Heard from my college, a postdoc was died last night in the building few hundreds meters away from mine.....
Until now it said it was related chemical, further information will come late...
Friday, March 14, 2014
I thought bomb attack is far from me, it seems not
Just saw the news police arrested two people who planned to bomb attach the university.....
what's wrong with the world.
http://www.helsinkitimes.fi/finland/finland-news/domestic/9811-iltalehti-two-suspected-of-planning-a-bomb-attack-on-university-of-helsinki.html
what's wrong with the world.
http://www.helsinkitimes.fi/finland/finland-news/domestic/9811-iltalehti-two-suspected-of-planning-a-bomb-attack-on-university-of-helsinki.html
Friday, March 7, 2014
Thursday, March 6, 2014
Call for copyright to move with the times－from research professional
Call for copyright to move with the times
Academics want EU-wide permission to mine data
Special provisions are urgently needed to stop copyright laws from hampering research activities, according to universities, libraries and funders.
Academic institutions say their staff must be free to carry out text and data mining, which involve using computer programmes to trawl through and analyse vast amounts of information from scientific papers. Such use is restricted by EU copyright legislation, but that could be about to change as the European Commission has launched a consultation to review the laws.
In consultation responses seen by Research Europe, several groups are calling for EU-wide exemptions to copyright for research purposes, on the basis that the regulations are stifling scientific and economic competitiveness. “We are very worried about this,” says Kurt Deketelaere, secretary-general of the League of European Research Universities.
Interest in computer-based mining techniques is growing among researchers as the volume of papers accessible online increases and better analytical technologies become available. But the respondents say that EU copyright laws have not kept up with this trend.
“Activities such as text and data mining are being hindered by a copyright framework that was not designed for the digital environment,” says the Association of European Research Libraries. “It is imperative that the framework is adapted to ensure that European innovation is competitive.”
The EU copyright directive allows member states to choose whether or not to implement a limit on non-commercial scientific research, meaning that laws vary widely. Many scientific publishers block the use of computer programmes for mining but grant permission on a case-by-case basis to academics who subscribe to their journals.
“What we really want is a clear, indisputable exemption for academic research, so there can be no discussion in the 28 member states or among different commercial players,” says Deketelaere.
“We think that content that people have already paid for should be free to read by computers as well as to read by eye,” says David Carr, a policy adviser at the Wellcome Trust, a UK-based medical research charity. The trust estimates that, under a licensing approach, a researcher wishing to mine 8,000 articles could spend up to 60 per cent of a working year—at a cost of €22,000—gaining permission from the articles’ publishers. “If researchers have to negotiate access to content on a journal-by-journal basis, it rapidly becomes unworkable,” says Carr.
Scientific groups are concerned that the Commission may only be considering a revision of the licensing procedures for text and data mining, rather than a fundamental law change. However, Pierre Delsaux, deputy director-general at the Directorate-General for Internal Market and Services, which oversees the consultation, refutes the idea that the outcome of the review is predetermined. “We have held the consultation to have a real debate,” he says, adding that the ability of the creative industries, including publishing, to remain economically viable must be taken into account.
In response to researchers’ demands, some publishers have started to make concessions. In January, Elsevier announced plans to allow text mining by subscribers on its ScienceDirect database. But the system contains restrictions on the amount of text that can be published, which some researchers object to.
The consultation was due to close on 5 March and the Commission intends to produce a white paper based on the outcome, after which it will begin discussions on future legislation. “Whatever we propose will be very difficult to negotiate,” says Delsaux. “There are a lot of interests at stake and it will be a lengthy process.”
But Deketelaere warns that if no exemption is made for academic research, this will be “the beginning of the war” between publishers and universities. “Everything up until now on open access is peanuts compared with this,” he says.
- See more at: http://www.researchprofessional.com/0/rr/news/europe/universities/2014/3/call-for-copyright-to-move-with-the-times.html#sthash.VggPj4qA.dpuf
Call for copyright to move with the times－from research professional
Call for copyright to move with the times
Academics want EU-wide permission to mine data
Special provisions are urgently needed to stop copyright laws from hampering research activities, according to universities, libraries and funders.
Academic institutions say their staff must be free to carry out text and data mining, which involve using computer programmes to trawl through and analyse vast amounts of information from scientific papers. Such use is restricted by EU copyright legislation, but that could be about to change as the European Commission has launched a consultation to review the laws.
In consultation responses seen by Research Europe, several groups are calling for EU-wide exemptions to copyright for research purposes, on the basis that the regulations are stifling scientific and economic competitiveness. “We are very worried about this,” says Kurt Deketelaere, secretary-general of the League of European Research Universities.
Interest in computer-based mining techniques is growing among researchers as the volume of papers accessible online increases and better analytical technologies become available. But the respondents say that EU copyright laws have not kept up with this trend.
