Latest posts

In which I dream

Lab worker looking at a Petri dish

One from the archives: I check out some urinary tract infection bacteria, circa 2016

Last night I dreamt I was pipetting.

It was a beautiful Gilson p200, the classic model of my formative years. The precision instrument felt reassuringly heavy and solid in my right hand. Despite its age, the movements were smooth and easy after years of faithful service. Double-slam the yellow tip, plunge, immerse, pull up, transfer, expel while mixing up and down, shoot the spent tip into the benchtop bin with a satisfying rattle, repeat ad infinitum – movements as familiar and thoughtless as clutchwork while shifting gears.

I was in the midst of one of those experiments where you’d have to perform the same rote transfer hundreds of times, the hours somehow compressed into timelessness, into a state where tedium encroaches upon nirvana. The manipulations require little thought, so your head fills up with all sorts of other things: the next step in the protocol after these racks of tubes are finally completed; when you will get a chance to collect ice and thaw the enzyme, eat, grab a quick coffee, nip to the loo, write up your notes; what time you might manage to leave the lab, and whether any other late workers along the corridor might be up for a spontaneous evening social. It could have been one afternoon in any of the thousands that occurred in the roughly 25 years when I was heavily active at the bench, not just funding, planning, analysing and writing up research like now, but actually performing it manually.

When I woke, I wasn’t sad to find those days far behind me. My plate is full of ample nourishment. In the grand principal investigator cycle, I currently have two grants under consideration, three in preparation, two newly funded with personnel to hire, and two papers at draft stage. My substantial team is busy producing interesting data. I’ve got about ten invited talks or keynotes to discharge so far this year, and while teaching itself is winding down for this term, there is still plenty that needs attention in that sphere.

Do I miss my Gilsons? Of course I do. There is something raw and vital about benchwork – not just the work itself, but the phase of life it punctuates. My lost youth is rattling in that cardboard tip waste box, along with the camaraderie of my fellow travellers. It’s lonely at the top, and scientific friendships – though still present and important – are never the same as during your PhD and postdoc, when everything seems possible and the future is a bright unknown. The reality is probably less exciting, but far more satisfying than those long-ago aspirations.

I wouldn’t be young again for anything – but a girl can dream.

Posted in academia, careers, Nostalgia, Research, Scientific thinking, The ageing process, The profession of science | Comments Off on In which I dream

My Generation

Lady Tulip

Lady Tulip

Back in January I predicted that we would hit our 14 kWh daily average sometime around the end of April.

I was a little off, as we first passed that marker on 1 March—surprisingly for such a rainy day, I thought. The battery kept us going all night, too.

Since then, we’ve had a week of 10 to 13 kWh, and then we’ve been wet and gloomy and down at the 5 kWh per day level. But yesterday we were just shy of 20 kWh, and the battery again lasted the night.

I ran the Zappi this morning though, and it’s clouded over again, so we’re still not turning a profit.

We had the tall eucalyptus tree trimmed last weekend, as it was tall enough to reach the house if it fell in the wrong direction, and was throwing shade on the solar panels in the afternoon. I don’t think I’m going to be able to test what difference it has actually made to the generation, but it had to be worth something.

In any case, the days are getting longer and brighter, the tulips and cherries are coming into bloom, and all five ladies are doing the business, sometimes all on the same day. I’ve also turned the heating off.

Eggs

They sure are

You really can’t stop it now.

Posted in eggs, flowers, hens, home, nature, solar, Spring, tulips | Comments Off on My Generation

Country House

It’s March, and that means there’s far too much stuff to do in the garden.

Beans bursting out

Bean love

A few years ago we went to a PYO and got a pumpkin (or 12, whatever). It was a Blue Hubbard, and we saved the seeds and sowed them the next year.

We got a bit of a sport from that that mother, cute in a blue-ish, wonky sort of way, and my daughters for whatever reason named it ‘Ken’. The family chat group, somewhat inevitably, was renamed ‘The Ken Fan Club’. Over the years the chat has been renamed ‘Son of Ken fan club’, and of course ‘Ken III fan club” as we (mostly Jenny, to be honest) have saved and vernalized seeds from each subsequent generation.

Today I sowed some Ken III seeds and we hope that this season we will welcome Ken IV (and turn him and his siblings into pumpkin pie, but let’s not talk about that yet).

Ken and friends

They look small now…

I also sowed sweetcorn and mange tout and peas and while that doesn’t take up much space at the moment, we’re going to have to pot them on at some point.

But as Jenny said of the 34 sweetcorn pots, “We’ll worry about where to put them later”.

Sweet. Corn.

I remember when this was all fields.

Posted in 15MinutePost, Gardening | Comments Off on Country House

Futurepub March 2024 – International Women’s Day

The latest event in the Futurepub series, on 4 March 2024, took International Women’s Day as its theme. The topics of the talks were related to women and four out of the five speakers were women.

