Notes Académiques de l'Académie d'agriculture de Academic Notes from the French Academy of Agriculture (N3AF) Document d'enseignement

DSR: frameworks guiding experimental work in science

Hervé This 1,2

1 UMR Ingénierie Procédés Aliments, AgroParisTech, Inra, Université -Saclay, 91300 Massy, France 2 Groupe de gastronomie moléculaire, Inra-AgroParisTech International Centre for Molecular Gastronomy, F-75005, Paris, France

Correspondance : [email protected]

Abstract Scientific activities appear sometimes difficult for DSR, ont été progressivement mis au point. science students or young scientists because a Ils guident le travail expérimental et large number of tasks have to be performed théorique et évitent des erreurs, tout en according to strict rules that are not always known augmentant la qualité et la traçabilité des or remembered. Electronic files guiding scientific travaux, sans remplacer toutefois les cahiers activity, with a series of detailed steps and de laboratoire. providing explanations about why these steps are needed, can be useful guides for scientists. Such Keywords documents, called DSR, are open documents planning, experiment, best practices that have been improving for years. They are used for improved traceability and quality, without Mots clés replacing laboratory notebooks. planification, pratique scientifique, bonnes pratiques Résumé Les étudiants des filières scientifiques et les jeunes scientifiques trouvent souvent l'activité scientifique difficile, notamment parce que le Introduction nombre de tâches simultanées ou successives, fondées sur des règles strictes Students in science and young scientists de bonne pratique, est considérable. Des sometimes find the practice of science difficult, documents électroniques qui guident l'activité because it involves considering a lot of data at de recherche, incluant une série d'étapes the same time, doing many different tasks détaillées assorties d'explications pour simultaneously and following strict rules of best justifier ces étapes, peuvent aider les practices. Frequently experiments have to be scientifiques. Ces documents, nommés redone not only because it is a “good practice” to “documents structurants de recherche”, ou find a confirmation, or validation (Fisher, 1937;

Notes Académiques de l'Académie d'agriculture de France (N3AF) 2017, 8, 1-14 1 Notes Académiques de l'Académie d'agriculture de France Academic Notes from the French Academy of Agriculture (N3AF) Document d'enseignement

Harris, 1998) or because one has to determine to be signed both by the operator and by a co- the standard-deviation on final results, but also worker or supervisor). because some data are missing in the first runs, DSR are no laboratory notebooks, but a way to due to insufficient preparation and planning of help the young scientists to make a structured experiments. The Journal of Chemical Education work, to be sure that their work will allow them to weighed in on the importance of this topic as early publish their results, to be sure to apply all the as 1933 (MacNeil and Falconer, 2010), but this good practices rules for scientific activity (Bybee applies in any scientific field and not only et al., 2008; Score, 2008; Sone, 2014) and avoid chemistry. It was noted that good note-taking forgetting important information. DSR are clearly skills in the laboratory are not only essential, but important educational tools, but they can be they are required (Sesen and Tarthan, 2010). The helpful even for confirmed scientists, as they issue is often whether scientists write down remind them of all the various tasks that have to enough details, but saying the disease is not be done during scientific research. curing it. One has also to add that many universities and Based on the management of many students scientific institutions discuss the way scientific (from 14-year old to Ph.D) for decades, we research can be done (Pagé et al., 2014), but progressively set up electronic files that all they don't deliver frameworks such as DSR. It is newcomers are happy to use in order to make even a proposal that DSR could be discussed good science, following rules of good practices and possibly modified by the whole scientific (This, 2017a). These electronic files are certainly community. And if it is true that some electronic not electronic laboratory notebooks, of which laboratory notebooks include some sections, we purpose is to ensure the traceability of the origin observe that more details, such as in DSR, could of a discovery, in particular in case of disputes be introduced. related to patenting (these are compulsory tools Current DSR have three sections: (1) for the for private and public laboratories, as said below) preparation of experiments, (2) for performing but they can be included either in traditional or them, and (3) for the interpretation of results. For electronic notebooks; they are called for short each field of each section, explanations are "DSR" (Documents for structuring research). They given in the documents, in order to guide the contribute to compensate for limits of human scientists. The content of the spreadsheet is not memory and attention, helping to ensure particularly novel- it is basic information that any consistency and completeness in carrying out scientist or science instructor knows and is scientific tasks. hopefully teaching. However it is a fact that they In practice, they are empty Maple (Waterloo can avoid mistakes by reminding steps. Maple Inc, Canada) files containing sections that Finally one should stress that these DSR are are to be filled in successively, like detailed based on various epistemological models, but checklists, adding explanations for each step to with a strong Baconian and Popperian direction be performed. The choice of the Maple software is (Bernard, 1865; Meyerson, 1908; Normandin, based on the possibility to mix text, formal 2007; Popper, 1959; Popper, 1972; This, 2009). calculation, programming as well as numerical More precisely, it is assumed (more below) that calculation. sciences of nature are advancing through the There is an important difference between DSR following steps: (1) identification of a and laboratory notebooks. Indeed laboratory phenomenon; (2) quantitative characterization of notebooks are of compulsory use in private and this phenomenon; (3) grouping the data into public laboratories (Caprette, 2017; Ryan, 2017). quantitative laws (i.e. equations); (4) by This is so well known that we give here only one induction, looking for a “theory”, i.e. a group of important reason of using laboratory notebooks, equations corresponding to “mechanisms”; (5) i.e. being official documents for assessing priority looking for a prediction based on the proposed and possibility of patenting (this is why they have theory; (6) testing quantitatively the theoretical

