Introduction

• News
  • Merten Dahlkemper is new Open Science Community Engagement Manager
  • Increasing collaboration with OAPEN: Hosting OA Books
  • ICFA Data Lifecycle panel has published recommendations for best practices on data preservation
• Events
  • OSPO event today at 3pm in Council Chamber about Open Source with Dawn Foster
  • Conference on Open Science in September: OS Fair on 15-17 September, organised by CERN and OpenAIRE, held in Science Gateway
• Topic of last OSPF was monitoring frameworks. We continue work on that and follow also international efforts closely
• Todays agenda
  • We need to review Implementation Plan by assessing achievements and gaps to write Open Science Report and prepare for the next two years
  • Work in Progress on a Google Doc linked in the description of this event. Today: presentation on all the chapters by the “sheperds” of the chapters
  • Need to present review to the OSSB by March/April
  • Publish report publicly in May/June

Open Access

• It’s the oldest Open Science chapters at CERN (policy exists since 2014)
• 4 different mechanisms to allow authors to comply with policy:
  • SCOAP3 for HEP
  • Favoured publishing model: collective models, where funding is provided by some consortia and everyone can publish
  • OA agreements where corresponding author has to be CERN-affiliated. CERN has 10 such agreements
  • Individual APCs for journals not covered by any agreements
• Open Access in 2023: 96% of CERN publications were OA (half of it via SCOAP3, 7% only Green OA)
  • Aim is to get to 100%
  • Licenses are on track: 98% are CC-BY, which is demanded by policy (more restricitive license could sign away author’s rights)
    • We are doing campaigns to make authors aware of licenses
• Continue support to researchers on OA
• SCOAP3 went into the next phase to push publishers to include Open Science elements
• Continued support to infrastructure (OAPEN, DOAJ,…)
• Participation in Diamond OA, where journals are open to everyone
• Future plans:
  • More education and outreach on good practices
  • Assess transformative agreements, how do we make them more transformative
  • New phase for SCOAP3
  • Global Infrastructure for OA (diamond/collective OA)

Discussion

• More comments can be added in the Review document
• We should communicate more general rules or recommendations for how to license something. That will be part of the communication strategy to be developed by Merten

Open Data

• History
  • Open Data Working Group started in 2020
  • LHC experiments OD policy was very broad, goes more into detail in Implementation Plan; implementation needed to start within 5 years; after this period, data should be released at the end of the run where the data was taken
  • IT agreed to provide resources by the end of 2025; they employed a person to work on tape integration of Open Data
  • Big experiments status
    • CMS has released 3 big datasets already
    • LHCb has released one big dataset already; they have developed their own system to more efficiently store/use data
    • ATLAS has had two data releases
    • ALICE is still missing but expect to have theor first release soon
  • Status is discussed at annual ODWG meetings
• Small LHC experiments also need to be included. They endorsed the policy in 2023, latency period is still ongoing (until 2028)
• Other facilities: Policy might not be applicable to all experiments
  • ISOLDE has written their own policy
  • AD and nTOF experiments are still missing a policy
  • SPS experiments currently in discussion
  • Need to follow up
• Discussion ongoing on monitoring
• ATLAS will also release Monte Carlo generator information (useful for simulations)
• Open Data Portal could be used also for older experiments (such as LEP experiments), storage size not a problem, but compatibility might be an issue
• Lessons has been learned on data preservation; synergy between data preservation and open data all experiments can learn from
• Future resource planning
  • used resources were smaller than expected in the past
  • In Run 2/3, there will be probably 2.5 as much as data as expected
  • Ongoing discussion as to where to get the resources for this
  • Interface between open data portal and tape system will bring down the costs

Discussion

• ESPP update
  • In a meeting next week, there will be a discussion for a white paper on how OD is included in the ESPPU (https://indico.cern.ch/event/1466101/timetable/#43-discussion-of-esppu-white-p)
• It’s a complicated discussion about the resource need of open data
  • Resources for data sharing use up to some part the resources for running the experiment
  • Discussion with management is ongoing on what the priorities are

Open Source Software

• OSPO was launched (2 years of preparation)
  • internal CERN community
  • broader open-source community
• Focus on guidelines/best practices: e.g., choice of default licenses; process for signing CLAs (Contributor License Agreements)
• CERN Open Source Software Catalogue
• 9 open sourcing requests in 2024
• Community event
• Plans for the coming two years
  • Consolidation: KPI development(Project with Software Heritage on measuring impact); Collaboration with European agencies; Contributing to non-CERN FOSS (theme of today’s OSPO seminar)
  • Tooling: Catalogue; Streamline open-sourcing processes; dependency tracking; license choosing workflow

Discussion

• Good that the organisation dedicated resources to OSPO

Open Source Hardware

• OS Hardware has similar status as FOSS in the OSPO
• Started work by focusing on creating a catalogue for OSHW
  • Software-Hardware asymmetry in policy: For software, the standard entry point is OSPO, for hardware it’s KT
• Gateware (language to describe hardware) was decided to be rather hardware than software -> default entry point is KT
• Development of new OSHW Repository. Preview at https://ohwr.github.io/ohwr.org/
• Include best practices for Gateware and Hardware
• KPI development
  • CERN’s electronic drawing office: 15 / 200 designs were OSHW (2024)
  • Designsat CERN’s electronic drawing office done with FOSS tool KiCad: 8 / 200 (2024)
  • CERN OHL v2 (de facto standard license for Open Hardware) adaption in github.com: 1343 projects in total used one of the three licenses
• New OSHW Repository to be released before summer
• Improve guidelines in OSPO docs (including licence chooser)
• Streamline the use of KiCAD; add guidelines on its use in OSPO docs; work with CERN drawing office, designers and EDAC
• By the end of the year assess, increase awareness on OSHW
• Future plans: also focus on mechanical designs (currently mostly electronics); Include KiCad on Product Lifecycle Management plans