It was held at Bounce – a large basement bar and table tennis venue. As with the event last October (which focused on AI) there was not an emphasis on publishing and scholarly communications. It was an interesting evening nonetheless.

The talks were recorded and will be available on the Cassyni platform.

Suze Sundu was the host for the evening. Suze wrote recently on the TL;DR blog about ‘Empowering Women in STEM‘ and in that piece she mentions her recent interview with Dame Athene Donald (an Occams blogger).  Dame Athene’s book Not Just for the Boys: Why We Need More Women in Science  is required reading for anyone who wants gender balance in science.

  1. Subhadra Das

The first speaker was Subhadra Das, talking about ‘The History we Deserve’. Subhadra is a ‘writer, historian, broadcaster and comedian, who looks at the relationship between science and society’. A historian of science, she is particularly interested in the history of scientific racism and eugenics.

Subhadra clearly knows her subject and she also knows how to communicate. She had the audience in the palm of her hand, making us laugh one moment and think (or wince) the next. Her recent book, Uncivilised, is definitely going on my personal reading list.

Subhadra said that ‘old ideas shape new stories’. I guess that implies that we should try to break free from the constraints that these old ideas can place on our thinking. She reminded us that the complete title of Charles Darwin’s famous work is ‘On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life ‘. Ouch! That subtitle is very uncomfortable. Subhadra asked us if Darwin was racist, answering her own question in the affirmative but adding that it was more complicated than a simple ‘yes’.

She also introduced us to a less familiar evolutionary pioneer, Edward Drinker Cope (1840-97).  Cope was a self-taught palaeontologist from the USA who made significant contributions to the field, but he had pronounced racist and sexist views. Those ideas seem very out-of-date to modern ears but there are plenty of people today whose thinking is influenced by them, knowingly or otherwise.

Subhadra finished by giving us a short reading list:

  • Annabel Sowemimo’s book Divided on racism in medicine
  • Ruha Benjamin’s Race after Technology on how social hierarchies are embedded in internet tech
  • Joy Buolamwini’s Unmasking AI on encoded discrimination and exclusion in AI.
  1. Hélène Draux

Next up was Hélène Draux, a Senior Data Scientist at Digital Science, talking on ‘What The Decline in Women’s First Publications Means For Research’. She told us that while the trend in the proportion of women publishing their first academic paper had been increasing since 2000, it peaked in 2021 and is now in decline. It is not clear what is causing this reversal, but it is a worrying trend. I suspect that the COVID lockdown might have something to do with it.

You can read more about her findings in this blogpost on TL;DR.

Hélène posed some questions that need further exploration:

  • Is this trend true at institutional level?
  • Is there a difference within fields of research?
  • Is there a difference between funded and unfunded research?
  1. Jennifer Rohn

Jenny is well-known to Occam’s regulars as the author of the Mind the Gap blog on this platform where she writes about her life as a professor at UCL, a scientific researcher, a novelist and a mother. Her subject this evening was ‘Outsmarting urinary tract infection’.

She noted that her area of scientific research, UTIs, was typically a conversation stopper. But it is an important issue.  There are about 400 million cases of UTIs every year and it is predominantly a disease of women. Jenny noted that there has been little progress in this “mostly women” disease and research funding is hard to come by. (Funders – you need to do better!)

Antibiotic treatment often fails as the bacteria causing UTIs can evade the drugs commonly used to treat them. Jenny’s lab has developed a 3D model of human bladder tissue that allows her team to study what is going on at a cellular level. Jenny is using this miniature system to study UTIs and how we can deliver drugs directly to the site of infection and knock out the offending bugs.

  1. Joe Twyman

Joe is the co-founder and director of the public opinion consultancy Deltapoll so he knows something about survey technique. His talk was provocatively titled ‘Sex with Strangers – what could possibly go wrong?’ It’s a serious-sounding topic but Joe had the audience in uncontrollable laughter from the outset.

He told us about a classic paper by Clark and Hatfield: “Gender differences in receptivity to sexual offers” that was published in 1989. The authors found that whereas 75% of men will have sex with strangers, 0% of women will do so. The paper has been cited more than 1200 times.

Joe dug into the details to give a devastating critique of the paper – the small sample size, the homogeneity of the sample (one Florida university campus), the cis-het focus, the way the questions were asked, the survey technique. Joe also pointed out that a high profile serial murderer and rapist had been active in the area prior to the research being undertaken. All in all, the paper’s findings can be called into question.

In the midst of his very funny presentation he raised a serious issue about how and why a flawed piece of research can become such an influential and highly cited paper in its field.

Joe summarised with a couple of points:

  • The questions respondents actually answer do not always align with the questions that respondents are asked
  • You need to know ‘how the sausage is made’, particularly in the context of gender
  1. Kate Devlin

Kate Devlin from King’s College spoke on ‘Navigating the AI sea of dudes’. She displayed a photograph of the 1956 Dartmouth AI workshop – all those shown were men, though there were women doing important work in AI at that time.