Notes Académiques de l'Académie d'agriculture de France (N3AF) 2017, 8, 1-14 2 Notes Académiques de l'Académie d'agriculture de France Academic Notes from the French Academy of Agriculture (N3AF) Document d'enseignement

Figure 1. The various parts of DSR documents.

Notes Académiques de l'Académie d'agriculture de France (N3AF) 2017, 8, 1-14 3 Notes Académiques de l'Académie d'agriculture de France Academic Notes from the French Academy of Agriculture (N3AF) Document d'enseignement

Figure 2. The beginning of the first part of the Maple version of DSR. Each slot contains first an explanation about how it should be filled in. The documents is highly structured by the use of "sections" and "sub-sections" (see Supplemental Material). prediction. Of course, there can be differences Material (.mw, .pdf, .html, for example) (This, depending on various sciences, but DSR can be 2017b). adapted to the various needs. In this article, a description of the content of DSR The DSR documents can be improved, and they is given (italics), with explanations (roman); a have been indeed changed for years. Various flowchart summarizing the main steps of the formats of the DSR are given in Supplemental whole process is shown in figure 1.

Notes Académiques de l'Académie d'agriculture de France (N3AF) 2017, 8, 1-14 4 Notes Académiques de l'Académie d'agriculture de France Academic Notes from the French Academy of Agriculture (N3AF) Document d'enseignement

First part: planning experiments that would be needed, so that a better prediction of time needed for the various Although we don't have figures to demonstrate it, tasks and a better planning can be made in we have been observing in our research group the future. It can be good training that that insufficient planning of experiments is a major students use the date format of the cause of failure, and this is why this part became international standard ISO 8601 (Kühn, progressively longer with years. It includes 2017). information for traceability and quality (Grogan, 2008). Estimation of the time needed for running the experiment: This field is useful both personally Title of the work: Here DSR users have first to and collectively. First it is good in scientific life consider the question "What is a title?". It is an that one can try to predict how much time will be important one, as DSR are later used for needed for a particular experiment, because this publication (internship reports, scientific helps keeping an agenda and planning works. publication). For sure, it can be sometimes difficult to follow Of course, some Guide to Authors from scientific an agenda, and a time window can be given journals explain how titles should be designed, instead of a single estimation. but this information is needed and helpful well It has to be added that there is no need to stick before an article is prepared. Moreover, designing to this prediction, and research has to be done at a proper title is also a way to envision more its pace. However, in view of future tasks of throroughly the work to be done. And the title of coordination, management or direction, it is the work is also often a useful basis for important to know how much time one needs discussions between a scientist and his/her personally, before asking allocating time mentors or hierarchy. resources for others.

Name of the scientist: Some fields of DSR Goals of the work: For sure, the goal of science documents are useful in view of knowledge is making “discoveries” (Popper, 1959; This, production, but others are important for 2009). But if an experiment was decided, it is educational reasons. In particular this one is used probably because a particular question was for making scientists aware of ethics and property introduced as a step for discovery. In this regard, (Du and Kofman, 2007). It is also useful in teams the title should be “Goal of the work”, with no in which intellectual exchange is considered as a plural, and accordingly, the first goal is the study useful tool for efficiency. of this particular question. This is explained in the “explanation” part of Name of the file: Using codes makes files more DSR, for this particular entry. However it easily to be recovered in a research group where happens in scientific research that secondary results can be discussed in common. Even if DSR goals have to be used when the primary one are not electronic laboratory notebooks, they can could not be reached (FAO, 2017). Also it is follow the same ISO 17025 rules (Du and good to consider that there can be milestones, Kofman, 2007). and scientists are invited to give them clearly here. When this file was created: This field will be used as others later in the file for keeping track The reasons of the experiment: Having a goal of the research agenda. Indeed this field was set is certainly useful, but is this goal well first introduced because it is part of quality chosen? A new opportunity of discussing the process (Chotkowski La Follette, 1982), but goal from a broader perspective is proposed also because it gives the possibility, at the here: if a goal was decided, why was it chosen? "evaluation step" (below), to evaluate the time Keeping a written track of the reason of the