Discussion

• Are there any insights in why people don’t share their designs under OSHW?
  • It lacks awareness -> Need for communication. Also complicated process, therefore need for advising and streamline of the process

Research Integrity

• More complicated topic
• About research output, not only data, but also metadata, auxiliary data, linked software, analysis workflows, documentation etc
• Report mostly done from the CMS perspective, as its very much about processes within the collaborations
• Workshops on workflow languages
• Trainings by HSF in 23/24, most are online
• Software development: REANA has been continouosly developed; CMS released Combine software; statistical models can now be published on CDS with a workflow
• Analysis code not so much covered by OSPO, as usually it’s not standalone code and it belongs to specific analysis
• For publsihing analysis code, CDS might be more appropriate than Zenodo
• A plan for research integrity has not been drafted but “recommendations for best practices for open science” have been drafted by ICFA Lifecycle panel which coulld be used here
• In CMS, a new group has been formed on common analysis tools that created templates for analysis reusability
• Discussions around needs and priorities for analysis preservation tools has been started, but most advancements are thanks to grassroots movements
• Trainings have been provided by HSF. There should be more trainings on CERN-specific tools, such as REANA. The frequency has to be defined
• automatic preservation is rather seen as a resommendation -> In any case it needs more trainings and documentation
• Communication and coordination needed

Discussion

• We are trying to promote the archival of software on repository.cern, also working on a gitlab integration
• OSPO is also looking into trainings for Open Source licensing
• OS Office could take over coordination

Open Infrastructure

• Plan was to make a list of services, identify sustainability measures and resource needs, develop a draft roadmap and to review these measures continuously
• Little was achieved, mostly because of limited capacity. It needs a more coordinated approach with OS Office
• Progress has made on the various platforms
  • opendata.cern: 80k records, tenth anniversary
  • Inspire: New Data collection
  • reana was used to reiinterpret ATLAS-Run-2 analyses
  • Zenodo: 11th anniversary, EU Open Research repository
  • Invenio RDM: COAR notify
• Suggestion for a reworked Implementation Plan:
  
  • Minimal set of services. For each service:
    • FAIR assessment
    • Key principles
    • Propose KPI
    • Identify missing integrations between services
  • Team meeting 2h/month, review achievements in 1 year
  • Short document to be provided
    • Potentially on the Open Science website

Discussion

• OS Office will support in coordination and creating and publishing a document to collect the infrastructure

Research Assessment

• CoARA as the main instrument to work on Research Assessment
  • It’s a coalition which aims to jointly update assessment practices with ten main principles (4 of them being “hard criteria”)
    • Recognize more than just articles
    • Base research assessment on qualitative instead of quantitative indicators
    • Abandon journal- and publication-based metrics (JIF)
    • Avoid use of rankings of research
• So far, we have released a preliminary action plan
  • We have started with interviews with colleagues in TH and EP to find out what the actual assessment principles look like
  • Develop educational material to create awareness
    • First policies on that topics have been in place already since 2003
  • Promote teaching and outreach
  • Implement, test, and revise changes
• Also want to assess current practices in allocating beamtime
• Currently Alex and Antonia from SIS are working on it, but everyone is encouraged to help

Discussion

• None

Training, Education and Outreach

• Lack of awareness for Implementation Plan
• Training: Has not happened yet. There are very limited activities from SIS in Science Writing course and in a course for newcomers
• Hands-on workshops reaching out to 30k people in 2023/24
• Teacher and student programmes have reached several thousand teachers and students
• virtual tours and educational videos
• Digital resources need to be licensed properly. TSP resources are licensed via Zenodo with CC-BY
• Academic training also exists with recordings and slides made available
• Outreach events: CERN-based masterclasses reach around 10k students
• Exhibitions: We need to reconsider the wording in the Implementation Plan
  • Should the exhibitions be on the theme of Open Science?
• Science Gateway inspiration book to inspire other museums and exhibitions
• We need to
  • expand training programs
  • manage licensing of materials
  • distinguish between educational and outreach material. Not clear if distinction is really needed
  • consider rewording of Implementation Plan

Discussion

• If we provide CERN material, it should be discussed whether CDS might be better than Zenodo as it’s the institutional repository.
• Implementation Plan stresses distinction between education (conceptual understanding) and outreach (raising awareness). Not clear whether we really need this distinction.

Citizen Science

• No coordinated effort has been done here over the past two years
• LHC@Home has continued
• In the past, other projects, mostly by ATLAS and CMS have been conducted over a limited time frame
• Educational resources have been published, e.g., on the open data portal
• There is great potential at CERN for doing citizen science

Discussion

• We should leverage what already exists, we don’t want to take anything away, just to promote things
• Some people do things, but only on a voluntary basis with a limited fraction of their time
• We can only try to highlight what is already happening
• Maybe we could reach out to organisations that promote citizen science

Discussion and next steps

• What happens next?
  • We continue working on review
  • Everyone gets two more weeks to work on the document. After that OS office will edit the document with the aim to have it ready by end of March
  • This review will be discussed with OSSB, while already working on the next Implementation Plan and preparing a document to be shared publicly
  • Also we will organize more focussed discussions on certain aspects of the plan