne in 1859. This monthly journal included content related to the history of the Florimontane Academy and articles on regional history. Most issues are in the public domain and available on Gallica.
+Since 1949, the Florimontane Academy has supported research on its history and on Montrottier Castle, including the work of Joseph Serand. This support has continued since 2007 and has also encompassed the research of Julien Coppier on Léon Marès and Montrottier, published in the Revue savoisienne. Bernard Premat has authored a comprehensive volume of the Academy’s memoirs and documents covering its history in the 19th and 20th centuries.
+
+== Motto and emblem ==
+Under the patronage of the Duke of Nemours, the Florimontane Academy adopted the orange tree and its fruits as its emblem, with the motto Flores fructusque perennes (“Flowers and fruits all year round”), reflecting François de Sales’ admiration for the tree’s year-round flowering and fruiting. These symbols were later incorporated into the Academy of Sciences, Letters, and Arts of Savoy, founded in 1820.
+
+== Members of the academy ==
+
+=== Members of the first Florimontane Academy ===
+
+François de Sales (1567–1622) and Antoine Favre (1557–1624) were the founding members of the Florimontane Academy. They were supported by Duke Henri I of Savoy-Nemours (1572–1632), the diplomat Louis de Sales (1577–1654), François de Sales’ brother, Amédée III de Chevron-Villette, the poet and theologian Claude-Étienne Nouvellet (1545–1613), and the lawyer Claude de Quoëx.
+Other individuals are reported to have participated in the Academy with varying degrees of certainty. These include Claude-Louis Machet (after 1561–1610); the jurist René Favre de la Valbonne (1583–1656), son of Antoine Favre; the legal scholar Gaspard Schiffordegher (1583–1631); Alphonse I d’Elbène or del Bene (1538–1608), Abbot of Hautecombe; and Pierre Fenouillet (1580–1652), Bishop of Montpellier. Less certain participants mentioned in some sources include Abbé Jean De Age or Déage (d. 1610); Claude Favre de Vaugelas (1585–1650), another son of Antoine Favre; the writer Honoré d’Urfé (1568–1625); the theologian Jean-Pierre Camus (1584–1652); and Pierre Baranzano (1590–1622), professor of physics and Hebrew at the Collège Chappuisien.
+
+=== Members of the second Florimontane Academy ===
+In 2014, the Academy had approximately 350 members, including 60 full members, 60 associate members, many corresponding members, and several honorary members.
+
+==== Presidents of the Academy ====

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florimontane_Academy-1.md

@@ -0,0 +1,50 @@
+---
+title: "Florimontane Academy"
+chunk: 2/2
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florimontane_Academy"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:50:33.671470+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+==== Notable figures of the Academy ====
+Baron and Doctor Charles-Humbert-Antoine Despine (1777–1852)
+Alphonse-Louis-Joseph Despine (1818–1872), lawyer and professor of law in Annecy, author of several works on regional history and literature, member of the Société des Antiquaires de France
+Camille Dunant (1819–1909)
+Venance Payot (1826–1902), guide, collector, scholar, editor, and naturalist in Chamonix
+Aimé Constantin (1832–1900), scholar, philologist, writer; his work led to the first dictionary of the Savoyard dialect
+Jean-François Gonthier (1847–1913), priest of the Diocese of Annecy and historian of Savoy, honorary president of the Salésian Academy
+Léon Marès (1854–1916), collector
+Louis Balleydier (1856–1927), professor of law, Dean of the Faculty of Law of Grenoble, father-in-law of Louis Aussedat
+Charles Buttin (1856–1933), scholar and collector, author of 140 works for 286 publications, mainly on ancient arms, including the Catalogue de la Collection d'armes anciennes, européennes et orientales (1933)
+Aimé Vaschy (1857–1899), telegraph engineer and mathematician
+René Payot (1894–1970), Swiss journalist
+Georges Chapier (1906–1975), historian of Savoy, member of the Florimontane Academy in 1973, correspondent of the Academy of Philately, and honorary president of the Lyon circle for philatelic and numismatic studies (1974)
+
+== See also ==
+Learned society
+History of Savoy
+
+== Notes ==
+
+== References ==
+
+== Bibliography ==
+Coppier, Julien (2012). "Généreuse Haute-Savoie, histoire des dons et legs 1860-1940 : Léon Marès et son legs du château de Montrottier à l'Académie florimontane" [Generous Haute-Savoie, history of donations and bequests 1860-1940: Léon Marès and his bequest of the Château de Montrottier to the Académie Florimontane]. des Philanthropes œuvrant pour les Beaux-arts et loisirs [Philanthropists working for the fine arts and leisure activities] (in French). pp. 58–61.
+Premat, Bernard (2009). De l’Association florimontane à l’Académie florimontane : histoire d’une renaissance (1951-2007) [From the Florimontane Association to the Florimontane Academy: the story of a renaissance (1951-2007)] (in French). Vol. 5. Annecy: Mémoires et documents publiés par l’Académie florimontane.
+Coppier, Julien (2009). "Le domaine de Montrottier (Lovagny–Haute-Savoie), de la demeure du collectionneur Léon Marès à la propriété de l'Académie florimontane (1916-1919)" [The Montrottier estate (Lovagny–Haute-Savoie), from the home of collector Léon Marès to the property of the Florimontane Academy (1916–1919)]. Revue savoisienne (in French): 97–130.
+Coppier, Julien (2007). Le château de Montrottier : la demeure d’un collectionneur (Lovagny–Haute-Savoie) [Montrottier Castle: the home of a collector (Lovagny–Haute-Savoie)] (in French). Saint-Amand-Montrond: Édition Gaud.
+Coppier, Julien (2007a). La Florimontane et ses académiciens : 400 ans au service de la connaissance [The Florimontane and its academicians: 400 years in the service of knowledge] (in French).
+Serand, J (1949). Le château de Montrottier, étude historique et archéologique [The Château de Montrottier, historical and archaeological study] (in French).
+
+=== Exhibition ===
+"La Florimontane et ses académiciens : 400 ans au service de la connaissance" [The Florimontane and its academicians: 400 years in the service of knowledge]. Archives du Jura (in French). Retrieved January 28, 2026.
+
+== External links ==
+"Académie Florimontane official website" (in French). Retrieved January 28, 2026.
+"Académie florimontane (Annecy)" [Florimontane Academy (Annecy)]. VIAF (in French). Retrieved January 28, 2026.
+"Académie florimontane (Annecy)" [Florimontane Academy (Annecy)]. BnF (in French). Retrieved January 28, 2026.
+"Académie florimontane (Annecy)" [Florimontane Academy (Annecy)]. IdRef (in French). Retrieved January 28, 2026.
+"Académie florimontane (Annecy, France)" [Florimontane Academy (Annecy, France)]. LCCN (in French). Retrieved January 28, 2026.
+"Académie florimontane d'Annecy - ANNECY cedex" [Florimontane Academy of Annecy - ANNECY cedex]. Comité des travaux historiques et scientifiques (in French). Retrieved January 28, 2026.