Notes Académiques de l'Académie d'agriculture de France (N3AF) 2017, 8, 1-14 5 Notes Académiques de l'Académie d'agriculture de France Academic Notes from the French Academy of Agriculture (N3AF) Document d'enseignement choice is perhaps a good practice, and in our themselves if this is the case. This does not experience it proved useful sometimes for being imply that a published research cannot be able to justify choices, in particular to reviewers. repeated, but if such a decision is taken, there This field is also the place where the initial should be a justification for this choice (Peng, question has to be discussed and justified, in 2009). particular in view of the particular scientific One should also observe that if the research strategy of the scientist. question is changed, after this first bibliographic survey, another round of Bibliographic research: This part can of course be bibliographic research can be necessary. very large, and the short explanation given in the DSR is certainly not enough to teach how to make Preliminary observations: Frequently a particular it well. For more guidance, specific references are research is done because previous experiments to be used (York University, 2017). Anyway, some indicate that there was a possibility of a sub-fields are given in order to help scientists to discovery or call for complementary work. do it without having to move away from the work, Preliminary observations must guide the work such as: being done. Finally, this field can give scientists the idea to make preliminary, such as non ● estimation of the time needed for this quantitative experiments, but it should be bibliographic research: Sometimes young discussed whether it is a good idea, because it scientists can spend too much (or too little) time can take time. A proposed answer to this on this part. Predicting a duration of the initial temptation of non quantitative research is to bibliographical research, or deciding for the observe that it should be very short, otherwise it amount of time allocated to this tack, can be is probably better to make a very strict, rigorous, important for planning and work in general, as precise and quantitative determination. written before. Which theoretical assumption is tested by the ● giving again the title of the work: This will be experiment?: In our research group, we work used for focusing the bibliographic research, with the debatable idea that experiments have to because as bibliographic work can be almost be done in order to test theoretical assumptions endless, from article to article, it needs pruning. because scientists have to refute old ideas, or previous theories, or models, which are always ● for each word of the title, a sub-field for which a insufficient (a reduced model of reality is specific research is done: Grouping all the obviously insufficient, being reduced, and not the bibliographic research being done in this DSR reality itself) (Popper, 1972; Lecointre, 2012; avoids the distribution of pieces of information in This, 2009). many different files. Here the scientists are invited Of course, one can also make scientific research to make a research for at least each word of the by simply using new analytical tools, without title of the work. In particular, it is a good idea to trying to refute previous theories: in this case, make three parts: one for the state of the art users of DSR have simply to write it down. More about the question studied, one for the technical generally, DSR are guides that should help. implementation of the experiment, and one for the This field of DSR is useful for training users to be data analysis and discussion methods. happy with negative results: if a prediction is proved wrong and if there was no logic or ● should the initial research question be experimental mistake, it means either that the changed (slightly)?: Sometimes the theoretical ideas on which it is based need bibliographic research can lead to a redefinition improvement, or that a mistake in the theory is to of the initial scientific goal of the planned be discovered, for example. Users have to experiment. Scientists are invited to ask recognize that guessing wrongly is fortunate,

