DOCSLIB.ORG

Plos Progress Update 2014/2015 from the Chairman and Ceo

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Plos Progress Update 2014/2015 from the Chairman and Ceo PLOS PROGRESS UPDATE 2014/2015 FROM THE CHAIRMAN AND CEO PLOS is dedicated to the transformation of research communication through collaboration, transparency, speed and access. Since its founding, PLOS has demonstrated the viability of high quality, Open Access publishing; launched the ground- breaking PLOS ONE, a home for all sound science selected for its rigor, not its “significance”; developed the first Article- Level Metrics (ALMs) to demonstrate the value of research beyond the perceived status of a journal title; and extended the impact of research after its publication with the PLOS data policy, ALMs and liberal Open Access licensing. But challenges remain. Scientific communication is far from its ideal state. There is still inconsistent access, and research is oered at a snapshot in time, instead of as an evolving contribution whose reliability and significance are continually evaluated through its lifetime. The current state demands that PLOS continue to establish new standards and expectations for scholarly communication. These include a faster and more ecient publication experience, more transparent peer review, assessment though the lifetime of a work, better recognition of the range of contributions made by collaborators and placing researchers and their communities back at the center of scientific communication. To these ends, PLOS is developing ApertaTM, a system that will facilitate and advance the submission and peer review process for authors, editors and reviewers. PLOS is also creating richer and more inclusive forums, such as PLOS Paleontology and PLOS Ecology Communities and the PLOS Science Wednesday redditscience Ask Me Anything. Progress is being made on early posting of manuscripts at PLOS. PLOS Computational Biology Topic Pages allow authors and editors to collaborate in a timely and transparent way. They then publish the work in both the journal and, along with the peer reviews and author responses, on Wikipedia for visibility and discussion. What began as a movement to make research accessible and free now provides millions of readers around the world increasing opportunities to make important, positive impacts on global health, scientific discovery and science education. Chairman , Chief Executive Ocer 1 Gary Ward, Elizabeth Marincola Transparent and Continual PLOS HIGHLIGHTS Assessment Advances Science Ongoing Engagement Extends New Research Available 100 PERCENT O PEN ACCESS the Lifetime of Research Sooner Accelerates Science Advances in digital technologies have created PLOS believes that the early availability of + opportunities to alter the way people work, research findings, expert commentary and YEARS communicate and cooperate. Leveraging the broad informed scientific opinion benefits basic 12 AS A LEADER IN OPEN ACCESS PUBLISHING readership and technology of Wikipedia and scientists, clinicians, policymakers and the editorial rigor of PLOS Computational Biology, public through improved decision making. Topic Pages [1] allow PLOS authors and editors a To allow for fast and timely release of PEER- collaborative, timely and transparent approach to information to the community at the height REVIEWED authoring, reviewing and editing. Manuscripts of the Ebola epidemic, two manuscripts JOURNALS created and revised on the journal’s Wiki undergo a submitted to PLOS Neglected Tropical 7 peer review process made transparent to the public Diseases describing the social pathways of by publishing the work—as both a journal article [2] transmission and factors leading to the and a Wikipedia page—together with the peer emergence of Ebola in West Africa were reviews and author responses. Access to the work conditionally accepted before rigorous peer on Wikipedia increases visibility and invites review and posted on the blog ‘Speaking of discussion. Eight Topic Pages have been created Medicine.’ On completion of the peer review with Wikipedia versions of articles updated as process, the articles [3] were published [4] discoveries are made, allowing the research record in the journal. to evolve. 