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Wilbanks-0.md

@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+---
+title: "John Wilbanks"
+chunk: 1/1
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Wilbanks"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:50:28.195707+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+John Wilbanks is a Senior Fellow at the Datasphere Initiative, former  Head of Data at Biogen Digital Health, former Chief Commons Officer at Sage Bionetworks, and Executive Director at Science Commons. He served as a Senior Fellow at the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation and at FasterCures. He is known for his work on informed consent, open science and research networks. Wilbanks led a We the People petition supporting the free access of taxpayer-funded research data, which gained over 65,000 signatures. In February 2013, the White House responded, detailing a plan to freely publicize taxpayer-funded research data.
+Scientific American featured Wilbanks in "The Machine That Would Predict The Future" in 2011. Seed magazine named Wilbanks among their Revolutionary Minds of 2008, as a "Game Changer"  and the Utne Reader named him in 2009 as one of "50 visionaries who are changing your world". He frequently campaigns for wider adoption of open access publishing in science and the increased sharing of data by scientists.
+
+
+== Education and career ==
+Wilbanks grew up in Knoxville, Tennessee, US. He attended Tulane University and received a Bachelor of Arts in philosophy in 1994. He also studied modern letters at the Sorbonne in Paris.
+
+From 1994 to 1997, he worked in Washington, D.C., as a legislative aide to Congressman Fortney "Pete" Stark. During this time Wilbanks was also a grassroots coordinator and fundraiser for the American Physical Therapy Association. Wilbanks was the Berkman Center for Internet & Society's first assistant director from the fall of 1998 to the summer of 2000. There he led efforts in software development and Internet-mediated learning, and was involved in the Berkman Center's work on ICANN.
+While at the Berkman Center, Wilbanks founded Incellico, Inc., a bioinformatics company that built semantic graph networks for use in pharmaceutical research and development. He served as President and CEO, and led to the company's acquisition in the summer of 2003. He has also served as a Fellow at the World Wide Web Consortium on Semantic Web for Life Sciences, was a visiting scientist in the Project on Mathematics and Computation at MIT, and was a member of the National Advisory Committee for PubMed Central. He was a member of the Board of Directors for Sage Bionetworks and is on the advisory boards of Genomera, Genomic Arts, and Boundless Learning. He is an original author of the Panton Principles for sharing data.
+
+
+=== Consent to Research ===
+Consent to Research (CtR) was a project that provides a platform for people to donate their health data for the purposes of scientific research and the advancement of medicine. Since health data is restricted and expensive, this project provided people the opportunity to freely donate information that can only positively benefit medicine and patients at large. Consent to Research was connected to the Access2Research project, which aimed to free access over the Internet to scientific journal articles that are already taxpayer-funded. Wilbanks founded the project in 2011 and gave a TED Global talk about the project in 2012. Ultimately this project followed him to Sage Bionetworks and his work in corporate governance, and finally transitioned into the Participant-Centered Consent Toolkit and integrated into Apple's ResearchKit open source toolkit.
+
+
+=== Science Commons ===
+Wilbanks worked at Science Commons and Creative Commons from October 2004 to September 2011. As vice president of science he ran the Science Commons project for its five-year lifetime and continued to work on science after he joined the core Creative Commons organization. He has been interviewed by Popular Science magazine, KRUU Radio, and BioMed Central to discuss Science Commons.
+
+
+== Footnotes ==
+
+
+== External links ==
+
+Five experts discuss how intellectual property can be adapted to spread green tech, what we can learn from Pasteur, and how to inspire people to innovate.
+John Wilbanks' Common Knowledge blog at Science Blogs
+John Wilbanks' personal site, del-fi
+John Wilbanks at TED

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Tennant-0.md

@@ -0,0 +1,51 @@
+---
+title: "Jon Tennant"
+chunk: 1/1
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Tennant"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:50:25.671137+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+Jonathan Tennant (6 May 1988 – 9 April 2020) was an English open science activist, science communicator and vertebrate paleontologist.
+
+
+== Early life and paleontology ==
+Tennant was born in 1988 in Kirby Muxloe, Leicestershire. His first 18 years were in Leicester with his parents and two sisters, Rebecca and Sarah. Jon attended Granby Primary School, Bushloe High School and then Beauchamp College. He obtained a PhD from Imperial College London in 2017, on a potential extinction event at the Jurassic-Cretaceous boundary. He also published research on atoposaurids, an extinct group of small early crocodilian relatives.
+As a science communicator, Jon was a regular contributor to Discover on paleontology.
+
+
+== Open Science movement ==
+
+A key advocate, speaker and activist in the Open Science movement, he was a supporter of open access to knowledge and cultural change within the scientific community. He was an Editor for the PLOS Paleo Community, executive editor for Geoscience Communication, part of the Mozilla Open Leadership Cohort, and worked as Communications Director for ScienceOpen. With Jennifer Beamer, Jeroen Bosman, Björn Brembs, Neo Christopher Chung, Gail Clement, and others, he wrote an influential guide and strategy on open access and open research. 
+He was a panelist and keynote speaker at various academic and scholarly publishing conferences worldwide. Among his talks are 
+
+"Open science is just good science", 2018 DARIAH Annual Event on Open Science (keynote)
+"Have we started a fire?", 2019 Open Science Fellows Program from Wikimedia Deutschland (closing event)
+"Reproducibility: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Open Science", 2018 IEEE Conference Evaluation and Beyond – Methodological Approaches for Visualization (invited talk).
+Invited panelist at the international conference held in 2018 to celebrate the 20th anniversary of SciELO.
+In 2014, Tennant and open access advocates drafted an open letter to American Association for the Advancement of Science expressing concerns about the journal Science Advances. They cited issues with reuse restrictions, failure to meet Budapest Open Access Initiative standards, and high publication fees.
+
+
+=== Institutional initiatives ===
+He was a founder of the Open Science MOOC and the preprint service PaleorXiv.
+
+
+=== Ban from OpenCon and sexual assault allegations ===
+In 2018, Tennant was banned from open science conference OpenCon after violating the conference's anti-harassment policy. This ban was publicly announced by OpenCon in 2019. Tennant accepted that he had behaved inappropriately at a 2016 conference (which he claimed had involved an "isolated incident of dancing with a friend/colleague while at a party, and running my hands down their side") and apologised. Tennant was subsequently accused of rape and sexual assault, which Tennant denied. The ban and allegations had a serious negative impact on Tennant's standing within the open science movement and academia more broadly, causing him to lose positions in academic journals (among others) and speaking engagements.
+
+
+== Later life and death ==
+He later lived in Berlin, Paris, and Bali. Tennant died from a motorbike accident in Bali on 9 April 2020 at the age of 31.
+
+
+== References ==
+
+
+== External links ==
+
+List and summary of paleontology works
+Full list of open science related publications and talks
+Nate Breznau's 2022 article Legacy of Jon Tennant, ‘Open Science Is Just Good Science posthumously co-credited to Jon.
+The Open Science Training Handbook, of which Jon was a co-author.

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learned_society-0.md

@@ -0,0 +1,54 @@
+---
+title: "Learned society"
+chunk: 1/1
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learned_society"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:50:34.914134+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+A learned society ( LEHRN-id; also scholarly, intellectual, or academic society) is an organization that exists to promote an academic discipline, profession, or a group of related disciplines such as the arts and sciences. Membership may be open to all, may require possession of some qualification, or may be an honour conferred by election.
+Most learned societies are non-profit organizations, and many are professional associations. Their activities typically include holding regular conferences for the presentation and discussion of new research results, and publishing or sponsoring academic journals in their discipline. Some also act as professional bodies, regulating the activities of their members in the public interest or the collective interest of the membership.
+
+
+== History ==
+Some of the oldest learned societies are the Académie des Jeux floraux (founded 1323), Sodalitas Litterarum Vistulana (founded 1488), Accademia della Crusca (founded 1583), Accademia dei Lincei (founded 1603), Académie Française (founded 1635), German National Academy of Sciences Leopoldina (founded 1652), Royal Society (founded 1660) and French Academy of Sciences (founded 1666).
+
+
+== Significance ==
+Scholars in the sociology of science argue that learned societies are of key importance and their formation assists in the emergence and development of new disciplines or professions. In the form of professional associations, they can assist in the creation of pathways to leadership.
+
+
+== Structure ==
+Societies can be very general in nature, such as the American Association for the Advancement of Science, specific to a given discipline, such as the Modern Language Association, or specific to a given area of study, such as the Royal Entomological Society.
+Most are either specific to a particular country (e.g. the Chinese Academy of Sciences), though they generally include some members from other countries as well, often with local branches, or are international, such as the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions or the Regional Studies Association, in which case they often have national branches. But many are local, such as the Massachusetts Medical Society, the publishers of the internationally known The New England Journal of Medicine.
+Some learned societies (such as the Royal Society Te Apārangi) have been rechartered by legislation to form quasi-autonomous non-governmental organizations.
+
+
+== Membership and fellowship ==
+
+Membership may be open to all, may require possession of some qualification, or may be an honor conferred by election.
+Some societies offer membership to those who have an interest in a particular subject or discipline, provided they pay their membership fees. Older and more academic/professional societies may offer associateships and/or fellowships to fellows who are appropriately qualified by honoris causa, or by submission of a portfolio of work or an original thesis. A benefit of membership may be discounts on the subscription rates for the publications of the society. Many of these societies award post-nominal letters to their memberships.
+
+
+== Online academic communities ==
+Following the globalization and the development of information technology, certain scholarly societies—such as the Modern Language Association—have created virtual communities for their members. In addition to established academic associations, academic virtual communities have been so organized that, in some cases, they have become more important platforms for interaction and scientific collaborations among researchers and faculty than have traditional scholarly societies.
+Members of these online academic communities, grouped by areas of interests, use for their communication shared and dedicated listservs (for example JISCMail), social networking services (like Facebook or LinkedIn) and academic oriented social networks (like Humanities Commons, ResearchGate, Mendeley or Academia.edu).
+
+
+== See also ==
+
+Academic conferences
+List of learned societies
+National academy
+Professional association
+Text publication society
+
+
+== References ==
+
+
+== External links ==
+
+Scholarly Societies Project - Edition 2 – database of hundreds of scholarly societies in various fields, focusing on the oldest societies; includes abbreviations for their journal titles