Notes Académiques de l'Académie d'agriculture de France (N3AF) 2017, 8, 1-14 6 Notes Académiques de l'Académie d'agriculture de France Academic Notes from the French Academy of Agriculture (N3AF) Document d'enseignement because there is a possibility of a discovery. General method that you want to use (only one Here, the field also contains the two sentences : sentence, only the general idea, and not the "The theoretical analysis is:” and below detailed method, as it will be explained later): It “Accordingly, one asks if: " is a good practice to have a general idea of one's work before considering details Calculation on which the experiment is based: (Descartes, 1637), what could be said differently: This section has different uses. One is to avoid considering strategy before tactics (Sun Tzu, that the experiment will be useless. For example, 2017). Before students discuss the experimental the use of an equipment of insufficient sensitivity details, they are invited to formulate a general or the analysis of a small number of samples can idea of the experiment that they plan. More lead to “failure”. In particular, statistical tests are precisely, they are invited to begin this cell with a very important, and they can be used before sentence such as : "The general idea is..." experiments, based on the estimated uncertainties. Also scientific theories and models Scheme of the experimental method: Here an are not like opinions, but ideas based on important precision is added in the explanatory calculation (Galilei, 1623). This is why some part: "Caution : here one should not make quantitative planning is gode to be done first. beautiful pictures, because it would be time Frequently, young scientists do not know which consuming, but only to represent the steps, IN calculation they can make, but the sole presence ORDER TO identify the main parameters and to of this field is welcome because it invites them to introduce SYMBOLS, giving also numerical more training in calculus, and to use their skills in values expressed in the International System the particular context of experiments. As a hint, (IS) of Units". Indeed, the proposal to make a they are invited to use the Leibniz idea that formal scheme of the experiment is only because it calculus is based on natural language; this means helps to characterize the phenomena, samples, that it is good training to translate the sentence of tools, and to introduce parameters with letters, or the previous field in formal, mathematical symbols, so that they are used later on, in language (Knecht, 1981). Moreover in order to “laws”, relationships, models, etc. (Redhead, help them, some sub-fields are present, such as: 1980). As it is good practice to always begin some calculation by introducing letters and ● again, the initial question is repeated: In order symbols, instead of numerical values, and to use to have it readily under the eyes, then it is made these symbols during calculation, instead of abstract, generalized (Cramer, 2006; Jeannotte, numerical values. This is also the opportunity to 2017). drop numerical data, after translation into SI units. ● a theoretical model is built: This particular sub- field is based on detailed best practices The detailed method: This section is the core of documents on calculation in natural sciences that the first of the three parts of DSR, and it is no includes making a scheme, introducing formal surprise that it is divided into sub-fields, with symbols, looking for relationships (equations) hints: between symbols, designing a strategy for solving systems of equations, making numerical ● first, the description of all experimental steps, applications, discussing the formal results... precisely described, with hardwares, processes, (Redhead, 1980). everything: Here, a table with two columns is to be filled. The first column lists the various steps Prediction of the time needed for the experiment: with numbering, and the second one is for the This field is repeated many times in this justification of the choices of methods, hardware, document, because it is good to be able to adapt reagents, for safety concerns (American one's ideas to new information. Chemical Society, 2017a) and commentaries.

Notes Académiques de l'Académie d'agriculture de France (N3AF) 2017, 8, 1-14 7 Notes Académiques de l'Académie d'agriculture de France Academic Notes from the French Academy of Agriculture (N3AF) Document d'enseignement

This detailed numbered list is to be prepared the discussion of the experiment. Of course, one before the experiment, and any intended action is need to collect here the IUPAC name of to be described, so that all the hardware and all solvents, CAS numbers, but also their purity, products and reagents are ready to be used, grade, supplier… avoiding unintended processes. The main point is however the hazard question: When measurements are planned, their results generally physical and chemical constant are are also planned: empty spaces are kept for the needed to judge the danger of these reagents, data to be recorded, as on a traditional laboratory but this is not enough. If users use reagents, notebook. Moreover, this field proposes to make they have to get the corresponding security file, three repeats for each data, preparing the and of course they have to read it, in order to calculation of a mean and a standard deviation. decide for the security rules that they have to This table is to be copied and pasted later, in the use. Concerning the end of the field, scientists “Results” section, but scientists are also invited to are invited to know that it occurs that suppliers print it, and to glue the empty sheets on the sell products with a lot more impurities than is laboratory notebook, in order to avoid having a displayed, or even make mistakes, changing one computer on the laboratory benches. product for another! This makes checks Various advices are given for making this table, necessary. Finally, the field contains the such as reducing the quantities of reagents and sentence "Please don’t kill you (and us)”, in products (Grey, 1928). This is a best practice that order to emphasize the hazard issue. anybody should know, but it is a fact that it is not always followed. Scientists are also reminded that Various products used in the experiment (such experiments should be repeated, for example as food products); give all detailed information: (Fisher, 1937; Tel Aviv University, 2017). The brand, date, origin, batch number, etc.: For some second column of the table in this field is for the researches, plant or animal tissues are used. In justification of all choices: methods, tools, this field, one should write where these products quantities, products, quality, variety, etc. Some come from, and give as much information as hints are also given, concerning various possible. The idea is obvious for senior characteristics of measurement tools (such as scientists, but students have to know that in scale precision), but also about security sheets scientific publications, the choice of any (American Chemical Society, 2017a), etc. particular detail has to be justified. Information Scientists are invited to explain any choice, on varieties, brands, batch number, etc. and because it is a good way to justify it and make it more generally, quantitative information about in a non arbitrarily way (American Chemical these products anticipates potential questions of Society, 2017b). referees (Coyne, 2005).