In 2016 Margaret Mitchell, an AI researcher at Microsoft, talked about a ‘sea of dudes’ in the AI space. People (i.e. men) told her she was wrong. Mitchell pointed out that this imbalance is important because ‘gender has an effect on the types of questions that we ask’.

Kate asked what has the discipline done since 2016 to improve things and make it fairer and more representative of the world? Sadly, nothing. She showed us persuasive evidence that there is still still a serious dude problem in tech. Things are improving, but very slowly.

  1. Wrap-up

The evening ended with food and drinks and networking, as well as a (very noisy) table tennis tournament. It was good to catch up with various people from the scholarly comms world. I hope future events will bring back some scholarly comms focus to the talks.

I tweeted and skeeted a little on the #futurepub hashtag. I didn’t see any other social media activity about the event, aside from a few pre-event posts on #futurepub. I guess that event tweeting (etc) is dying out.

Posted in Futurepub, Journal publishing, women, Women in science, Women in tech | Comments Off on Futurepub March 2024 – International Women’s Day

Take Five

It‘s a crazy mixed up world, and the snowdrops were early and then the daffs were late but now there‘s tulips, tulips I tell you, showing their red little faces among the hyacinths and the daffs at the Gillingham roundabout.

It‘s probably something to do with climate change and technically being in an ice age but who knows? Life still, fortunately, goes on, and our hens have woken up to the fact it‘s 2024. First Iris (a while ago, now) and then Arty and Athena, and finally, today, Rhea lays a misshapen but ever-so-welcome little blue-green egg and suddenly I‘m going to have to start selling eggs to the neighbours again.

Eggs

Eggsellent work, ladies.

Nike, of course, is wondering what all the fuss is about.

 

Posted in 15MinutePost, hens, wibbling | Comments Off on Take Five

Desires of my heart

Let the little children come to me

14Jesus said, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.”

St Mary’s volunteer lanyard

A St Mary’s volunteer lanyard, on seemingly semi-permanent loan from the church.

Once St Mary’s clocked that I was not working and was willing, I got pulled in to assist with all sorts of activities. My experience with art-making made running a preplanned craft activity at the Light Party seem feasible. But things progressed fast.

I was then asked to help deliver an exploration of the Nativity to local schoolchildren. The step up in what was being demanded of me felt considerable. Experience Christmas focuses less on crafts and more on Jesus. The evening before, I was in the pub with the bellringers. When the bellringing gang looked dismayed at my leaving early, I told them

I’ve got to go. I have to get up in the morning. Gotta go indoctrinate some small children.

They told me

You don’t seem wild about this.

The Youth Minister at St Mary’s bashes the kids over the head with a Bible less than I had feared. Still, the Experience was a bit overwhelming and when I confessed this to Chloe, she said breezily

Don’t worry. There will be more for you to do at Easter.

I thought:

Great.

Command them to … be willing to share

Art materials are a vessel. They contain my anxieties. Art-making distracts and serves as a shared focus. By my third or fourth time volunteering with the kids, I have given up on reticence. I get called in to help facilitate a visit to the church from the local primary school. In contrast with previous times when I have delivered a pre-planned craft activity, this time I am to devise an activity myself in line with the themes for the day: faith, community, diversity and inclusion.

18Command them to do good, to be rich in good deeds, and to be generous and willing to share.

When given a problem I do not know how to solve, my first strategy is this: find someone who has solved this problem before, and ask them. I fired off an email to my art psychotherapist asking for suggestions. I needed a ten-minute activity with a one-word prompt, to go along with the themes for the day. After a brief exchange of ideas about structure, art materials, and underlying motivations, I went with the theme of sharing.

Year 3 from St Mary’s Church of England Primary School rotated around different tables at church in small groups, thinking about and discussing different aspects of our themes.

At my table, we asked

What might we share? What do people share with us?

and

Why do we share? Why is sharing important?

Answers ran the gamut from my Nintendo, the Bible, food and toys through to things we should not share: your credit card number. Among motivations for sharing, joy was commonly put forward, a bit of a surprise as I was expecting answers based on physical needs.

Then we got stuck in the the creative process, drawing pictures of what we might share and assembling a giant collage.

Sharing collage

Sharing collage.

Take delight in the Lord

Year 3 took their collage with them back to their classroom. I am left exhausted but exhilarated. I am finding it hard to accept how much I am enjoying It All. Early on in the journey, in the free fall furnishing my vertiginous descent into Christianity, I plied one of my disciplers with

But how can I trust this? How?

By this I meant Jesus, God, the Bible. Anything.

With that circular reasoning characteristic of an Evangelical, they offered scripture. As if that would help.

3Trust in the Lord, and do good;
so you will live in the land, and enjoy security.
4Take delight in the Lord,
and he will give you the desires of your heart.
5Commit your way to the Lord;
trust in him, and he will act.