2 Recognized Author Contributions respectful dialogue and constructive commenting. Industry Collaboration on PLOS—A TOP TEN PLOS supports these experiments through its editor PLOS ONE— Enhance Discovery Peer Review Ensures Integrity Measuring Article Impact BIOMEDICAL PUBLISHER and reviewer training available in the Academic To encourage appropriate recognition of researchers Editor Knowledge Base. PLOS joined other publishers and the Committee On 0.10 for contributing resources such as antibodies and Publication Ethics (COPE) to improve the integrity Scientists in the UK identify their model organisms, authors of PLOS Biology and and eectiveness of peer review by developing an 0.08 best work for the UK’s 2014 PLOS Genetics articles gained the ability to industry-wide response to inappropriate and Research Excellence Framework participate in the cross-publisher Resource orchestrated manipulation of the review process. whereby materials described 0.06 (REF), a periodic assessment of Identification Initiative The response includes a statement with published research articles. A total in an article are assigned a persistent and unique recommendations for individual publishers on of 2,403 PLOS articles across a machine-readable resource identifier. The identifier 0.04 retracting articles published on the basis of wide range of disciplines that links to a curated description of the resource, and manipulated reviews, and guidelines to ensure the provide new understanding of other articles or online sources citing that resource, integrity of the scientific record, public trust in the 0.02 CALCULATED CITATION FREQUENCY CITATION CALCULATED disease processes, clinical insights via the SciCrunch web portal. In addition to scientific literature and author confidentiality. or important basic scientific incentivizing appropriate credit, this facilitates better 0.00 research discoveries were submitted resource management, reproducibility and discovery. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 to the assessment, reflecting high- SCOPUS CITATIONS quality research by UK university “The balance tips towards the requirement Training Improves scientists published in PLOS journals. for transparency. Readers need 23,464 articles published in 2012 Assessment Quality to be able to judge whether writers are • 10% of articles ≥19 citations Assessment at multiple stages along a research commenting outside their areas of expertise.” • Median citations =7 project’s lifecycle provides a comprehensive Hilda Bastian Courtesy of Martin Fenner. Scopus citation counts as of July 13, 2015 for approach toward faster publication of quality work. PLOS ONE articles published in 2012 Editor, PubMed Health and PubMed Commons Training in how to critique research, the ability to Academic Editor, PLOS Medicine more rigorously capture the intellectual eort of commenting and acknowledgments of contributions will stimulate a stronger post-publication culture [5]. Towards this goal, those scientists engaged in discovery—from basic science [6] to translational research [7]—in discussion through blogs [8] can play a role in creating and enriching a scientific environment enhanced by critical thinking, 3 Recognized Author Contributions respectful dialogue and constructive commenting. Industry Collaboration on PLOS supports these experiments through its editor OPENNESS FOSTERS Enhance Discovery Peer Review Ensures Integrity and reviewer training available in the Academic INCREASED PUBLIC To encourage appropriate recognition of researchers Editor Knowledge Base. ENGAGEMENT PLOS joined other publishers and the Committee On for contributing resources such as antibodies and Publication Ethics (COPE) to improve the integrity model organisms, authors of PLOS Biology and and eectiveness of peer review by developing an PLOS Genetics articles gained the ability to The Public Engagement in Science industry-wide response to inappropriate and ARTICLE HIGHLIGHTS* participate in the cross-publisher Resource Collection [9] investigates through orchestrated manipulation of the review process. Identification Initiative whereby materials described case studies the conditions under ARTICLES PUBLISHED The response includes a statement with in an article are assigned a persistent and unique which the public is motivated to recommendations for individual publishers on machine-readable resource identifier. The identifier engage in scientific issues and retracting articles published on the basis of links to a curated description of the resource, and + decision making related to bio- manipulated reviews, and guidelines to ensure the other articles or online sources citing that resource, 33,000 science innovation. Recent articles integrity of the scientific record, public trust in the via the SciCrunch web portal. In addition to address open collaboration [10] scientific literature and author confidentiality. incentivizing appropriate credit, this facilitates better involving broadened participant resource management, reproducibility and discovery. groups to improve local 11.6 MILLION environmental governance; Training Improves MONTHLY ARTICLE VIEWS increased transparency [11] in the grant review process to bolster Assessment Quality confidence for public spending on Assessment at multiple stages along a research 1.9+ MILLION research; incremental changes [12] project’s lifecycle provides a comprehensive MONTHLY ARTICLE DOWNLOADS to improve transparency of peer approach toward faster publication of quality work. review for grant funding