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientific_bodies_explicitly_rejecting_intelligent_design-0.md

@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+---
+title: "List of scientific bodies explicitly rejecting intelligent design"
+chunk: 1/4
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientific_bodies_explicitly_rejecting_intelligent_design"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:50:36.121108+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+This article lists those scientific organisations and other nationally or internationally recognised groups that specifically reject intelligent design as a valid alternative to evolutionary theory.
+
+== United States ==

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientific_bodies_explicitly_rejecting_intelligent_design-1.md

@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
+---
+title: "List of scientific bodies explicitly rejecting intelligent design"
+chunk: 2/4
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientific_bodies_explicitly_rejecting_intelligent_design"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:50:36.121108+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+=== National ===
+The American Association for the Advancement of Science is the world's largest general scientific society. The AAAS serves some 262 affiliated societies and academies of science, serving 10 million individuals. A 2002 statement states: "[T]he lack of scientific warrant for so-called 'intelligent design theory' makes it improper to include as a part of science education."
+A 2006 statement on the teaching of evolution: "Some bills seek to discredit evolution by emphasizing so-called "flaws" in the theory of evolution or "disagreements" within the scientific community. Others insist that teachers have absolute freedom within their classrooms and cannot be disciplined for teaching non-scientific "alternatives" to evolution. A number of bills require that students be taught to "critically analyze" evolution or to understand "the controversy." But there is no significant controversy within the scientific community about the validity of the theory of evolution. The current controversy surrounding the teaching of evolution is not a scientific one."
+Q & A on Evolution and Intelligent Design: Is intelligent design a scientific alternative to contemporary evolutionary theory? No. Intelligent design proponents may use the language of science, but they do not use its methodology. They have yet to propose meaningful tests for their claims, there are no reports of current research on these hypotheses at relevant scientific society meetings, and there is no body of research on these hypotheses published in relevant scientific journals. So, intelligent design has not been demonstrated to be a scientific theory. American Association of University Professors is an organization of professors and other academics in the United States. AAUP membership is about 47,000, with over 500 local campus chapters and 39 state organizations. "deplores efforts in local communities and by some state legislators to require teachers in public schools to treat evolution as merely a hypothesis or speculation, untested and unsubstantiated by the methods of science, and to require them to make students aware of an 'intelligent-design hypothesis' to account for the origins of life. These initiatives not only violate the academic freedom of public school teachers, but can deny students an understanding of the overwhelming scientific consensus regarding evolution."
+Regarding Academic Freedom bills: "Such efforts run counter to the overwhelming scientific consensus regarding evolution and are inconsistent with a proper understanding of the meaning of academic freedom."
+American Astronomical Society is an American society of professional astronomers and other interested individuals, with over 7,000 members and six divisions. 2005 letter sent to President George W. Bush by society President, Dr. Robert P. Kirshner: "'Intelligent design' isn't even part of science – it is a religious idea that doesn't have a place in the science curriculum."
+2005 statement on the Teaching of Evolution: "'Intelligent Design' fails to meet the basic definition of a scientific idea: its proponents do not present testable hypotheses and do not provide evidence for their views that can be verified or duplicated by subsequent researchers. Since 'Intelligent Design' is not science, it does not belong in the science curriculum of the nation's primary and secondary schools."
+American Chemical Society is a scientific society that supports scientific inquiry in the field of chemistry, with more than 164,000 members at all degree-levels and in all fields of chemistry, chemical engineering, and related fields. It is the world's largest scientific society and one of the leading sources of authoritative scientific information. "urges... State and local education authorities to support high-quality science standards and curricula that affirm evolution as the only scientifically accepted explanation for the origin and diversity of species."
+American Geophysical Union The AGU represents over 43,000 Earth and space scientists. "Advocates of intelligent design believe that life on Earth is too complex to have evolved on its own and must therefore be the work of a designer. That is an untestable belief and, therefore, cannot qualify as a scientific theory."
+American Institute of Physics has a Governing Board policy statement supporting evolution and opposing creationism. American Psychological Association The Science Directorate and the APA Council of Representatives issued a Resolution Rejecting Intelligent Design As Scientific And Reaffirming Support For Evolutionary Theory. American Society of Agronomy The ASA represents over 10,000 members. "Intelligent design is not a scientific discipline and should not be taught as part of the K-12 science curriculum. Intelligent design has neither the substantial research base, nor the testable hypotheses as a scientific discipline. There are at least 70 resolutions from a broad array of scientific societies and institutions that are united on this matter."
+American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology The ASBMB is a scientific and educational society representing 12,000 biochemists and molecular biologists. ""Intelligent design" is not a theory in the scientific sense, nor is it a scientific alternative to the theory of evolution. ..."intelligent design" might be appropriate to teach in a religion or philosophy class, but the concept has no place in a science classroom and should not be taught there." The president of the society wrote, "Their [religious fundamentalists'] latest ploy masquerades as "critical thinking" or "freedom of expression" and takes the form of laws prohibiting someone from being dismissed from his or her job for teaching the alleged controversy about evolution, by which they mean that it's perfectly OK for a so-called science teacher to present creationism, intelligent design and other Bible-in-science-clothing religious doctrines as legitimate alternatives to evolution, even though anyone who does so ought to be fired for incompetence."
+Botanical Society of America "The proponents of creationism/intelligent design promote scientific ignorance in the guise of learning. As professional scientists and educators, we strongly assert that such efforts are both misguided and flawed, presenting an incorrect view of science, its understandings, and its processes."
+Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology The Federation represents 22 professional societies and 84,000 scientists, and its statement FASEB Opposes Using Science Classes to Teach Intelligent Design, Creationism, and other Non-Scientific Beliefs was adopted by the FASEB Board of Directors. National Association of Biology Teachers "Scientists have firmly established evolution as an important natural process. ... Explanations or ways of knowing that invoke metaphysical, non-naturalistic or supernatural mechanisms, whether called "creation science," "scientific creationism," "intelligent design theory," "young earth theory," or similar designations, are outside the scope of science and therefore are not part of a valid science curriculum." - Adopted by the NABT Board of Directors, 1995. Revised 1997, 2000, May 2004, and 2008. Endorsed by: The Society for the Study of Evolution, 1998; The American Association of Physical Anthropologists, 1998. The National Center for Science Education itself opposes the teaching of intelligent design, acting as a clearinghouse for information regarding efforts to force creationism (including intelligent design) into the classroom. The NCSE describes intelligent design as "a successor to the "creation science" movement, which dates back to the 1960s...The term "intelligent design" was adopted as a replacement for "creation science," which was ruled to represent a particular religious belief in the Supreme Court case Edwards v. Aguillard in 1987. IDC proponents usually avoid explicit references to God, attempting to present a veneer of secular scientific inquiry. IDC proponents introduced some new phrases into anti-evolution rhetoric...but the basic principles behind these phrases have long histories in creationist attacks on evolution.