Reagents, with, for each, the name, chemical and Hardware: Again, if no step was forgotten in the physical parameters, SECURITY rules (give the detailed description of the experiment, this cell Security document as an annex of this file), purity should be easy to fill in. If one has written "weigh (did you check it? How do you know that the (three times) the mass of a 250 mL Erlenmeyer", product that was used is really the one whose then the list of hardware must include the name was written on the bottle? Did you make description of a particular scale. If one has any purification, supplier, etc.: If the previous written "record UV spectrum", there should be detailed description of the experiment was well information on a particular UV-visible done, then it is easy to fill this cell in (American spectrophotometer that was used, the particular Chemical Society, 2017a). spectroscopic parameters which were chosen Indeed, the work to be done in this field is then (and why), etc. DSR users are invited to give all simply to group all information, which will be details here: brand, model, specification, useful in view of scientific publication, but also for experimental conditions, date, time, temperature,

Notes Académiques de l'Académie d'agriculture de France (N3AF) 2017, 8, 1-14 8 Notes Académiques de l'Académie d'agriculture de France Academic Notes from the French Academy of Agriculture (N3AF) Document d'enseignement etc. Also a list of software used (with references) linked to the ability to see what others do not, a has to be given (National Academy of Sciences, scientific quality that has been called 1992). "serendipity" (Jacques, 1990; University of California Museum of Paleontology, 2017). All How much time did you need in order to prepare clues are then very important, and young the experiment: This corresponds to a previous scientists have to know that chemists of the past section, and it is a way to improve planning skills, were even smelling, tasting, hearing… Today by a comparison of the predicted time for the smelling and tasting are preferably avoided, but preparation of the experiment, and the practical the idea remains. time used. Young scientists often under-estimate this time. Results properly expressed: Tables full of figures are difficult to read, and it is an important Here stops the DSR document before the part of scientific activity to translate these tables experiment. into elaborated information from which "laws" can be inferred (Tuft, 2001). Indeed, students have to be trained to the use of histograms, Second part: Results curves, and various ways of displaying quantitative information (Khamat and Hartland, Then comes the second part, about making the 2014; Nature Editorial, 2017). However a experiment. Now the various fields are: common mistake is to confuse results and models, i.e. interpretations, and to link dots on a Date: The reason of this field was explained diagram without any prior (good) reason to do it. before. At various steps of the work, time keeping This is why scientists are reminded here that for is proposed. this “Results” field, data should not be fitted (it is proposed to do it in the next section of the DSR). Raw results: This field includes a copy of the table that was established previously, at the field Estimation of uncertainties, confidence intervals: "Detailed description of the experiment". But now, Of course, if one made replicates of the data and various notes are introduced, during measurements or experiments, she/he can the experiment. calculate average values and standard When measurement tools are connected to a deviations. Sometimes, uncertainties are also local network (which minimizes hand writing and needed, to estimate results. Indeed no curve possibility of errors), their data are stored in files (below) should be given without information on whose name is given here (directory, name of the quality of the results (JCGM, 2008). files, etc.). But sometimes, data or information are manually introduced, in particular when all Description of the trends on diagrams (this hardware are not linked in a computer network. description will be cut and pasted in the Now the justifications of the second column are “Discussion” part of the DSR): In order to not needed any longer, and it is better when interpret results, one has to be fully aware of scientists write down instead some qualitative them. Of course, all the information that one has commentaries or remarks, or put pictures taken to interpret lies in the diagrams that were made, during the experiments. but it was observed that young scientists need Concerning qualitative results, scientists are help in order to make the interpretations. This is reminded that there are many things to be why they are invited to describe their results observed during an experiment, and all this with words and sentences, so that properly information is important either for the expressed ideas ("the curve starts at zero", "the interpretation of results later, or simply for making curve seems to increase linearly", "there is an new discoveries. The quality of a scientist is often asymptote"…) can be discussed later.