Load more

Recommended publications
  • MICHAEL SWETNAM ALAN MOGHISSI, Phd ALAN LESHNER, Phd HEATHER JOSEPH January 22, 2014
    SEMINAR REPORT The Economics of Open Access: International and Domestic Implications Featured Speakers MICHAEL SWETNAM ALAN MOGHISSI, PhD ALAN LESHNER, PhD HEATHER JOSEPH January 22, 2014 C IN MA ST O IT T B U O T POTOMAC INSTITUTE FOR P E POLICY STUDIES F O R G 901 N. Stuart St. Suite 200 S P IE O D Arlington, VA 22203 LICY STU The Potomac Institute for Policy Studies gratefully acknowledge par- ticipants’ contributions included in this event report. Please note that the transcript has been edited for publication. The Institute and Potomac Institute Press cannot assume responsibil- ity for the validity of all materials or the consequences of their use; the view and opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies or Potomac Institute Press. Copyright © 2014 Potomac Institute for Policy Studies 901 N. Stuart St, Suite 200 Arlington, VA, 22203 www.potomacinstitute.org Telephone: 703.525.0770; Fax: 703.525.0299 Email: [email protected] POTOMAC INSTITUTE PRESS TABLE OF CONTENTS CReST 4 AGENDA 5 OPENING REMARKS 6 INTRODUCTION 8 PANEL TRANSCRIPT 9 OPEN DISCUSSION TRANSCRIPT 19 SPEAKER BIOGRAPHIES 40 POTOMAC INSTITUTE FOR POLICY STUDIES 45 CReST The Center for Revolutionary Scientific Thought (CReST) at the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies brings together individuals from a variety of backgrounds to enable a comprehensive outlook of science and technology (S&T) futures from academic and policy perspectives. CReST intends to: 1) develop new ideas, 2) formulate strategies on how to achieve revolutionary gains in S&T, 3) provide a discussion forum to address political, ethical, legal and social issues related to S&T, and 4) inform the public and policymakers about the most pressing issues and concerns regarding the future of S&T.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Educational Practices and Resources
    Open Educational Practices and Resources OLCOS Roadmap 2012 Edited by Guntram Geser Salzburg Research EduMedia Group Project information and imprint Project information and imprint Open e-Learning Content Observatory Services (OLCOS) OLCOS is a Transversal Action funded by the European Commission under the eLearning Programme. Duration: January 2006 – December 2007 Website: www.olcos.org Project partners European Centre for Media Competence, Germany European Distance and E-Learning Network, Hungary FernUniversitaet in Hagen, Germany Mediamaisteri Group, Finland Open University of Catalonia, Spain Salzburg Research, Austria Project coordinator Salzburg Research / EduMedia Group Veronika Hornung-Prähauser Jakob Haringer Straße 5/III, A-5020 Salzburg, Austria [email protected] Tel. 0043-662-2288-405 OLCOS roadmap editor Guntram Geser, Salzburg Research / EduMedia Group, Austria Contributors to the OLCOS roadmap FernUniversitaet in Hagen: Peter Baumgartner and Viola Naust Open University of Catalonia: Agustí Canals, Núria Ferran, Julià Minguillón and Mireia Pascual Mediamaisteri Group: Mats Rajalakso and Timo Väliharju Salzburg Research: Wernher Behrendt, Andreas Gruber, Veronika Hornung-Prähauser and Sebastian Schaffert Graphics & layout Jesper Visser, Salzburg Research 3 Project information and imprint Images Based on copyright-free photographs from www.imageafter.com Print version ISBN 3-902448-08-3 Printed in Austria January 2007 Online A digital version of this report can be freely downloaded from www.olcos.org Copyright This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution–NonCommercial–ShareAlike 2.5 License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ Disclaimer This publication was produced by the OLCOS Project with the financial support of the European Commission. The content of this report is the sole responsibility of OLCOS and its project partners.
