1. Access to Scientific Information
Past, Present, and Future
Michael J. Kurtz
Harvard-Smithsonian
Center for Astrophysics

2. Research Communication is
Changing
•After WWII Maxwell/Pergammon
–Publishers sell paper journals to libraries
–Publishers create journals according to market
–Publishers make profit
–Libraries satisfy scientists
•This model worked for 60 years

3. What is at Risk?
drives
Research Innovation
4%
dr
dri
iv
ve
es
s
Economy
The Future of the World!

4. What does 4% per year mean?
•Population growth ~1.7%
•Per capita growth 2.3%
•After 60 years per capita GDP 4 times
•If 2.5% per year then 0.8% per capita
•Then after 60 year a 60% rise in GDP/person
Changes in the rate of growth
have profound consequences

5. The Value of Research
•High yield crops
•Transistor
•DNA
•Bone marrow transplant
•2.7K background radiation
•Giant Magnetoresistance --- Moore’ Law
s

6. Beyond the Journal
Scientific Communication
for Today
An Example from Astrophysics

27. Astronomer
CDS/NED ADS
Data Centers Journals arXiv
Data Links Data Links VO

28. Some New Directions
•myADS-arXiv an Open Access Virtual
Journal
•Protein Data Bank (Borne & Fink) data
mining journals into a structured DB
•Work Flow/Provenance Systems capture
the exact details of data reduction for
publication and reuse (VisTrails, Freire)

31. Freire, VisTrails, 2007

32. Facts & Fallacies
about Open Access

33. 1. Money will be saved
•Publication costs are 1% of research
costs, less than yearly uncertainties in
funding agency budgets
•Large efficiency increases due to digital
communications (~7% in astronomy)
•4% growth breaks budgets over time
•The funding model is broken, but the new
technologies will still have to be paid for

34. Green versus Gold
• Papers appear free in • Papers appear free in
local/central repositories journals
• PDF mainly, no additional • Full formatting options
formatting • A single system
• Journals separate system • Requires (unknown)
• No solution to the funding solution to the funding
problem, no cost for author problem (author pays?)
or reader • Funding agency driven
• Can happen very quickly (direct vs indirect cost)
• Opposed by publishers and • Accepted by publishers
scientific societies

35. Green: IR Mandates(NIH, Harvard, … )
S. Harnad & A. Swan

36. Green: CR - arXiv
P. Ginsparg

37. Gold: Author Pays (Page Charges)

38. Gold: Consortium Pays
The SCOAP3 model
A consortium sponsors HEP publications and makes them
Open Access by re-directing subscription money.
Today: (funding bodies through) libraries purchase journal
subscriptions to (indirectly) support the peer-review service
and to allow their users to read
•
Tomorrow: funding bodies and libraries contribute to SCOAP3,
which pays centrally for the articles.
S. Mele

39. 2. OA Increases Citations
•If all OA: no changed
•OA articles are 2 to 1 more cited than non-OA
•This is NOT caused by financial considerations
•The best authors post their best work
•Early Access via arXiv
•80-20 rule

41. 2½ OA Increases Reads
•True, but …
•Most new reads are casual
•Does not measurably effect citation

43. The Immediate Cost
•The discovery not made
•Science is highly non-linear
•We do not know who will discover the next
big thing
–Cross-disciplinary work?
– Inner city MD with patients?
–Theorists with pencils?
–…

44. The Cost of Doing Nothing
•The most important intellectual work of the
20th century was done by a junior clerk in
the Swiss patent office
•Today he would not be able to access the
on-line journals
•What work is not being done now because
a junior engineer in an Indonesian shoe
factory cannot read The Physical Review
(or Cell or … ) on her lunch break?