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientific_bodies_explicitly_rejecting_intelligent_design-2.md

@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+---
+title: "List of scientific bodies explicitly rejecting intelligent design"
+chunk: 3/4
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientific_bodies_explicitly_rejecting_intelligent_design"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:50:36.121108+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+Underlying both of these concepts, and foundational to IDC itself, is an early 19th-century British theological view, the 'argument from design.'" The NCSE also maintains lists of organizations from around the world that oppose the teaching of creationism, including intelligent design, listing 71 scientific organizations, 23 religious organizations, 43 educational organizations, and 10 civil liberties organizations. The National Science Teachers Association NSTA is a professional association of 55,000 science teachers and administrators. "We stand with the nation's leading scientific organizations and scientists, including Dr. John Marburger, the president's top science advisor, in stating that intelligent design is not science. … It is simply not fair to present pseudoscience to students in the science classroom."
+United States National Academy of Sciences
+The academy wrote a statement entitled "Science and Creationism: A View from the National Academy of Sciences, Second Edition National Academy of Sciences" which said that "Creationism, Intelligent Design, and other claims of supernatural intervention in the origin of life or of species are not science". There was also a letter from Bruce Alberts, former president, NAS: "We stand ready to help others in addressing the increasingly strident attempts to limit the teaching of evolution or to introduce non-scientific 'alternatives' into science courses and curricula. If this controversy arrives at your doorstep, I hope that you will both alert us to the specific issues in your state or school district and be willing to use your position and prestige as a member of the NAS in helping to work locally."

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientific_bodies_explicitly_rejecting_intelligent_design-3.md

@@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
+---
+title: "List of scientific bodies explicitly rejecting intelligent design"
+chunk: 4/4
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientific_bodies_explicitly_rejecting_intelligent_design"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:50:36.121108+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+=== State and university ===
+Kentucky Academy of Science states "...in the strongest and most determined ways possible deplores the decision to substitute "change over time" for "evolution" in the state teaching standards, urges that the original wording be reinstated, and decries any attempt to remove the teaching of basic evolutionary theory..." Adopted by KAS Governing Board November 6, 1999. Passed unanimously by KAS membership November 6, 1999. Unanimously approved again at its annual business meeting on November 11, 2005. The KAS also voted to endorse the October 2002 AAAS Board Resolution on Intelligent Design Theory.
+The Kentucky Paleontological Society Statement on Teaching Evolution states that "KPS is opposed to any attempt to teach creationism or omit mention of evolution from public school instruction. Furthermore, evolution should be called "evolution" in curriculum guidelines and other documents; euphemisms such as "change over time" are intellectually dishonest for they attempt to conceal the terminology used by scientists." Executive Committee approved this statement in 1999.
+The Lehigh University Department of Biological Sciences responded to faculty member and intelligent design proponent Michael Behe's claims about the scientific validity and usefulness of intelligent design, publishing an official position statement which says "It is our collective position that intelligent design has no basis in science, has not been tested experimentally, and should not be regarded as scientific."
+
+== Other countries and international bodies ==
+Elie Wiesel Foundation for Humanity Nobel Laureates Initiative. This organization has 38 Nobel laureates, who wrote a letter calling upon the Kansas Board of Education to reject intelligent design. "Logically derived from confirmable evidence, evolution is understood to be the result of an unguided, unplanned process of random variation and natural selection. As the foundation of modern biology, its indispensable role has been further strengthened by the capacity to study DNA. In contrast, intelligent design is fundamentally unscientific; it cannot be tested as scientific theory because its central conclusion is based on belief in the intervention of a supernatural agent."
+Council of Europe. In 2007 the council's "Committee on Culture, Science and Education" issued a report, The dangers of creationism in education, which states "The intelligent design ideas annihilate any research process. It identifies difficulties and immediately jumps to the conclusion that the only way to resolve them is to resort to an intelligent cause without looking for other explanations. It is thus unacceptable to want to teach it in science courses. It is not enough to present it as an alternative theory in order to have it included in the science syllabus. In order to claim to be scientific, it is only necessary to refer to natural causes in one's explanations. The intelligent design ideas, however, only refers to supernatural causes" and ""Intelligent design", which is the latest, more refined version of creationism, does not completely deny a degree of evolution. However, this school of thought has hardly provided any fuel for the scientific debate up to now. Though more subtle in its presentation, the doctrine of intelligent design is no less dangerous".
+Intelligent Design is not Science Initiative. This initiative was brought forth by a coalition organized by the Faculty of Science at the University of New South Wales representing more than 70,000 Australian scientists and science teachers with signatories from the Australian Academy of Science, the Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies, and the Australian Science Teachers Association. "(Intelligent design) is a theological or philosophical notion... Evolution meets all (scientific) criteria but ID meets none of them: it is not science."
+Interacademy Panel Statement on the Teaching of Evolution. This is a joint statement issued by the national science academies of 67 countries, including the United Kingdom's Royal Society, warning that scientific evidence about the origins of life was being "concealed, denied, or confused". It urges parents and teachers to provide children with the facts about the origins and evolution of life on Earth.
+The International Society for Science and Religion declared that "[w]e believe that intelligent design is neither sound science nor good theology."
+Project Steve. A statement signed by 1200 scientists, all named Steve. "It is scientifically inappropriate and pedagogically irresponsible for creationist pseudoscience, including but not limited to "intelligent design," to be introduced into the science curricula of our nation's public schools."
+The Royal Astronomical Society of Canada, Ottawa Centre, said, "The RASC Ottawa Centre, then, is unequivocal in its support of contemporary evolutionary theory that has its roots in the seminal work of Charles Darwin and has been refined by findings accumulated over 140 years. Some dissenters from this position are proponents of non-scientific explanations of the nature of the universe.  These may include "creation science", "creationism", "intelligent design" or other non-scientific "alternatives to evolution". While we respect the dissenters’ right to express their views, these views are theirs alone and are in no way endorsed by the RASC Ottawa Centre.  It is our collective position that these explanations do not meet the characteristics and rigour of scientific empiricism."
+The Royal Society "opposes the misrepresentation of evolution in schools to promote particular religious beliefs" and states "intelligent design has far more in common with a religious belief in creationism than it has with science, which is based on evidence acquired through experiment and observation. The theory of evolution is supported by the weight of scientific evidence; the theory of intelligent design is not."
+
+== See also ==
+Creation–evolution controversy
+Level of support for evolution
+
+== References ==

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIRCEN-0.md

@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
+---
+title: "MIRCEN"
+chunk: 1/1
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIRCEN"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:50:37.630787+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+MIRCEN (Microbial Resources Centers) is an international network of microbiology and biotechnology centres established with support from UNESCO.
+
+
+== See also ==
+UNESCO
+World Federation for Culture Collections
+Culture collection
+Biotechnology
+
+
+== References ==

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observatory-0.md

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ chunk: 1/3
 source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observatory"
 category: "reference"
 tags: "science, encyclopedia"
-date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:35:40.643015+00:00"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:50:38.955199+00:00"
 instance: "kb-cron"
 ---
 

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observatory-1.md

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ chunk: 2/3
 source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observatory"
 category: "reference"
 tags: "science, encyclopedia"
-date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:35:40.643015+00:00"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:50:38.955199+00:00"
 instance: "kb-cron"
 ---
 