    [Show full text]
  • Progress Update July 2011
    PUBLIC LIBRARY of SCIENCE PUBLIC LIBRARY of SCIENCE www.plos.org 3URJUHVV8SGDWH 2010 Progress Update July 2011 www.plos.org Welcome to the 2010 PLoS Progress Update, aimed at keeping our authors, reviewers, editors, and supporters fully apprised of developments at PLoS over our most recent Highlights year. You can sign up to read future updates here. If you would like 1. Message from a fuller historical picture of how far we’ve come, you can read the the Founders 2009 Progress Update and the first full Progress Report. 2. Publishing Initiatives 3. Influential 1. Message from the Founders Research 4. A Growing It’s been another exciting year for PLoS, focused on establishing more open, Organization efficient, and effective ways to accelerate progress in science and medicine 5. The Evolving and leading a transformation in research communication. Open Access Landscape PLoS reached a truly significant milestone in 2010 when, seven years 6. The First PLoS after entering the publishing business, our annual operating revenues Forum exceeded expenses for the first time. Although we are delighted that PLoS and others have now shown that Open Access (OA) is a viable and 7. Customer Service sustainable business model, we have a long way to go before universal 8. Financial Summary access is achieved for all. 9. 2011 and Beyond The significant progress that we’ve made toward this goal could not have 10. Major Support been achieved without the leadership of our co-founder Harold Varmus, in 2010 who announced during the year that he was stepping aside as Chairman 11.
    [Show full text]
  • When Is Open Access Not Open Access?
    Editorial When Is Open Access Not Open Access? Catriona J. MacCallum ince 2003, when PLoS Biology Box 1. The Bethesda Statement on Open-Access Publishing was launched, there has been This is taken from http:⁄⁄www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/bethesda.htm. a spectacular growth in “open- S 1 access” journals. The Directory of An Open Access Publication is one that meets the following two conditions: Open Access Journals (http:⁄⁄www. 1. The author(s) and copyright holder(s) grant(s) to all users a free, irrevocable, doaj.org/), hosted by Lund University worldwide, perpetual right of access to, and a license to copy, use, distribute, transmit Libraries, lists 2,816 open-access and display the work publicly and to make and distribute derivative works, in any digital journals as this article goes to press medium for any responsible purpose, subject to proper attribution of authorship2, as (and probably more by the time you well as the right to make small numbers of printed copies for their personal use. read this). Authors also have various 2. A complete version of the work and all supplemental materials, including a copy of “open-access” options within existing the permission as stated above, in a suitable standard electronic format is deposited subscription journals offered by immediately upon initial publication in at least one online repository that is supported traditional publishers (e.g., Blackwell, by an academic institution, scholarly society, government agency, or other well- Springer, Oxford University Press, and established organization that seeks to enable open access, unrestricted distribution, many others). In return for a fee to interoperability, and long-term archiving (for the biomedical sciences, PubMed Central the publisher, an author’s individual is such a repository).