A year later, it is dawning on me that the desires of your heart routine is a double-edged sword of laser precision. You will be given, in time, everything that you never knew that you wanted.

Not for human masters

23Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for human masters, 24since you know that you will receive an inheritance from the Lord as a reward. It is the Lord Christ you are serving.

As Richard moves into job-hunting territory, I, with God’s will and a following wind, move out of it. All of that getting stuck in at St Mary’s this past year has paid off. I have been offered a job in the St Mary’s church office.

I feel I can breathe again. That stage of the job hunt seems to be over. I have concerns though. When James mentioned the upcoming vacancy my first response was

Isn’t that really risky, working for your own Vicar.

To which James replied

Yes

At least we are on the same page, then.

The congregation seem delighted it will be me in the role, but I am wary. Will how they see me, change? I have been off work for some time now. Will I cope? What the heck does God have planned for me next?

At least, provided I do start as planned in a few days, I will have a new job title. Thus I have solved one problem which was bothering me: what to put on my LinkedIn.

This post comes with particular thanks to: nwg of Essex, the cheer squad, and everyone who cajoled, commiserated, believed in or prayed for or with me during the job hunt; everyone who agreed to provide a reference, met me for coffee, or pointed out a potential job. Most of all thanks to God for his guiding and guarding hand over all of us, and thanks to the good people of St Mary’s for giving me this opportunity.

Posted in career, careers, Children’s ministry, discernment, Faith, Life | Comments Off on Desires of my heart

The (Damaging) Power of Silence

There are many strategies for dealing with an overfull inbox, not all of which are helpful to the person who sent the email. I have weeks where I feel more or less on top of things and other weeks where too many slip through the cracks. Then I find myself, weeks later, sending an email saying ‘I do apologise for not replying sooner but….’ After that beginning I can try to find some plausible excuse along the lines of the dog ate my homework. However, these days I tend just to say ‘I’m afraid it got lost in my inbox’, which is usually the truth. Along these lines, I was amused to read a decade-old post of mine about constantly living on the edge of chaos, along with all its comments, which was complemented by the next post about the importance of knowing when to say no.

However, there is another way to deal with an overfull inbox, particularly when some of the emails are tricky or embarrassing to answer. That is to do absolutely nothing. Silence. Ignore the email, either as a deliberate strategy or in the hopes that if you don’t reply the whole problem will go away. Although I can’t say I have never used this strategy occasionally (but I hope not often), when someone does this to me in reverse, I find it intensely annoying. There was the time when I wrote to a colleague in Cambridge pointing out that the way he kept patting me on the arm through a dinner wasn’t particularly a problem for me at my advanced age, but might be regarded as totally inappropriate by a student. When no response was received, I felt strongly enough to send it again, to which I eventually received the reply ‘Athene, I got your email the first time.’ That was all. A totally inadequate response, but of course my original email had fallen into the ‘tricky or embarrassing to answer’ category. At least I felt I’d tried, not been complicit in letting bad behaviour go unremarked.

However, there are persistent offenders who simply do not answer when a direct question is addressed to them. If a PhD student asks ‘can I have access to your equipment?’ and you choose not to reply, where does that leave the student (or indeed their supervisor, if it gets escalated to them)? If an administrator tries to convene a meeting to discuss space utilisation, and the key professorial (robber) baron doesn’t acknowledge the email, let alone confirm a possible time to meet, how can space be fairly allocated? In both these cases, there is a power imbalance implicit in the situation, and a senior professor can get a long way by ignoring emails they would prefer not to answer. It is a very difficult situation to resolve, particular when someone is a long-term offender who hogs equipment, space etc but is never prepared to engage in a dialogue. Sadly, I have seen this situation (appropriately modified to any particular departmental situation) more times than I care to recall.

It is, of course, a form of bullying. Bullying by default. In my experience this passive sort of bullying is just as damaging to the local culture as anything else. If someone lower in the food chain tries similar behaviour, there tends to be recourse. If a PhD student silently but implicitly refuses to let another student use equipment, in principle (although in my experience most reluctantly) escalation through their supervisor may resolve the issue. It may not, however, lead to any sort of sanction being applied to the student in question, who then learns they can get away with being obstructive. They may anyhow have learnt this bad behavioural trait from their supervisor.  There is no doubt that students learn ‘acceptable’ behaviour from those around them; badly behaved supervisors can perpetuate a pattern of poor behaviour indefinitely.

To me, silence in these sorts of situation, including email, is a form of passive-aggressive behaviour that can be hugely damaging to an individual and a community. The one-off ‘oops’ moment, the email that slipped through the net inadvertently, the one put off and off because a reply is tricky until ultimately it vanishes from consciousness, that’s one type of failure. (Sadly, I would guess most of us have sometimes fallen into that trap; most certainly I have and usually with deep embarrassment when I realise this has occurred.) But, the repeat offender who thinks this is a good way to get on in the world is destructive to those around them, even if sadly it appears to be a constructive way to get on for the guilty party. It is , however, just one of the multitude of ways that enables a toxic culture to be built up, and one that is extremely difficult to unpick.