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observatory-2.md

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ chunk: 3/3
 source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observatory"
 category: "reference"
 tags: "science, encyclopedia"
-date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:35:40.643015+00:00"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:50:38.955199+00:00"
 instance: "kb-cron"
 ---
 

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_site-0.md

@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+---
+title: "Research site"
+chunk: 1/1
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_site"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:50:41.242537+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+CHALLENGES of MATHEMATICS LEARNING In joining extracurricular activities
+
+
+== Clinical research ==
+In clinical research a research site conducts all or part of a clinical trial. For clinical trials which recruit research participants in multiple locations, often the research will have a headquarters then multiple regional research sites to conduct the research in that region. In a network of research sites where all are recruiting study participants, sites with low recruitment benefit from coaching from sites with high recruitment.
+Characteristics of good clinical research sites include setting good timelines, early participant recruitment, and having a management plan for efficiency.
+Researchers in nursing have reported challenges accessing the facilities designated for conventional medical research.
+The design of a research site should have a means of detecting fraud.
+
+
+== Ethnographic research ==
+Researchers who do not have a cultural tie to a research population may have difficulty doing ethnographic research with that community.
+
+
+== References ==
+
+
+== External links ==
+Basic Requirements for Starting a Research Site from American Society of Clinical Oncology

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uses_of_open_science-0.md

@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
+---
+title: "Uses of open science"
+chunk: 1/9
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uses_of_open_science"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:50:26.910892+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+The open science movement has expanded the uses of scientific output beyond specialized academic circles.
+Non-academic audience of journals and other scientific outputs has always been significant but was not recorded by the leading metrics of scientific reception, which favor citation data. In the late 1990s, the first open-access online publications started to attract a large number of individual visits. This transformation has renewed the theories of scientific dissemination, as direct access to publications curtailed the classic model of scientific popularization. Social impact and potential uses by lay readers have become focal points of discussion in the development of open science platforms and infrastructures.
+Analysis of open science uses has required the development of new methods, including log analysis, crosslinking analysis or altmetrics, as the standard bibliometric approach failed to record the non-academic reception of scientific productions.
+In the 2010s, several detailed studies were devoted to the reception of specific open science platforms due to the increasing availability of use data. Log analysis and surveys showed that professional academics do not make up the majority of the audience, as recurrent reader profiles include students, non-academic professionals (policy makers, industrial R&D, knowledge workers) and "private citizens" with various motivations (personal health, curiosity, hobby). Traffic on open science platforms is stimulated by a larger ecosystem of knowledge sharing and popularization, which includes non-academic productions like blogs. Non-academic audiences tend to prefer the use of local language, which has created new incentives in favor of linguistic diversity in science.
+
+== Concepts and definition ==
+
+=== Bibliometrics and its limitations ===
+After the Second World War, the reception of scientific publications has been increasingly measured by quantitative counts of citations. The field of bibliometrics coalesced in parallel to the development of the first computed search engine, the Science Citation Index, originally established by Eugene Garfield in 1962. Founding figures of the field, like the British historian of science Derek John de Solla Price, were proponents of bibliometric reductionism, i.e., the reduction of all possible bibliometric indicators to citation data and citation graphs. Bibliometric indicators, like the Impact Factor, have had a significant influence over research policy and research evaluation since the 1970s.
+Academic search engine, citation data collection and the related metrics were intentionally designed to favor English-speaking journals. Until the development of open science platforms, "very little [was] actually known about the impact of Latin American journals overall". The use of standard bibliometric indicators like the impact factor yielded a very limited outlook on the breadth and diversity of the academic publishing ecosystem in this region and other non-Western areas: "Putting aside issues of equity, the underrepresentation and shear low number of journals from developing countries mean that journals that are geared towards the developing world will have less of its citations counted than one geared towards journals that are in the dataset."
+In the early developments, the open science movement partly coopted the standard tools of bibliometrics and quantitative evaluation: "the fact that no reference was made to metadata in the main OA declarations (Budapest, Berlin, Bethesda) has led to a paradoxical situation (…) it was through the use of the Web of Science that OA advocates were eager to show how much accessibility led to a citation advantage compared to paywalled articles." After 2000, an important bibliometric literature was devoted to the citation advantage of open access publications.
+By the end of the 2000s, the impact factor and other metrics had been increasingly held responsible for a systemic lock-in of prestigious non-accessible sources. Key figures of the open science movement, such as Stevan Harnad, called for the creation of "open access scientometrics" that would take "advantage of the wealth of usage and impact metrics enabled by the multiplication of online, full-text, open access digital archives." As the public of open science expanded beyond academic circles, new metrics should aim for "measuring the broader societal impacts of scientific research."

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uses_of_open_science-1.md

@@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
+---
+title: "Uses of open science"
+chunk: 2/9
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uses_of_open_science"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:50:26.910892+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+=== Non-academic audience ===
+Academic journals have always had a significant non-academic audience, be they students, professionals, or amateurs. In 2000, one-third of these readers had never authored a scientific publication. This rate may be higher for social science journals, which may also act as intellectual periodicals. During the second half of the 20th century, the non-academic audience may have continuously expanded in Western countries, along with the increasing prevalence of high school education: "the percentage of U.S. adults with a minimal level of understanding of the meaning of scientific study has increased from 12 percent in 1957 to 21 percent in 1999".
+The prevalence of non-academic audience raises additional issues on the relevance and scope of classic bibliometric measures, as they would "never appear in citation data". The infrastructures and business models put in place by leading scientific publishers do not consider non-academic uses. Following the periodical crisis of the 1980s and the inflation of subscription prices, major journals have largely become unattainable for lay readers or independent researchers not affiliated with a large research institution. Search engines and bibliographic databases developed since the 1960s and the 1970s were meant to be used by professional librarians. Leading scientific publishers tacitly rely on a "gap" model of scientific reception, where specialized scientific knowledge is not directly accessible but mediated and popularized.
+The shift of academic journals to electronic publishing and open access has underlined the significant discrepancy between the measures of citation counts. By the late 1990s, online journals and archive repositories had evidently attracted a very large audience: "Within individual disciplines the change has been nearly instantaneous. As an example, in mid-1997 the number of papers downloaded from astronomy's digital library, the Smithsonian/NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS; ads.harvard.edu) exceeded the sum of all the papers read in all of astronomy's print libraries". Log studies have regularly underlined that publication of open access has a much higher rate of use and downloading than publications behind a paywall.
+The enlargement of the audience of scientific work to non-academic has always been a key objective of the open access movement: "even the earliest formulations of the concept of open access included the general public as a potential audience for open access". The Budapest Open Access Initiative of 2001 includes among the beneficiaries of open access "scientists, scholars, teachers, students, and other curious minds".
+In an open science context, non-academic audience has been associated with a wider figure: the lay reader or unexpected reader.  Once universally accessible, an academic work can have unplanned readers or users. In 2006, John Willinsky conjectured that "it is not difficult to imagine occasions when a dedicated history teacher, an especially keen high school student, an amateur astronomer, or an ecologically concerned citizen might welcome the opportunity to browse the current and relevant literature pertaining to their interests." Unexpected forms of reception did happen as the Editor in chief of PLOS once received a promising research on the modelling of pandemics, which turned out to be written by "a fifteen-year old high school student". The lay reader is not necessarily part of a non-academic audience, as a professional scientist may become one if "the information sought is outside his or her area of expertise". Not all unexpected readers behave similarly or have the same capacity of using academic resources. Even where they are not dealing with their main domain of expertise, academic researchers or some professionals (the knowledge workers) have acquired some generic skills for bibliographic analysis, such as following citations in the literature.
+
+=== Unanticipated academic uses ===
+Paywalled journals did not satisfy a larger range of unanticipated academic uses, as the costs of subscription access have been conditioned on the field of work or the available resources at the institutional level. In 2011, Michael Carroll introduced a typology of five "unanticipated readers" which are beyond the scope of the reading expectations of online academic journals: serendipitous readers (who discover the publication through complex reading paths), the under-resourced readers (presumably uninitiated, like high school students) interdisciplinary readers (scientists that belong to a different field) international readers (scientist that work within a different national frame) and machine readers (bots that retrieve a corpus, for instance as part of a text mining project).
+The development of academic pirate platforms like Sci-Hub or Libgen highlighted structural inequalities on a global scale: "The geography of Sci-Hub usage generally looks like a map of scientific productivity, but with some of the richer and poorer science-focused nations flipped." High rates of sci-hub use have been especially found in Russia, Algeria, Brazil, Turkey, Mexico and India, which are all countries with significant local academic productions despite having fewer resources than OECD countries: "relatively to their national scientific production, middle-income countries had the more intensive use of pirated academic works". The audience of pirate academic platforms remains significant even in North American and European universities endowed with large library subscriptions, as access is commonly perceived as more straightforward than in paywalled libraries: "even for journals to which the university has access, Sci-Hub is becoming the go-to resource".
+
+=== From impact factor to social impact ===
+The development of large open science platforms and infrastructure after 2010 entailed a shift in the measurement of scientific impact, from a strong focus on highly quoted English-speaking journals to an expanded analysis of the social circulation of scientific publications. This transformation has been especially noticeable in Latin America, due to the early development of public-funded international publishing platforms like Redalyc, or Scielo: "There is a definite sense in Latin America that the investment in science will result in development in a more broadly defined sense—beyond simply innovation and economic growth."
+In 2015, Juan Pablo Alperin introduced a systematic measure of social impact by relying on a diverse set of indicators (log analysis, survey and altmetrics). This approach entailed a conceptual redefinition of key concepts of scientific reception, such as impact, reach or reader:

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uses_of_open_science-2.md

@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
+---
+title: "Uses of open science"
+chunk: 3/9
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uses_of_open_science"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:50:26.910892+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+I turn our attention to these alternative, public forms of research impact and reach by examining the Latin American case. In this study, impact will be assessed through evidence of the research literature being saved, discussed, forwarded, recommended, mentioned, or cited, both within and beyond the academic community (…) Reach refers, in this study, to the extent to which the research literature is viewed or downloaded by members of various audiences, beginning with the traditional academic readership and extending outward through related professions, and perhaps journalists, teachers, enthusiasts, and members of the public (…) By looking at a broad range of indicators of impact and reach, far beyond the typical measures of one article citing another, I argue, it is possible to gain a sense of the people that are using Latin American research, thereby opening the door for others to see the ways in which it has touched those individuals and communities.
+The unprecedented focus on the social impact of science fits with alternative models of scientific popularization. In 2009, Alesia Zuccala introduced a radiant model of open science dissemination with a variety of mediated and unmediated connections between non-academic audience and academic production: "Sometimes [research] engages the lay public—this is the co-production model of science communication—and sometimes self-selected intermediaries tell members of the public what they should know—the education model of science communication".
+
+== Methods ==
+While open science has been largely theorized to have a significant impact on academic and non-academic access to literature, research investigation in this area has proven challenging: it has "the subject of many discussions and indeed was the basis for a lot of the advocacy work and many funding agencies' OA policies, but rarely so in formal published studies" By definition, open science productions are non-transactional and as such their use leave much less traces than the distribution of commercialized scientific outputs. Overall, it is very difficult to retrieve "data on user demographics from currently available information sources (e.g., repositories and publisher platforms)".
+The classic methods of bibliometric studies, including citation analysis, are largely unable to capture the new forms of reception created by open science. Alternative approaches had to be developed in the 2000s and the 2010s, and for a long time, open science advocates and policy-makers had to rely on limited evidence.
+
+=== Survey ===
+Surveys have been the primary method of analyzing scientific reception before the development of bibliometrics.
+After the development of electronic publishing and open access, survey methods have also migrated online. Pop-up surveys were introduced for academic publications in the early 2000s: they made it possible to query the user at the exact moment when the resource was retrieved and could be correlated with log data. Yet, "response rates of pop-up surveys tend to be low", which may ultimately distort the representativeness of the survey.
+Since 2002, large international surveys of the uses of academic resources have been conducted by Simon Inger and Tracy Gardner with the support of several major scientific organizations and publishers. While not specifically focused on open science, the survey strived to include a more diverse subset of potential users beyond academic authors.

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uses_of_open_science-3.md

@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
+---
+title: "Uses of open science"
+chunk: 4/9
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uses_of_open_science"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:50:26.910892+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+=== Log Analysis ===
+Academic publications have been among the earliest corpora used for log analysis. The first applied studies in the area long predate the web, as interconnected scientific infrastructures were already widely used in North America and Europe by the 1970s and 1980s.
+In 1983, several studies, pioneered by the Online Computer Library Center, analyzed "transaction logs" left by database users. Logs were stored on magnetic tapes at the time, and a large part of the analysis was devoted to the reformatting and standardization of the data. Standard methods of log analysis were already implemented in these early studies, such as the use of probabilistic approaches based on Markov Chains, in order to identify the more regular patterns of user behavior or the comparison with more user surveys.
+The use of logs and other reader metrics to measure the reception of academic work has remained marginal. Large commercial databases, like the Web of Science and Scopus, had no incentives to divulge reading statistics and mostly use them for internal purposes. Bibliometric indices based on aggregated citation counts, like the impact factor or the h-index, have been favored as the leading measures of academic impact.
+Beyond the restrictions imposed by leading publishers, log analysis has raised significant methodological issues. Data logging processes differ significantly depending on the structure of the interface: "The number of full-text downloads may be artificially inflated when publishers require users to view HTML versions before accessing PDF versions or when linking mechanisms". Automated access, including search engine indexers or robots, can also largely distort aggregated visit counts. This uncertainty impedes the comparability of data: "issues such as journal interfaces continue to affect how users interact with content users, making even standardized reports difficult, if not impossible, to compare."
+Log analysis has been revived in the 2010s due to technological developments and the emergence of large open science platforms. Standards for the retrieval of academic log data have been introduced in the early 2010s, such as COUNTER, PIRUS or MESUR. These standards were, by design, limited to specialized research use due to their integration into academic infrastructures.
+The development of open-source web analytics software like Matomo has established an emerging standard for log collection. During the same period, publicly funded scientific platforms have started to share use data openly, as part of their enlarged commitment to open science. In Latin America, both Redalyc and SciELO "provide such usage statistics to the public", although they have remained largely underused: "It is surprising that given the availability of these data, nobody has conducted a study analyzing different dimensions of downloads, beyond the overall view counts and "top 10" lists of articles available from time to time on the respective Web portals."
+In 2011, Michael J. Kurtz and Johan Bollen called for the development of usage bibliometrics, an emerging field that "provides unique opportunities to address the known shortcomings of citation analysis". Increased access to log data from open science platforms has made it possible to publish extensive case studies on SciELO and Redalyc, Érudit, OpenEdition.org, Journal.fi or The Conversation
+
+=== Crosslinking ===
+The web itself and some of its key components (such as search engines) were partly a product of bibliometrics theory. In its original form, it was derived from a bibliographic scientific infrastructure commissioned to Tim Berners-Lee by the CERN for the specific needs of high energy physics, ENQUIRE. The onset of the World Wide Web in the mid-1990s made Garfield's citationist dream more likely to come true. In the world network of hypertexts, not only is the bibliographic reference one of the possible forms taken by a hyperlink inside the electronic version of a scientific article, but the Web itself also exhibits a citation structure, links between web pages being formally similar to bibliographic citations." Consequently, bibliometrics concepts have been incorporated in major communication technologies the search algorithm of Google: "the citation-driven concept of relevance applied to the network of hyperlinks between web pages would revolutionize the way Web search engines let users quickly pick useful materials out of the anarchical universe of digital information."
+While the web immediately affected reading practices, by creating seamless connections between texts, it did not transform to a similar extent the quantitative analysis of citation data, which remained mostly focused on academic connections. Global analysis of hyperlinking and backlinks makes it possible to extend the citation analysis beyond scholarly publications and recover the expanding scope of open science circulations: "We have witnessed a proliferation of means of disseminating scholarly publications via academic blogs, scientific magazines destined to a wider audience." In 2011, a log analysis of the Kyoto University website identified a highly diversified set of links to scientific publications. In 2019, a study supported by the Aix-Marseille University of crosslinkings to the French open science platform OpenEdition highlighted that "scientific literature from a largely open access hosting platform is re-appropriated and repurposed for various uses in the public arena."