    [Show full text]
  • Open Publications
    Open publications Research Services Essential Series Open Research Team 10th Feb 2021 1 Open Research team Caroline Huxtable (Open Access Repository Officer) Imogen Ward-Smith (Open Access Publications Officer) Chris Tibbs (Research Data Officer) Sofia Fernandes (Open Research Manager) www.exeter.ac.uk/research/openresearch/support/contact 2 http://www.exeter.ac.uk/research/researchdatamanagement/support/contact/ 2 Agenda • What is open research? • Why publish open access? • Open access, Symplectic and ORE • Open access policies • Publishing open access on the publisher website [email protected] 3 3 Open research Open research involves openness throughout the research lifecycle: • Openness as part of project planning / concept • Open notebook science • Making research methodology, software, code freely available • Open peer review • Open access to publications • Open data doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.49960 4 Open research lifecycle: Grigorov, Ivo. et al. (2016) ‘Research Lifecycle enhanced by an "Open Science by Default" Workflow’, Zenodo. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.49960 Wikipedia: Open-notebook science is the practice of making the entire primary record of a research project publicly available online as it is recorded. This involves placing the personal, or laboratory, notebook of the researcher online along with all raw and processed data, and any associated material, as this material is generated. Open peer review includes e.g. the author and reviewer identities are disclosed to each other during the peer review process, unlike the traditional peer review process where reviewers are anonymous except to the editors; making reviewers' reports public, rather than disclosing to the authors only, (this may include publishing authors' replies and editors' recommendations); allowing self-selected reviewers to comment on an article, rather than (or in addition to) having reviewers selected by the editors.
    [Show full text]
  • Article Reference
    Article Incidences of problematic cell lines are lower in papers that use RRIDs to identify cell lines BABIC, Zeljana, et al. Abstract The use of misidentified and contaminated cell lines continues to be a problem in biomedical research. Research Resource Identifiers (RRIDs) should reduce the prevalence of misidentified and contaminated cell lines in the literature by alerting researchers to cell lines that are on the list of problematic cell lines, which is maintained by the International Cell Line Authentication Committee (ICLAC) and the Cellosaurus database. To test this assertion, we text-mined the methods sections of about two million papers in PubMed Central, identifying 305,161 unique cell-line names in 150,459 articles. We estimate that 8.6% of these cell lines were on the list of problematic cell lines, whereas only 3.3% of the cell lines in the 634 papers that included RRIDs were on the problematic list. This suggests that the use of RRIDs is associated with a lower reported use of problematic cell lines. Reference BABIC, Zeljana, et al. Incidences of problematic cell lines are lower in papers that use RRIDs to identify cell lines. eLife, 2019, vol. 8, p. e41676 DOI : 10.7554/eLife.41676 PMID : 30693867 Available at: http://archive-ouverte.unige.ch/unige:119832 Disclaimer: layout of this document may differ from the published version. 1 / 1 FEATURE ARTICLE META-RESEARCH Incidences of problematic cell lines are lower in papers that use RRIDs to identify cell lines Abstract The use of misidentified and contaminated cell lines continues to be a problem in biomedical research.
    [Show full text]
  • Scientific Production in the PLOS Journals Sibele Fausto*, Rogério Mugnaini**
    Beyond traditional metrics at the University of São Paulo: scientific production in the PLOS journals Sibele Fausto*, Rogério Mugnaini** *[email protected], **[email protected] Escola de Comunicações e Artes, University of São Paulo, Av. Prof. Lúcio M. Rodrigues, 443, São Paulo, SP, CEP 05608-020 (Brazil) INTRODUCTION In the evolution of the Open Access Movement, there have been pioneering initiatives to provide free and open access to published scientific content, such as the creation of the BioMed Central (BMC) and the Public Library of Science (PLOS) in early 2000. These set out a new funding model for journals where the liability for publishing costs is transferred from the readers to the authors. The PLOS was also innovative since it led to the creation of Article-Level Metrics - ALM (Fenner & Lin, 2013) and expanded by issuing a series of new titles - PLOS Biology in 2003; PLOS Medicine in 2004, PLOS Computational Biology, PLOS Genetics and PLOS Pathogens in 2005, PLOS ONE in 2006 and more recently PLOS Currents. As a result, today the set of PLOS journals is widely recognized and prestigious. Recently (on June 18, 2013), PLOS introduced a new search engine - PLOS-ALM Reports (http://almreports.plos.org/) (Allen, 2013) which allows more detailed investigations to be carried out in all the PLOS journals showing consolidated alternative measures of visibility and impact earned by published articles. Since the University of São Paulo is considered to be "Brazil's leading academic institution in research and graduate education" (Schwartzman, 2006), this study is an attempt to find evidence of the USP performance that goes beyond traditional metrics, by using the alternative indicators provided by PLOS-ALM and making a comparison with other articles in the PLOS journals that come from Brazil.