“Activities such as text and data mining are being hindered by a copyright framework that was not designed for the digital environment,” says the Association of European Research Libraries. “It is imperative that the framework is adapted to ensure that European innovation is competitive.”
The EU copyright directive allows member states to choose whether or not to implement a limit on non-commercial scientific research, meaning that laws vary widely. Many scientific publishers block the use of computer programmes for mining but grant permission on a case-by-case basis to academics who subscribe to their journals.
“What we really want is a clear, indisputable exemption for academic research, so there can be no discussion in the 28 member states or among different commercial players,” says Deketelaere.
“We think that content that people have already paid for should be free to read by computers as well as to read by eye,” says David Carr, a policy adviser at the Wellcome Trust, a UK-based medical research charity. The trust estimates that, under a licensing approach, a researcher wishing to mine 8,000 articles could spend up to 60 per cent of a working year—at a cost of €22,000—gaining permission from the articles’ publishers. “If researchers have to negotiate access to content on a journal-by-journal basis, it rapidly becomes unworkable,” says Carr.
Scientific groups are concerned that the Commission may only be considering a revision of the licensing procedures for text and data mining, rather than a fundamental law change. However, Pierre Delsaux, deputy director-general at the Directorate-General for Internal Market and Services, which oversees the consultation, refutes the idea that the outcome of the review is predetermined. “We have held the consultation to have a real debate,” he says, adding that the ability of the creative industries, including publishing, to remain economically viable must be taken into account.
In response to researchers’ demands, some publishers have started to make concessions. In January, Elsevier announced plans to allow text mining by subscribers on its ScienceDirect database. But the system contains restrictions on the amount of text that can be published, which some researchers object to.
The consultation was due to close on 5 March and the Commission intends to produce a white paper based on the outcome, after which it will begin discussions on future legislation. “Whatever we propose will be very difficult to negotiate,” says Delsaux. “There are a lot of interests at stake and it will be a lengthy process.”
But Deketelaere warns that if no exemption is made for academic research, this will be “the beginning of the war” between publishers and universities. “Everything up until now on open access is peanuts compared with this,” he says.
- See more at: http://www.researchprofessional.com/0/rr/news/europe/universities/2014/3/call-for-copyright-to-move-with-the-times.html#sthash.VggPj4qA.dpuf
Wednesday, March 5, 2014
Coffee could help memory
Just hears the news from voa,they said the research showed coffee could increase the ability to memorize, but also increase nervous .
Tuesday, March 4, 2014
giant virus is coming back
latest news from nature.
scientist researchers have found a giant virus from 30000 years old ice, and this giant virus still infectious.
learn more: find more information here
Nature: doi:10.1038/nature.2014.14801
scientist researchers have found a giant virus from 30000 years old ice, and this giant virus still infectious.
learn more: find more information here
Sunday, March 2, 2014
climate change-what can we do?
what could we do with the climate change ? could we stop it ? i am not in this area. but it is hot topic nowadays.
for me i could feel the environment around me is changing, comparing with the memo ten years ago..
in my home town, i have not seen snowing for many years, the rain is also less and less, especially recent few years.
few days ago, have read one paper from nature climate, the authors have utilized earth system model to see the effects of different method for climate changing. it seems like the methods have little effect on climate change if i did't understood wrongly.
i am thinking whether we could stop the climate changing or we just could slow down the changing process?
the most important thing, we should try our best to have better living environment, good water, air.....
for me i could feel the environment around me is changing, comparing with the memo ten years ago..
in my home town, i have not seen snowing for many years, the rain is also less and less, especially recent few years.
few days ago, have read one paper from nature climate, the authors have utilized earth system model to see the effects of different method for climate changing. it seems like the methods have little effect on climate change if i did't understood wrongly.
i am thinking whether we could stop the climate changing or we just could slow down the changing process?
the most important thing, we should try our best to have better living environment, good water, air.....
fake papers-more are found
it is sad to read this news for all scientist, but we could not avoid it and have to face the problem. what is the reason for producing these non-sense papers.
According to recent news from nature, there're about 120 are found as fake paper, and most of them from china. most of these paper are generalized by a software called scigen.
there are several things we should think about,
1, why some scientist willing to produce such fake paper?
2, how these fake paper pass the examination of peer reviews?
3, what could we do to improve such problem?
we should re-think the publishing systems. not only you, me, but also the government, publishers, and reviewers....
original news could be found in the following link:
http://www.nature.com/news/publishers-withdraw-more-than-120-gibberish-papers-1.14763
According to recent news from nature, there're about 120 are found as fake paper, and most of them from china. most of these paper are generalized by a software called scigen.
there are several things we should think about,
1, why some scientist willing to produce such fake paper?
2, how these fake paper pass the examination of peer reviews?
3, what could we do to improve such problem?
we should re-think the publishing systems. not only you, me, but also the government, publishers, and reviewers....
original news could be found in the following link:
http://www.nature.com/news/publishers-withdraw-more-than-120-gibberish-papers-1.14763
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)