Posted in bullying, complicit, email, power imbalance, Science Culture | Comments Off on The (Damaging) Power of Silence

Opportunities

It’s a horrible word, redundant. ‘No longer needed or useful; superfluous’.

I don’t feel superfluous, but have to admit to feeling a little less than useful.

Some people have been very kind, noting my efforts to continue to support my little team and make sure they’ve got what they need to navigate these tricky waters, while others sail on, seemingly oblivious.

Can’t really blame them—those of us who are being shepherded out probably feel like an embarrassment; best not to say anything, or even look in our direction.

Titanic in color

It’s all a bit shit, really.

On the other hand, I’ve had an outpouring of support and interest on LinkedIn. Nothing firmed up yet, but despite the industry being in a bit of a patch at the moment, especially for people at my level, it’s not looking so bad.

I’m trying to see this as an opportunity to refocus, and think about things, and do some gardening and reading and shooting and I really really really hope to do a substantial amount of writing. It’s my last day tomorrow, and I can’t wait.

I do need to find a new job at some point, but one step at a time.

I’ve got the brains…

Posted in gizza job, personal, work, Writing | Comments Off on Opportunities

What I Read In February

Screenshot 2024-02-03 at 11.50.58Barbra Streisand: My Name Is Barbra I first came across Barbra Streisand with a fluffy comic song in my parents’ record collection. It was ‘Second-Hand Rose’, which I now know was written in 1921 and originally performed by the music-hall comedienne and singer Fanny Brice. It was in a Broadway musical about Brice that Streisand made her name and shot to stardom. That was Funny Girl. Streisand was just 21. As a child she was practically feral. Her father died when she was an infant. Plainly an inconvenience to her cold stepfather and uncaring mother, she left home in her mid teens and hustled for acting and singing jobs, eventually scoring a residency at a well-known Manhattan night spot as well as stealing the show, aged just nineteen, with a supporting role in a Broadway production, I Can Get It For You Wholesale.  Her talents as singer and actor were spotted and she was cast as the lead in Funny Girl. That was made into a movie in which Streisand starred opposite Omar Sharif, and she never looked back. Dozens and dozens of albums followed, along with films, in which she played an ever more active part behind as well as in front of the camera. This culminated in Yentl, the story of an Orthodox Jewish girl who impersonates a man so she can acquire learning, in which Streisand not only starred, but wrote the screenplay, produced and directed — a first for a woman.  There are parallels with Streisand’s life and that of rock star Geddy Lee, whose memoir My Effin’ Life I reviewed last month. At first glance, it’s hard to imagine musicians as different as Lee and Streisand. But look closer: they are both Jewish; their fathers died when they were very young; neither went to college (which perhaps explains the ferocious curiosity of the autodidact); both are entirely self-taught as musicians, and have enjoyed lifelong and lauded careers. This mammoth memoir goes into immense detail about every project Streisand was involved in, her loves, and her hates. She settles old scores, talks about food (a lot), and recalls every outfit she’s every worn, anywhere. At almost 1,000 pages, it was (unusually for a celeb autobiography) written without literary assistance. Perhaps Streisand’s greatest coup was that she had written into her contracts, from a very early age, that she would have total creative control of any recording project she would be involved in. I suspect that this applied to this book, too. My Name Is Barbra is an enjoyable if over-long read, but somewhere there’s a place for us in Manhattan is a book editor sobbing into her skinny latte in frustration.

UPDATE: Since reading this I’ve started to listen to the audiobook. This makes more sense than the dead-tree version. It’s narrated by Barbra herself, naturally, and also has clips of the music she mentions along the way. It’s amazingly long — about 48 hours — so is likely to keep me out off mischief on dog walks for some time.

 

UntitledIain Banks: Espedair Street Danny Weir is a gangly bug-eyed kid from a sink estate in Paisley, Scotland, who goes by the name of ‘Weird’ (a school joke: he was ‘Weir, D.’ in the school roll). He has just one talent – writing songs. In the early 70’s he linked up with a promising rock band, became their bass player and main songwriter, and enjoyed (if that’s the word) the life of 1970s rock excess. Years later, he lives in a converted folly in Glasgow, fabulously rich but somehow aimless. A concatenation of events leads him to contemplate suicide. That’s when his rockstar past collides with an uncertain future. But which will he choose? Espedair Street comes from the literary-novel side of Banks’ personality. With his middle initial ‘M’ he wrote brilliantly realised and influential space operas. I’ve read all of those, some of them many times, but haven’t read so many of his M-free works. Those I have read are varied in character and tone, from the ghoulishly gruesome Complicity to the affectionately dotty Whit to the readable but strangely heartless The Business to the fantastical Transitions to his gleefully revolting debut The Wasp Factory. Okay, perhaps I have read more of them than I first thought. Espedair Street tends to the darkly comic, with some amazing sitcom-style set pieces (always involving a great deal of alcohol and drugs), but is on the more affectionate side of his writing. I once met Banks in the coffee queue at a SF conference, and considering that many of his works are very dark, sometimes violent, he was the nicest, kindest, sweetest person imaginable. Perhaps he exorcised his demons in his writing. He died of cancer aged just 59: even with his prodigious literary output, he left us far too early.