    [Show full text]
  • Enabling Research Through Open Access Policies
    THE SCHOLARLY PUBLISHING & ACADEMIC RESOURCES COALITION 21 Dupont Circle NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 296-2296 www.arl.org/sparc Enabling Research through Open Access Policies Heather Joseph, Executive Director SPARC Washington, DC USA The Issue • Funders invest in research with the expectation that it will result in improvements to the public good. • They increasingly recognize that dissemination is an essential component of the research process. • Research is cumulative - it advances through sharing results. The value of an investment in research is maximized only through use of its findings. www.arl.org/sparc 2 The Issue • Too often, the research results (either publicly or privately funded ) are simply not widely available to the community of potential users. • Internet provides new opportunity to bring information broader audience at virtually no marginal cost, and use it new, innovative ways. Result: Call for new framework designed to allow research results to be more easily accessed and used. www.arl.org/sparc 3 Without Open Access But Article Isn’t Available….. Usability is Key “By open access, we mean its free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search or link to the full text of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software or use them for any other lawful purpose…” - The Budapest Open Access Initiative www.arl.org/sparc 6 Greater Access is a Policy Concern “Governments would boost innovation and get a better return on their investment in publicly funded research by making research findings more widely available….
    [Show full text]
  • The 2.5% Commitment
    The 2.5% Commitment David W. Lewis Dean of the IUPUI University Library [email protected] September 11, 2017 © 2017 David W. Lewis. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license The Commitment: Every academic library should commit to contribute 2.5% of its total budget to support the common infrastructure needed to create the open scholarly commons. Academic Libraries and the Open Scholarly Commons In the end, libraries can point out the fact that their future role actually points in in two, apparently opposite, yet deeply complementary directions: on the one hand, they plunge deeply into the local production scenes since they aim at systematically sweeping, storing, preserving, and curating all that is produced in their hosting institution; at the same time, the libraries, with their sister institutions, are involved in the task of ensuring a vibrant knowledge-nurturing life for their documents: they will circulate, be discoverable, be interoperable, be evaluated, etc. With the first function, each library ensures its safe and strong function within its host institution; with the second function, the libraries connect to bring the knowledge infrastructure that we all really need. — Jean-Claude Guédon1 In the Internet era information will be free, the only question remaining is who pays for that freedom. — Kalev Leetaru2 The two quotes define one of the primary challenges academic libraries currently face. Jean- Claude Guédon in his Budapest Open Access Initiative 15 Statement nicely describes the world that needs to be created, what Locan Dempsey nicely framed as moving form an “Outside-In” strategy to an “Inside-Out” strategy.3 What we, as the academic library community, want to create is an open scholarly commons that will be digital and distributed with colleges, universities, cultural heritage organizations, scholarly societies, foundations, and governments hosting the content created, funded, or of interest to them in repositories that would make the content openly available to the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Inequalities in Open Source Software Development: Analysis of Contributor’S Commits in Apache Software Foundation Projects
    RESEARCH ARTICLE Inequalities in Open Source Software Development: Analysis of Contributor’s Commits in Apache Software Foundation Projects Tadeusz Chełkowski1☯, Peter Gloor2☯*, Dariusz Jemielniak3☯ 1 Kozminski University, Warsaw, Poland, 2 Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Center for Cognitive Intelligence, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America, 3 Kozminski University, New Research on Digital Societies (NeRDS) group, Warsaw, Poland ☯ These authors contributed equally to this work. * [email protected] a11111 Abstract While researchers are becoming increasingly interested in studying OSS phenomenon, there is still a small number of studies analyzing larger samples of projects investigating the structure of activities among OSS developers. The significant amount of information that OPEN ACCESS has been gathered in the publicly available open-source software repositories and mailing- list archives offers an opportunity to analyze projects structures and participant involve- Citation: Chełkowski T, Gloor P, Jemielniak D (2016) Inequalities in Open Source Software Development: ment. In this article, using on commits data from 263 Apache projects repositories (nearly Analysis of Contributor’s Commits in Apache all), we show that although OSS development is often described as collaborative, but it in Software Foundation Projects. PLoS ONE 11(4): fact predominantly relies on radically solitary input and individual, non-collaborative contri- e0152976. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0152976 butions. We also show, in the first published study of this magnitude, that the engagement Editor: Christophe Antoniewski, CNRS UMR7622 & of contributors is based on a power-law distribution. University Paris 6 Pierre-et-Marie-Curie, FRANCE Received: December 15, 2015 Accepted: March 22, 2016 Published: April 20, 2016 Copyright: © 2016 Chełkowski et al.