Notes Académiques de l'Académie d'agriculture de France (N3AF) 2017, 8, 1-14 9 Notes Académiques de l'Académie d'agriculture de France Academic Notes from the French Academy of Agriculture (N3AF) Document d'enseignement

Other observations made during the experiments: generally equations have to be found between This field helps to remind users that many the introduced parameters of the previous field. observations can be usefully done. In other words, when a trend is observed, it should be translated into mathematical How much time did you need for this “Result” part language. of the work?: Again, this field is for training in administration, but also for quality and traceability. Numerical applications: Frequently determination of orders of magnitudes are needed in order to better understand equations. Third part: interpretation and more In particular, when large equations include many terms, it is good to be able to rank them by order Too often, young scientists find the discussion of magnitude. steps difficult, because it is true that, whereas it is a core task for science, they lack methods in Discussion (explanation of results, trying to order to do it. There are also reasons: for answer the « why » question using the example, the French mathematician and bibliographic research): Scientists sometimes physician Henri Poincaré explained that the confuse using bibliographic data to confirm their making of a model from the “laws” included an results and discussing there results. induction process, and not only deduction This is because the interpretation of (Poincaré, 1905). Based on epistemological experimental results is difficult, and it is studies, some fields are proposed here. proposed here to divide the difficulty into smaller steps, for which sub-fields are proposed : Date: The goal is the same as for the corresponding fields above. ● here users are invited to copy the results (field above), and to discuss them: Each sentence Prediction of the time needed: idem. from the "Results" section can become a question such as "why so and not differently?" Of Fittings: The same diagrams as before are course the answer should be quantitative! displayed here but now data points have to be linked by particular curves based on theoretical ● then, for each sentence, use the bibliographic assumptions, as fitting a curve means data and propose a quantitative explanation of interpreting, wich is indeed discussion (Forster, the results: Scientists are reminded that they 1999). Of course, when a fit is made, a have to take into account all the previous works, quantitative estimation of the quality of the fitting in order to make a comprehensive model. All this (such as the residual sum of squares and its should be quantitative, not only with words such distribution, standard error...) is needed. as: “our results are compatible with data from xxx et al.” Formalization: introduction of new notions, concepts, quantitative parameters: Science ● quantitative tests of the explanation: Here means introducing new objects based on the users have to find the mechanisms that can laws, i.e. quantitative relationships that were explain the laws that were previously found, discovered through the experimental work (Kuhn, because laws alone are not the aim of science. It 1962). Scientists are invited to do it here, using should be stressed that science should better methods that can be discussed elsewhere. refute wrong theories and that there are no “demonstrations”. Looking for laws, relations between parameters: Here scientists are invited to translate what can Proposal of new concepts: Some consider as a be observed on diagrams into equations. More good working assumption that any experimental

Notes Académiques de l'Académie d'agriculture de France (N3AF) 2017, 8, 1-14 10 Notes Académiques de l'Académie d'agriculture de France Academic Notes from the French Academy of Agriculture (N3AF) Document d'enseignement result should be considered as a particular case any software which allow formal calculation as of a general category (or more than one general well as natural writing...) files, but the same category) that we have to look for. content could be implemented with word This is the place to do the job. Here it is to be processing software. However using such observed that many scientific journals are very software would lead scientists to use other cautious about sentences such as “This is the first software for computing, leading to an increasing time that” or “Our original results show...”. Indeed number of files for the same work. It is proposed one has to follow carefully the Instructions to that this spreadsheet, after being discussed by Authors when writing a publication later. the whole scientific community, could become a general tool for science education and research, Evaluation (did we reach the objective? etc.): perhaps with modification for particular scientific Such a cell should finish the DSR, as it disciplines. corresponds to the classic "Discussion and perspectives" that many articles include.

Proposals for the improvement of the technique Références and of the results: Frequently, users have to transmit their results to other users. It is helpful American Chemical Society. 2017a. Safety in when they can propose improvement based on academic chemistry laboratories, past experiments. https://www.acs.org/content/dam/acsorg/about /governance/committees/chemicalsafety/publi Conclusions: Same as in publications. cations/safety-in-academic-chemistry- laboratories-students.pd f, last access 2017- Perspectives: One should not forget to draw 07-21. consequences of one's work, which means possibility of generalization, including tests of American Chemical Society. 2017b. such proposals. Information for authors, http://pubs.acs.org/paragonplus/submission/ac How much time did you need for this part: same sccc/acsccc_authguide.pdf, last access 2017- as before. 07-21.

Please don’t forget: 1. Did you check the Bernard C. 1865. Introduction à la médecine spelling ? 2. Did you check the grammar? 3. Are expérimentale, http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12- there still adverbs or adjectives that you should 148/btv1b86120273, last access 2017-07-21. translate into quantitative data? 4. Did you check the calculations (and how)? 5. Did you validate Bybee RW, Powell JC, Trowbridge LW. 2008. your work? 6. Do all diagrams have the right Teaching secondary school science: indications (units, abscissa, ordinate, title)? 7. strategies for developing scientific literacy, 9th Others. No comment needed. ed, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River.