UntitledMartin Popoff: Queen: Album By Album I rarely read, still less buy, books about rock musicians written by fans or journalists, even books about Queen, a band I’ve been fond of since I was eleven. I confess that I bought it by mistake, on eBay. I thought I was bidding on a book of Queen sheet music, as I have just joined a Queen tribute band as piano player and need to sort my Galileos from my Bismillahs (I bought that too, in the end). Still, it didn’t cost much, and when it arrived, I read it. It’s a series of transcribed interviews with various Queen fans, musicians and journalists conducted by rock journalist Popoff, each chapter analysing one of their many albums in chronological order from the self-titled debut in 1973 to their final record, Made In Heaven in 1995, released four years after Freddie Mercury’s death. I was pleased to see that not everyone agreed with one another, nor did they have universal praise for everything Queen did. Hot Space came in for a critical panning, which one would expect, but to my surprise A Kind Of Magic came off worse. Reading this did make me realise that no Queen album can be seen as a coherent whole. This is perhaps a function of the band having four strong-minded songwriters with very different tastes. That they worked so long together and produced (in my opinion) some fantastic and enduring music is all the more mysterious.

UntitledHarry Sidebottom: The Mad Emperor Until recently perhaps the only time anyone heard the name of the Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, better known as Elagabalus or Heliogabalus (reigned 218-222CE) was in the Gilbert and Sullivan song sung by the Modern Major General:

I know our mythic history, King Arthur’s and Sir Caradoc’s/ I answer hard acrostics, I’ve a pretty taste for Paradox/ I quote in elegiacs all the crimes of Heliogabalus/ In conics I can floor peculiarities parabolous.

But who was Heliogabalus, and what exactly were the crimes, so proverbially well-known in Victorian times that Gilbert and Sullivan’s audience would immediately have understood? History has painted Heliogabalus as the most depraved and dissolute of all the Roman Emperors (something that takes some doing). He was perhaps most notorious for his many extravagant banquets, which were not only decadent but dangerous. This idea was cemented in the 1888 painting The Roses of Heliogabalus by Sir Lawrence Alma-Tadema, a fine example of High Victoriana, showing guests at one of his soirees suffocating in a blizzard of rose petals. Lately, Heliogabalus has become a minor icon in parts of the LGBTQ+ movement, as a man who wanted to be regarded as a woman, and even (legend has it) that he inquired about having surgery to create a vagina. Wherefore the modern gender-fluid ideation?  Historian Harry Sidebottom tries to separate the man from the myth in this excellent book which — be warned — is much drier than you’d expect from the subject matter. The problem is that almost all we know of Heliogabalus comes from three sauces tzores sources, all variously unreliable, only two of which were written by contemporaries, and only one by someone who ever stood in the same room as Heliogabalus. What is certain is that Heliogabalus was a spectacularly incompetent Emperor. His lavish spending depleted the Imperial coffers; his habits alienated the Senate, the Army, the Plebs and the Imperial Household — the four constituencies that any competent Emperor would have to mollify; and, worst of all, he tried to introduce a new religion to Rome. Heliogabalus, although born in Rome, was raised in his family’s ancestral home of Emesa (modern-day Homs) in Syria, where the local god was Elagabal, a solar deity manifested as a large conical black stone. Heliogabalus was a High Priest of Elagabal and brought the god to Rome, where he insisted that it assume primacy over Jupiter, father of the Roman pantheon. Romans didn’t mind adding another God to their pantheon (they did it all the time) but objected to the demotion of Jupiter. That, along with the fact that Heliogabalus often wore priestly robes rather than a toga (a habit that the Romans found effeminate); was circumcised and didn’t eat pork (A similarity to Judaism — antisemitism, then as now, lurked close to the surface); and tended to promote people to high office on the basis of penis size — all contributed to his downfall. What Sidebottom doesn’t explain is how, a century or so later, Jupiter and the entire Roman pantheon were not only demoted but completely swept away by another obscure Oriental cult, an offshoot of the despised Judaism, that venerated a man nailed to a cross. But perhaps Constantine had better PR.