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uses_of_open_science-4.md

@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+---
+title: "Uses of open science"
+chunk: 5/9
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uses_of_open_science"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:50:26.910892+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+=== Altmetrics ===
+During the 2000s and 2010s, the web was increasingly dominated by very large social media platforms that curate and shape a significant part of the digital public sphere. The public reception of scientific literature has also largely migrated to these platforms. This evolution has prompted the development of new metrics and quantitative methods aiming to map the circulation of publications on social media: the altmetrics.
+The concept of alt-metrics was introduced in 2009 by Cameron Neylon and Shirly Wu as article-level metrics. In contrast with the focus of leading metrics on journals (impact factor) or, more recently, on individual researchers (h-index), the article-level metrics makes it possible to track the circulation of individual publications: "article that used to live on a shelf now lives in Mendeley, CiteULike, or Zotero – where we can see and count it" As such they are more compatible with the diversity of publication strategies that has characterized open science: preprints, reports or even non-textual outputs like dataset or software may also have associated metrics. In their original research proposition, Neylon and Wu favored the use of data from reference management software like Zotero or Mendeley. The concept of altmetrics evolved and came to cover data extracted "from social media applications, like blogs, Twitter, ResearchGate and Mendeley." Social media sources proved especially to be more reliable on a long-term basis, as specialized academic tools like Mendeley came to be integrated into a proprietary ecosystem developed by leading scientific publishers. Major altmetrics indicators that emerged in the 2010s include Altmetric.com, PLUMx and ImpactStory.
+As the meaning of altmetrics shifted, the debate over the positive impact of the metrics evolved toward their redefinition in an open science ecosystem: "Discussions on the misuse of metrics and their interpretation put metrics themselves in the center of open science practices." Social media altmetrics are limited to a specific subset of social media platforms and, within the platforms, to numeric metrics of reception let by users such as likes, shares or comments: "However, 'altmetrics' has continued in the same tradition as the older biblio/scientometrics by basing its indicators on numerical trace, i.e., computing the number of likes, posts, downloads, tweets or retweets a scholarly publication gets on the web with the result that neither of these fields provide information on the actual use of the scholarly publications cited nor the reasons for which they were cited."
+While altmetrics were initially conceived for open science publications and their expanded circulation beyond academic circles, their compatibility with the emerging requirements for open metrics has been brought into question: social network data, in particular, is far from transparent and readily accessible. The conversation tracked on social media may not be that representative of the social impact of research, as researchers are overly represented in these spaces: "about half of the tweets mentioning journal articles are from academics". In 2016, Ulrich Herb published a systematic assessment of the leading publications' metrics in regard to open science principles and concluded that "neither citation-based impact metrics nor alternative metrics can be labeled open metrics. They all lack scientific foundation, transparency and verifiability."
+
+== Current uses ==
+Most empirical information retrieved on open science use is platform-specific.
+
+=== User demographics ===
+
+Studies of the use of open science resources have generally highlighted the diversity of user profiles, with academic researchers only representing a minor segment of the audience. In 2015, the two leading Latin American platforms, Redalyc and SciELO, had mostly an audience of university students (with 50% and 55% respectively) and professionals in non-academic sectors (20% in SciELO and 17% in Redalyc). Once discounted from other university employees, "researchers only make up 5–6% of the total users". On the Finnish platform journal.fi, students are also the main demographic group (with 40% of users), but academic researchers still make up for a large group (36%).
+Convergent estimations of lay readers have been given by the different open science platform studies: 9% of amateur/personal uses in SciELO and 6% in Redalyc, 8% of "private citizens" in the reader survey of journal.fi.
+Open science platforms have a balanced gender distribution. The two Latin American platforms, Redalyc and Scielo, tend to have a relative "predominance of women users" (about 60%).
+The discipline of the resources' impact has a varying impact on uses. Personal interest is more prevalent in the humanities in SciELO. In contrast, "little variability between disciplines" has been observed in Redalyc. Analysis of the bookmark data left by the readers of F1000Prime on Mendeley highlighted a significant share of uses by disciplines totally distinct from the expected audience.

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uses_of_open_science-5.md

@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
+---
+title: "Uses of open science"
+chunk: 6/9
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uses_of_open_science"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:50:26.910892+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+=== User practices and motivations ===
+Studies of user practices have mostly focused on specific user profiles. Few general surveys have been undertaken. In Japan, a 2011  poll of 800 adults showed that a "majority of respondents (55%) claimed that Open Access is useful or slightly useful to them", which suggests a rather large awareness of open science in a population with a significant share of high school education.
+The issues facing medical patients have been especially highlighted. An important field of research on health-information-seeking behavior (HISB) emerged prior to the development of open science. In a 2003 survey, half of American Internet users had attempted to find qualified information about their health, but regularly faced access issues: "Many current Internet health users want to expand access to information-laden sites that are currently closed to non-subscribers". A qualitative research on English medical patients, subscription paywalls were cited as the main barrier to access to scientific knowledge, along with the complexity of scientific terminology. While the specific needs patients make a strong case for open science, they have also overshadowed the variety of potential uses of academic research: "open access is not just a public health matter: It has a much more general research-enhancing mission".
+Research has also focused on professional non-academic uses, due to their potential economic impact. In 2011, a JISC report estimated that there were 1.8 million knowledge workers in the United Kingdom working in R&D, IT, and engineering services, most of whom were "unaffiliated, without corporate library or information center support." Among a representative set of English knowledge workers, 25% stated that access to the literature was fairly difficult or very difficult and 17% had a recent access problem that had never been resolved. A 2011 survey of Danish businesses highlighted a significant dependence of R&D to academic research: "Forty-eight per cent rated research articles as very or extremely important". The non-profit sector is also significantly impacted by increasing access to literature, as a survey of 101 NGOs from the United Kingdom showed that "73% reported using journal articles and 54% used conference proceedings". In 2018, a log analysis on OpenEdition highlighted  corporate access as a significant source of readership, especially among "the aircraft industry, the bank, insurance, car selling and energy sectors and, even more significantly for the further circulation of science in the public sphere, media organizations." These results showed that open access had a direct commercial impact on small and large companies.
+
+=== Language diversity ===
+Scientific publications in languages other than English have been marginalized in large commercial databases: they represent less than 5% of the publications indexed in the Web of Science.
+The development of open science platforms has gradually shifted the focus, with local-language publications becoming acknowledged as important actors in the social dissemination of scientific knowledge. In the 2010s, quantitative studies have started to highlight the positive impact of local languages on the reuse of open access resources in varied national contexts such as Finland, Québec, Croatia or Mexico.
+Measures of social impact tend to reverse the incentives of international academic metrics like the impact factors: while they are less featured in academic indices, publications in a local language fare better on an enlarged audience. In Finland, a majority of the audience of the academic platform journal.fi favors publications in Finnish (67%). Yet, the linguistic practices of the visitors vary significantly depending on their academic status. Lay readers (private citizens) and students have a clear preference for the local language (81% and 78% of publications accessed). In contrast, professional researchers slightly favor English over Finnish (55%).
+Due to the ease of access, open science platforms in a local language can also achieve a broader reach. The French-Canadian journal consortium Érudit has mostly an international audience, with less than one-third of the readers coming from Canada.
+
+=== Sharing ecosystem ===
+Open science resources are more likely to be shared in non-scientific settings such as "Twitter, News, Blogs and Policies". In 2011, a log analysis study in Japan highlighted "a remarkable variety of websites linked to these OA papers, including blogs about personal hobbies, websites by patients or their families, Q&A website and Wikipedia."
+The diversity of the open science ecosystem has been hypothesized to affect the life cycle pattern. In the classic framework of bibliometrics, most publications are expected to experience an exponential decline in citations over the year (also characterized as "half-life", by assimilation with the decay of radioactive elements). In contrast, open science publications "have the feature of keeping sustained and steady downloads for a long time". This sustained reception on a longer timeframe may be partially caused by recurrent episodes of "unexpected access": where old publications attract  a new wave of readers suddenly due to a newfound relevance.
+
+=== Reuse of data and software ===
+In contrast with publications, open scientific data and software frequently require a higher level of technical skills: "access is not enough to guarantee that Open Data can be reused effectively because reuse requires not only access, but other resources such as skills, money and computing power". Even firms and organizations may lack the "necessary skills such as information literacy to fully benefit from open resources".
+Yet, recent developments like the growth of data analytics services across a large variety of economic sectors have created further needs for research data: "There are many other values (…) that are promoted through the longterm stewardship and open availability of research data. The rapidly expanding area of artificial intelligence (AI) relies to a great extent on saved data." In 2019, the combined data market of the 27 countries of the European Union and the United Kingdom was estimated at 400 billion euros and had a sustained growth of 7.6% per year. although no estimation was given of the specific value of research data, research institutions were identified as important stakeholders in the emerging ecosystem of "data commons".
+
+== References ==
+
+== Bibliography ==