    [Show full text]
  • EN125-Web.Pdf
    ercim-news.ercim.eu Number 125 April 2021 ERCIM NEWS Special theme: Brain-inspired Computing Also in this issue Research and Innovation: Human-like AI JoinCt ONTENTS Editorial Information JOINT ERCIM ACTIONS ERCIM News is the magazine of ERCIM. Published quarterly, it reports 4 ERCIM-JST Joint Symposium on Big Data and on joint actions of the ERCIM partners, and aims to reflect the contribu - Artificial Intelligence tion made by ERCIM to the European Community in Information Technology and Applied Mathematics. Through short articles and news 5 ERCIM “Alain Bensoussan” Fellowship Programme items, it provides a forum for the exchange of information between the institutes and also with the wider scientific community. This issue has a circulation of about 6,000 printed copies and is also available online. SPECIAL THEME ERCIM News is published by ERCIM EEIG The special theme “Brain-inspired Computing” has been BP 93, F-06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France coordinated by the guest editors Robert Haas (IBM +33 4 9238 5010, [email protected] Research Europe) and Michael Pfeiffer (Bosch Center for Director: Philipp Hoschka, ISSN 0926-4981 Artificial Intelligence) Contributions Introduction to the Special Theme Contributions should be submitted to the local editor of your country 6 Brain-inspired Computing by Robert Haas (IBM Research Europe) and Michael Copyrightnotice Pfeiffer (Bosch Center for Artificial Intelligence) All authors, as identified in each article, retain copyright of their work. ERCIM News is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Reinfection by Dengue: a Network Approach Using Data from Mexico
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/475137; this version posted November 23, 2018. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license. Regional reinfection by Dengue: a network approach using data from Mexico Mayra N´u~nez-L´opeza;∗, Luis Alarc´on-Ramosb, and Jorge X. Velasco-Hern´andezc aDepartamento de Matem´aticas Aplicadas, ITAM R´ıoHondo 1, CDMX 01080, M´exico bDepartamento de Matem´aticas Aplicadas y Sistemas, UAM-Cuajimalpa, Av.Vasco de Quiroga 4871, CDMX 05300, M´exico and cInstituto de Matem´aticas, UNAM-Juriquilla, Boulevard Juriquilla No. 3001, Quer´etaro, 76230, M´exico Most of the recent epidemic outbreaks in the world have a strong immigration component as a trigger rather than the dynamics implied by the basic reproduction number. In this work we present and discuss an approach to the problem of pathogen reinfections in a given area that associates people mobility and transmission of dengue, using a Markov-chain Susceptible-Infected-Susceptible (SIS) metapopulation model over a network. Our model postulates a parameter that we have named the effective inoculum size which represents a local measure of the population size of infected hosts that arrive at a given location as a function of population size, current incidence at neighboring locations and the connectivity of the patches. This parameter can be interpreted as an indicator of outbreak risk of any location.
    [Show full text]