Britta U. Westner, Daniel R. McCloy, Eric Larson, Alexandre Gramfort, Daniel S. Katz, Arfon M. Smith, invited co-signees
{"title":"在高速公路上骑车开源神经科学软件的危险状况","authors":"Britta U. Westner, Daniel R. McCloy, Eric Larson, Alexandre Gramfort, Daniel S. Katz, Arfon M. Smith, invited co-signees","doi":"arxiv-2403.19394","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Most scientists need software to perform their research (Barker et al., 2020;\nCarver et al., 2022; Hettrick, 2014; Hettrick et al., 2014; Switters and Osimo,\n2019), and neuroscientists are no exception. Whether we work with reaction\ntimes, electrophysiological signals, or magnetic resonance imaging data, we\nrely on software to acquire, analyze, and statistically evaluate the raw data\nwe obtain - or to generate such data if we work with simulations. In recent\nyears there has been a shift toward relying on free, open-source scientific\nsoftware (FOSSS) for neuroscience data analysis (Poldrack et al., 2019), in\nline with the broader open science movement in academia (McKiernan et al.,\n2016) and wider industry trends (Eghbal, 2016). Importantly, FOSSS is typically\ndeveloped by working scientists (not professional software developers) which\nsets up a precarious situation given the nature of the typical academic\nworkplace (wherein academics, especially in their early careers, are on short\nand fixed term contracts). In this paper, we will argue that the existing\necosystem of neuroscientific open source software is brittle, and discuss why\nand how the neuroscience community needs to come together to ensure a healthy\ngrowth of our software landscape to the benefit of all.","PeriodicalId":501219,"journal":{"name":"arXiv - QuanBio - Other Quantitative Biology","volume":"45 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cycling on the Freeway: The Perilous State of Open Source Neuroscience Software\",\"authors\":\"Britta U. Westner, Daniel R. McCloy, Eric Larson, Alexandre Gramfort, Daniel S. Katz, Arfon M. Smith, invited co-signees\",\"doi\":\"arxiv-2403.19394\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Most scientists need software to perform their research (Barker et al., 2020;\\nCarver et al., 2022; Hettrick, 2014; Hettrick et al., 2014; Switters and Osimo,\\n2019), and neuroscientists are no exception. Whether we work with reaction\\ntimes, electrophysiological signals, or magnetic resonance imaging data, we\\nrely on software to acquire, analyze, and statistically evaluate the raw data\\nwe obtain - or to generate such data if we work with simulations. In recent\\nyears there has been a shift toward relying on free, open-source scientific\\nsoftware (FOSSS) for neuroscience data analysis (Poldrack et al., 2019), in\\nline with the broader open science movement in academia (McKiernan et al.,\\n2016) and wider industry trends (Eghbal, 2016). Importantly, FOSSS is typically\\ndeveloped by working scientists (not professional software developers) which\\nsets up a precarious situation given the nature of the typical academic\\nworkplace (wherein academics, especially in their early careers, are on short\\nand fixed term contracts). In this paper, we will argue that the existing\\necosystem of neuroscientific open source software is brittle, and discuss why\\nand how the neuroscience community needs to come together to ensure a healthy\\ngrowth of our software landscape to the benefit of all.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501219,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"arXiv - QuanBio - Other Quantitative Biology\",\"volume\":\"45 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"arXiv - QuanBio - Other Quantitative Biology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/arxiv-2403.19394\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv - QuanBio - Other Quantitative Biology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/arxiv-2403.19394","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
大多数科学家都需要软件来完成他们的研究(Barker et al.,2020;Carver et al.,2022;Hettrick,2014;Hettrick et al.,2014;Switters and Osimo,2019),神经科学家也不例外。无论我们研究的是反应时、电生理信号还是磁共振成像数据,我们都依赖软件来获取、分析和统计评估我们获得的原始数据,如果我们研究的是模拟数据,则需要软件来生成这些数据。近年来,神经科学数据分析开始转向依赖免费开源科学软件(FOSSS)(Poldrack 等人,2019 年),这与学术界更广泛的开放科学运动(McKiernan 等人,2016 年)和更广泛的行业趋势(Eghbal,2016 年)是一致的。重要的是,FOSSS 通常是由在职科学家(而非专业软件开发人员)开发的,鉴于典型学术工作场所的性质(学术界人士,尤其是处于职业生涯早期的人士,都是签订短期和固定期限合同),这就造成了一种不稳定的局面。在本文中,我们将论证现有的神经科学开源软件生态系统是脆弱的,并讨论为什么神经科学社区需要团结起来,以确保我们的软件环境健康发展,造福所有人。
Cycling on the Freeway: The Perilous State of Open Source Neuroscience Software
Most scientists need software to perform their research (Barker et al., 2020;
Carver et al., 2022; Hettrick, 2014; Hettrick et al., 2014; Switters and Osimo,
2019), and neuroscientists are no exception. Whether we work with reaction
times, electrophysiological signals, or magnetic resonance imaging data, we
rely on software to acquire, analyze, and statistically evaluate the raw data
we obtain - or to generate such data if we work with simulations. In recent
years there has been a shift toward relying on free, open-source scientific
software (FOSSS) for neuroscience data analysis (Poldrack et al., 2019), in
line with the broader open science movement in academia (McKiernan et al.,
2016) and wider industry trends (Eghbal, 2016). Importantly, FOSSS is typically
developed by working scientists (not professional software developers) which
sets up a precarious situation given the nature of the typical academic
workplace (wherein academics, especially in their early careers, are on short
and fixed term contracts). In this paper, we will argue that the existing
ecosystem of neuroscientific open source software is brittle, and discuss why
and how the neuroscience community needs to come together to ensure a healthy
growth of our software landscape to the benefit of all.