Signature (for priority questions, patents, etc.): Caprette DR. 2017. Guidelines for keeping a Lawsuits, patents, and careers have all been laboratory record, Experimental Biosciences, made or lost based on what was in, or not in, http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~bioslabs/tools/notebo laboratory notebooks (Eisenberg, 1982; Meagher ok/notebook.html, last access 18 september and Copeland, 2006; Taylor, 2006). 2017.

Chotkowski La Follette M. 1982. Quality in Finally, we have to add that DSR are Maple (or science, The MIT Press: Boston.

Notes Académiques de l'Académie d'agriculture de France (N3AF) 2017, 8, 1-14 11 Notes Académiques de l'Académie d'agriculture de France Academic Notes from the French Academy of Agriculture (N3AF) Document d'enseignement

Coyne GS. 2005. The laboratory companion: a Harris DC. 1998. Quantitative chemical practical guide to materials, equipment and analysis, W. H. Freeman & Company: New technique, Wiley, Hoboken (NJ), 552 p. York (5th edition).

Cramer CA. 2006. Abstraction and the classical Jacques J. 1990. L'imprévu, ou la science des idea, 1760-1920, University of Delaware Press, objets trouvés, Odile Jacob, Paris. Newark. JCGM (Joint Committee for Guides in Descartes R. 1637. Discourse on the method Metrology). 2008. Evaluation of measurement of rightly conducting one's reason and of data — Guide to the expression of seeking truth, http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/ uncertainty in measurement, www.bipm.org, epub/59/pg59.txt, last access 2017-07-21. last access 2017-07-21.

Du P, Kofman JA. 2007. Electronic laboratory Jeannotte D. 2017. Les processus abstraire et notebooks in pharmaceutical R&D: on the road généraliser conceptualisés dans une to maturity, http://journals.sagepub . perspective commognitive, http://emf.unige . com/doi/abs/10.1016/j.jala.2007.01.001, last ch/files/3614/6401/7985/EMF2015GT3JEANO access 2017-07-24. TTE.pdf, last access 2017-07-21.

Eisenberg A. 1982. Keeping a laboratory Kamat P, Hartland GV. 2014. Graphical notebook, Journal of Chemical Education, 59, excellence, The Journal of Physical Chemistry 1045-1046. Letters, Editorial, 5, 2118-2120.

FAO. 2017. Planning for forest use and Knecht HH. 1981. La logique chez Leibniz, conservation guidelines for improvement, essai sur le rationalisme baroque, L'âge http://www.fao.org/docrep/w3210e/w3210e05.ht d'homme, Lausanne. m#TopOfPage, last access 2017-07-22. Kühn M. 2017. A summary of the international Fisher RA. 1937. The design of experiments, standard date and time notation, Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh-London. http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/iso-time.htm l, last access 2017-09-18. Forster M. 1999. Curve fitting problem, in Cambridge dictionary of philosophy (Audi R, Kuhn TS. 1962. The structure of scientific ed), The Cambridge University Press, revolutions, University of Chicago Press. Cambridge. MacNeil J, Falconer R. 2010. Keeping a Galilei G. 1623. The Assayer, English laboratory notebook, Journal of Chemical translation by Thomas Salisbury (1661), p. 178, Education, 87, 703-704. in The Metaphysical foundations of modern science (Burt, EA, ed), Dover Publications: Lecointre G. 2012. Les sciences face aux New York, 2003, 75. créationnismes. Ré-expliciter le contrat méthodologique des chercheurs, Quæ, Grey EC. 1928. Practical chemistry by micro- Versailles, 172 p. methods, W Heffer & Sons Ltd., Cambridge. Meagher TF, Copeland RG. 2006. When Grogan K. 2008. Science traceability, learning the hard way makes learning easy, http://www.csc.caltech.edu/references/Grogan Research Management Review, 15, 1-13. %20STM.pdf, last access 2017-07-21.

Notes Académiques de l'Académie d'agriculture de France (N3AF) 2017, 8, 1-14 12 Notes Académiques de l'Académie d'agriculture de France Academic Notes from the French Academy of Agriculture (N3AF) Document d'enseignement

Meyerson E. 1908. Identité et réalité, Vrin, http://www.scoreeducation.org/media/3668/rep Paris. ort.pdf, last access 2017-09-18.