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uses_of_open_science-6.md

@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
+---
+title: "Uses of open science"
+chunk: 7/9
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uses_of_open_science"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:50:26.910892+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+=== Book & thesis ===
+Matthews, Joseph R.; Lawrence, Gary S.; Ferguson, Douglas K. (1983). Using Online Catalogs: A Nationwide Survey: a Report of a Study Sponsored by the Council on Library Resources. Neal-Schuman. ISBN 978-0-918212-76-4.
+Tenopir, Carol; King, Donald W (2000). Towards electronic journals: realities for scientists, librarians, and publishers. Washington, DC: Special Libraries Association. ISBN 978-0-87111-507-2.
+Willinsky, John (2006). The access principle: the case for open access to research and scholarship. Digital libraries and electronic publishing. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-23242-5.
+Bellis, Nicola De (2009-03-09). Bibliometrics and Citation Analysis: From the Science Citation Index to Cybermetrics. Scarecrow Press. ISBN 978-0-8108-6714-7.
+Montgomery, Scott L. (2013-05-06). Does Science Need a Global Language?: English and the Future of Research. University of Chicago Press. ISBN 978-0-226-01004-5.
+Hogan, A. (2014-04-09). Reasoning Techniques for the Web of Data. IOS Press. ISBN 978-1-61499-383-4.
+Alperin, Juan Pablo (2015). The public impact of Latin America's approach to open access (Thesis). Stanford University.
+Sugimoto, Cassidy R.; Larivière, Vincent (2018). Measuring Research: What Everyone Needs to Know. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-064011-8.
+Gillespie, Tarleton (2018). Custodians of the internet: platforms, content moderation, and the hidden decisions that shape social media. New Haven: Yale University Press. ISBN 978-0-300-17313-0.
+
+=== Reports ===
+Fox, Susannah; Fallows, Deborah (2003). Half of American adults have searched online for health information, but there is room for improvement in searches and overall Internet access (Report). Pew Research Center. p. 42.
+Houghton, John; Swan, Alma; Brown, Sheridan (2011). Access to research and technical information in Denmark (Report). Denmark Electronic Research Library.
+Rowlands, Ian; Nicholas, David; Brown, David (2011-01-01). Access to scholarly content: gaps and barriers (Report).
+OECD (2017-12-06). Business models for sustainable research data repositories (Report). Paris: OECD. Archived from the original on 2022-02-28. Retrieved 2022-02-28.
+Wilsdon, James; Bar Ilan, Judit; Frodeman, Robert; Lex, Elisabeth; Peters; Wouters., Paul (2017). Next-generation metrics: responsible metrics and evaluation for open science (Report). LU: European Commission Publications Office. doi:10.2777/337729. Retrieved 2022-04-24.
+Micheletti, Giorgio; Cataneo, Gabriella; Glennon, Mike; La Croce, Carla; Mitta, Chrysoula (2020). The European Data Market Monitoring Tool (Report). European Commission. p. 101.

data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uses_of_open_science-8.md

@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
+---
+title: "Uses of open science"
+chunk: 9/9
+source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uses_of_open_science"
+category: "reference"
+tags: "science, encyclopedia"
+date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:50:26.910892+00:00"
+instance: "kb-cron"
+---
+
+"Does open access to academic research help small, science-based companies?". Journal of Industry-University Collaboration. 2 (3): 95–109. doi:10.1108/JIUC-04-2020-0004. ISSN 2631-357X. Tunger, Dirk; Meier, Andreas (2020-12-07). "4.1 The Future Has Already Begun: Origin, Classification, and Applications of Altmetrics in Scholarly Communication". In Ball, Rafael (ed.). Handbook Bibliometrics. De Gruyter Saur. pp. 181–190. doi:10.1515/9783110646610-019. ISBN 978-3-11-064661-0. S2CID 235879114. Pölönen, Janne; Syrjämäki, Sami; Nygård, Antti-Jussi; Hammarfelt, Björn (October 2021). "Who are the users of national open access journals? The case of the Finnish Journal.fi platform". Learned Publishing. 34 (4): 585–592. doi:10.1002/leap.1405. ISSN 1741-4857. Hicks, Diana; Zullo, Matteo; Doshi, Ameet; Asensio, Omar I. (March 2022). "Widespread use of National Academies consensus reports by the American public". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 119 (9): –2107760119. Bibcode:2022PNAS..11907760H. doi:10.1073/pnas.2107760119. PMC 8892306. PMID 35193972. Ross-Hellauer, Tony; Reichmann, Stefan; Cole, Nicki Lisa; Fessl, Angela; Klebel, Thomas; Pontika, Nancy (2022). "Dynamics of cumulative advantage and threats to equity in open science: a scoping review". Royal Society Open Science. 9 (1) 211032. Bibcode:2022RSOS....911032R. doi:10.1098/rsos.211032. PMC 8767192. PMID 35116143.
+
+=== Conference ===
+Tolle, John E. (1983). "Transaction log analysis online catalogs". Proceedings of the 6th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval - SIGIR '83. the 6th annual international ACM SIGIR conference. Bethesda, Maryland: ACM Press. p. 147. doi:10.1145/511793.511816. ISBN 978-0-89791-107-8. Retrieved 2020-03-04.
+Dacos, Marin; Cixous, Mikael; Faath, Elodie; Gombin, Joel; Langlais, Pierre-Carl (2017). The Unexpected reader. DH2017. Montreal.
+Torny, Didier; Capelli, Laurent; Danjean, Lydie (2019-06-14). "ELPUB 2019 23d International Conference on Electronic Publishing". ELPUB 2019 23d International Conference on Electronic Publishing. ELPUB 2019 23d International Conference on Electronic Publishing. OpenEdition Press. doi:10.4000/proceedings.elpub.2019.22. Retrieved 2022-03-16.
+
+=== Other sources ===
+Paveau, Marie-Anne (2013). "Les enfants-chercheurs de la science ouverte" (Billet). Espaces réflexifs, situés, diffractés et enchevêtrés. doi:10.58079/tjg3. Retrieved 2022-05-08.
+Bohannon, John (2016-04-25). "Who's downloading pirated papers? Everyone". Science | AAAS. Retrieved 2020-09-27.