UntitledRichard Shepherd: Unnatural Causes When I was an undergraduate I went to a talk given by a forensic pathologist who recounted some grimly hilarious episodes from his casebook, many of which have stuck in the memory but which are probably unrepeatable nowadays. Imagine my anticipation when I was recommended this book by a colleague who, like me, enjoys a televisual emission called Silent Witness, which follows the lives of forensic pathologists as they solve mysterious deaths from the many clues that silent corpses can reveal — if you know where to look. Unlike Silent Witness, Unnatural Causes is the memoir of the real-life work of a forensic pathologist, one Richard Shepherd, who was switched on to cutting up dead bodies in his earliest youth, and ended up involved, directly or indirectly, in many celebrated cases, including the Marchioness river boat disaster, the Clapham rail crash, the 9/11 outrage, and the inquiry into the deaths of Princess Diana and Dodi Fayed.  The personal cost of such work proved to be enormous. His first marriage was sacrificed to his devotion to slicing and dicing, along with his mental health (in later life he suffered from PTSD) and — very nearly — his reputation, when he was referred to the General Medical Council over a trivial error (the case was dismissed). Shepherd clearly prefers the company of the dead, who, unlike the living, are unlikely to overload one with emotional demands (his young baby, his frustrated wife, the grieving relatives of the dead) or indulge in personal character assassinations (attack-dog barristers in court-room cross examinations). His only solace seems to have come from flying, an occupation that took him far away from the cares of the everyday. I have to say I found this a grim read, though I stuck it out doggedly to the end.

Posted in Music, Writing & Reading | Comments Off on What I Read In February

Notes from Open Research London, 12 February 2024

Earlier this month Open Research London held a half day event at the Francis Crick Institute to mark Love Your Data week, comprising six half-hour talks. The very engaging and interesting talks were focused on research data discovery, with detours into publishing, preprints and AI. Attendees were well-supplied with coffee and pastries during registration and the halftime break, so there was plenty of time for chatting with fellow attendees. There was also an option to move on to a local pub afterwards to continue conversations and catch-ups. All in all, it was a great chance to learn from and discuss with knowledgeable people.

Here are some notes about each talk. I’ve put them in a different order from the actual programme.

  1. Dan Crane, from the Open Research team at King’s College

Dan started by describing the setup at King’s and outlining what FAIR data is (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable). Then he outlined how his team capture datasets into the King’s Open Research Data System (KORDS) – a repository that uses FigShare.

The team at King’s have developed a metadata template to guide and encourage researchers to add descriptive metadata. There’s a balance to be struck between encouraging them to be as thorough as possible, whilst not nagging them so much that they are put off depositing their dataset. There’s also a balance between getting the researcher to do the work versus the Open Research Team taking on the work. I really recognise that dichotomy. Depositors in KORDS are encouraged to include a readme file and to add their ORCIDs. The system can also capture relationships between datasets. There is a good range of guidance and training material to help users to get their head around FAIR and open data sharing. Researchers are shown how they should reference the dataset deposited in KORDS when creating their data access/availability statement in the paper.

The King’s team also encourages researchers to create metadata-only records for datasets that cannot be shared openly, to give some exposure to this data.

Finally, Dan talked about how they create DOIs for grey literature in their PURE repository. Currently this is done manually. Guidance on ‘how to cite this’ is put on the page of each grey literature document that is posted in the repository.

I wonder how easy it is to get the message out to researchers that creating a DOI for any grey literature that they create is a Really Good Idea? I found that researchers (in life sciences at any rate) have a tendency to stick documents on general web pages without considering that there might be a better way to make them discoverable and accessible.

  1. Jonathan Green and Julie Baldwin from Univ Nottingham libraries

Jonathan and Julie described the process they use to find research datasets that have been deposited on external platforms by Univ Nottingham researchers, and then to import metadata from Scholix into the Nottingham repository. The aim is to create metadata-only records in the Nottingham data repository. Often research data is deposited into specialist domain repositories and thus is not easily visible or knowable via the university where the authors work. The Nottingham service is based on code shared by Durham/Manchester and uses the Scholix service as a data source.
Jonathan and Julie explained that initially they kept the project small-scale, due to resourcing constraints. The project started as an exploration – running some code to find what datasets existed ‘out there’ and then checking them manually before converting the metadata so it could be imported into the DSpace repository. The process has now been streamlined and further automated.

They had an interesting slide reflecting on some of the challenges and learning points. These boiled down to observing that the world of research data is messy, unpredictable and complex, hence human intervention is needed.

I found it very interesting to see this idea in practice as it’s something I’ve long thought could be useful. You can also import metadata from the EBI’s Biostudies database and I’ve seen this done, but for the purpose of research evaluation rather than for increasing the visibility of the datasets.

  1. Holly Ranger, from University of Westminster

Holly talked about capturing research outputs from practice research. This kind of research is often non-tangible, and collaborative, affected by its relations with other practice research. Holly noted that existing standards aren’t always suitable for arts research outputs. To improve the representation of practice research in the repository, Westminster has made various changes to the schemas for these. A particular feature is the ‘overlays narrative and context’. Holly said that contextualised data is really important for practice research. Holly mentioned persistent identifiers; RAiD, DataCite DOIs and CReDit. RAiD has proved to be a good fit for these outputs.

Westminster has embedded guidance to making practice research open within the practice PhD research handbook – explaining how to document the practice and research journey.