National Academy of Sciences. 1992. Sesen BA, Tarhan L. 2010. Promoting active Responsible Science, https://www.nap.edu learning in high school chemistry: learning /download/1864, last access 2017-07-21. achievement and attitude, Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 2625-2630. Nature Editorial. 2017. Image doctoring must be halted, Nature News, 546, 7660. Sone EM. 2014. Guiding students to develop an understanding of scientific inquiry: a Normandin S. 2007. Claude Bernard and an science skills approach to instruction and introduction to the study of experimental assessment. CBE-Life Sciences Education, medicine: “physical vitalism”, dialectic and 13, 90–101. epistemology. Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences, 62, 495-528. Sun Tzu. The art of war, http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/132, last Pagé J. Boisclair G. Mathieu R. 2014. Guide access 2017-07-21. des sciences expérimentales, De Boeck, Bruxelles. Taylor KT. 2006. The status of electronic laboratory notebooks for chemistry and Peng RD. 2009. Reproducible research and biology, Current Opinion on Drug Discovery Biostatistics. Biostatistics, 10, 405-408. and Development, 9, 348-353.

Poincaré H. 1905. Science and hypothesis, Tel Aviv University. 2017. Replicability in http://www.gutenberg.org/files/37157/37157- science, http://www.replicability.tau.ac.il pdf.pdf, last access 2017-07-21. /index.php/replicability-in-science/replicability- as-a-central-dogma-in-science.html, last Popper KR. 1959. The logic of scientific access 2017-07-24. discovery, Routledge Classics, London/New York. This H. 2009. Cours de gastronomie moléculaire n°1 : Science, technologie, Popper KR. 1972. Objective knowledge: an technique... culinaires : quelles relations ?, evolutionary approach, Oxford University Quae/Belin, Paris. Press, Oxford. This H. 2017a. http://www.agroparistech.fr/- Redhead M. 1980. Models in physics, The Les-bonnes-pratiques-scientifiques-.html, last British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, access 2017-10-08. 31, 145-163. This H. 2017b. Ryan P. 2017. Keeping a lab notebook, Office http://www.agroparistech.fr/IMG/pdf/dsr.pdf, of integrated training education (National last access 2017-09-27. Institutes of Health), http://molecular- gastronomy international.blogspot.fr/2017/09/de Tuft ER. 2001. The visual display of ar-friends-this-morning-question-if.html, last quantitative information, Graphic Press, access 2017-09-18. Nuneaton, 2nd edition.

Score. 2008. Practical work in science: a report University of California Museum of and proposal for a strategic framework. Score, Paleontology. 2017. Understanding science,

Notes Académiques de l'Académie d'agriculture de France (N3AF) 2017, 8, 1-14 13 Notes Académiques de l'Académie d'agriculture de France Academic Notes from the French Academy of Agriculture (N3AF) Document d'enseignement http://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/serendipity, Publié last access 2017-07-21. 9 octobre 2017

York University. 2017. Citing sources, https://spark.library.yorku.ca/creating- bibliographies-citing-sources-part-of-academic- culture/, last access 2017-07-21. Citation This H. 2017. DSR: Frameworks for guiding experimental work in science. Notes Edité par Académiques de l'Académie d'agriculture de Dominique Job, directeur de recherche émérite France / Academic Notes from the French au CNRS, Laboratoire mixte CNRS-Bayer Academy of Agriculture, 2017, 8, 1-14. CropScience (), membre de l'Académie d'agriculture de France.

Rapporteurs Michel Dron, professeur émérite de l'Université Paris Sud-Orsay (classe exceptionnelle), directeur honoraire de l’Ecole doctorale « Sciences du Végétal » au sein de cette université, membre de l’Académie d’agriculture de France (section 1).

Loïc Rajjou, maître de conférence AgroParisTech, chercheur à l’INRA (Versailles).

Rubrique Cet article a été publié dans la rubrique «Documents d'enseignement» des Notes Hervé This est physico-chimiste, directeur du Académiques de l'Académie d'agriculture de Centre international de gastronomie France. moléculaire INRA-AgroParisTech, directeur scientifique de la Fondation Science & Culture Reçu Alimentaire (Académie des sciences). Il est 25 juillet 2017 membre de l'Académie d'agriculture de France (section 8), membre correspondant de Accepté l'Académie royale des sciences, des arts et 30 septembre 2017 des lettres de Belgique.

Notes Académiques de l'Académie d'agriculture de France (N3AF) 2017, 8, 1-14 14