The second aspect of Westminster’s steps to embedding OA into practice research was implementing ‘Theory of change for research design’. I missed the details of this part of the talk. Holly mentioned the Practice Research Voices project, funded by the AHRC, and its final report and recommendations that have been published.

  1. Maria Levchenko, from the Europe PMC team at EBI

Maria talked about preprint discovery and preprint review/feedback, focusing on preprints in life sciences. She started with a definition of what a preprint is, and showed the growth in adoption of preprints and of preprint evaluations being posted. She mentioned that there are up to 60 preprint servers that have some biomedical content, and there are more than 35 initiatives reviewing life science preprints. This means that discovering preprints in life sciences can be challenging.

Europe PMC has been indexing preprints since 2018 and now has 735k preprints from more than 30 servers. Of those, 260k have been published in peer-reviewed journals and 10k have some kind of feedback.

Europe PMC also indexes preprint feedback and links them to the original preprint, to help readers assess the preprint. The feedback can be any kind of comment on the pre-published work. Though still small, the numbers of preprint peer reviews are now increasing. Researchers can gain exposure and credit through providing feedback on preprints. ePMC also links into funder and grant information about the research in the preprint, and citations to the preprint. These are all indicators of trust. Maria mentioned eLife’s Sciety website and EMBO’s Early Evidence Base website. Both of these categorise preprint feedback, but their categories are not the same. It would be helpful to harmonise types of preprint feedback.

Maria highlighted the issue of licences for reviews to whether and how the reviews can be reused. For example, can they be translated, text-mined, used by AI tools to provide summaries? Free to read does not mean free to re-use. Hence there is a growing need for pre-print licenses. Subsequently on Twitter EuropePMC posted:

If you want to be part of the conversations to define best practices and community standards sign up here: buff.ly/3uyZC3V

You can check for preprint updates using the Europe PMC Article Status Monitor tool to check if a preprint is:

  • Published in a journal
  • Withdrawn
  • Removed
  • Available as a newer version
  1. Mark Hahnel, Digital Science

Mark’s talk was titled “Global Academic Publishing: Where will experimentation lead?” He enumerated some of the qualities we look for in effective academic publishing: speed, openness, cost-effectiveness, trust. It’s hard to combine all four of these. Mark suggested that trust is the most important.

Mark sketched out some of the current problems in scholarly publishing: paper mills, research integrity failures, the volume of research that needs peer review. He pointed out that over the last 20 or so years the amount of academic research published has tripled, but there aren’t three times as many academics. Hence the peer review burden on each academic is increasing, and this is not sustainable. He asked whether/how we can limit the number of papers and datasets that need to be reviewed?

Mark said he doesn’t have answers to these problems, but emphasised that we need innovation in publishing in order to find the answers. He added that innovation can add complexity to the whole system, so it is not always welcomed by researchers/authors.

  1. Andrea Chiarelli, Research Consulting

Andrew talked about AI’s influence on open research discoverability and impact. He stated that there are many AI tools today and it’s hard to keep up. There’s even a website called ‘There’s an AI for that‘.

AI tools for enhancing search/discovery/review are getting better. Some tools can recommend what to read. Others can enhance research objects with machine-generated metadata, to improve discovery. Other AI tools can help to translate academic language into language that speaks to the policy and practitioner communities that can benefit from research findings. AI tools can also help with trend discovery and analysis.

Andrea highlighted three tools that are worth a look:

He acknowledged that there are drawbacks to AI. It’s a black box – leading to limitations in transparency and reproducibility. It’s difficult to understand the tools and language of AI. There is potential for bias and ‘hallucinations’ with generative AI. There are also data security and privacy concerns.
Finally, Andrea posed the question whether AI is a research partner or a research predator?

He presented the pros (research partner) thus:

  • AI becomes a powerful ally for researchers, enabling them to deliver more
    efficient, comprehensive and rigorous work.
  • AI tools help researchers with literature review, data analysis, hypothesis generation, experiment
    design and paper writing.
  • Researchers leverage AI to enhance their creativity, curiosity and critical thinking.
  • AI helps democratise research, making it more accessible, inclusive and diverse.

and the cons (research predator) thus:

  • Researchers lose their autonomy, agency and identity as AI takes over several facets of their roles.
  • AI enables a competitive and metric-driven culture, where researchers are pressured to publish even more and faster, sacrificing quality and integrity.
  • AI widens the gap between disciplines, institutions and countries, creating a monopoly of research by a
    few powerful actors.
  • AI tools are used to manipulate, plagiarise, and fabricate research results at scale by paper mills and toxic actors.

A question from the audience highlighted sustainability concerns with using free AI tools: who owns the infrastructure that we become depend on when we use these tools? What “hidden costs” are associated with this? This is an aspect that needs further thought by anyone building services that rely on these tools.

Posted in AI, Journal publishing, Open Science, Preprints | Comments Off on Notes from Open Research London, 12 February 2024