Or, how to make physics fun.

It’s widely recognised that the established scholarly publishers skim an awful lot of money off the top of research budgets.

Special Issue on reproducibility in EuroScientist.

With so much new literature published each year, why are authors increasingly citing older papers?

A survey of SciELO users

An awesome list of (large-scale) public datasets on the Internet. (On-going collection)

Navigating the various requirements can be difficult and time consuming for authors. Every funding agency seems to have slightly different specifics to their OA policies and each paper has multiple authors with multiple funding agencies supporting their research.

In theory, science isn't just self-interested. We're all driven by curiosity and pure motives to strive together to unlock the secrets of the universe and solve problems.But it's for others to determine whether or not we've unlocked or solved anything.

The Web was invented to enable scientists to collaborate.

Open access isn't just some "free culture" refrain. It really matters and can save lives.

The Cell paper has been cited 150 times, according to Web of Science, while the Nature paper has been cited 40. The Nature paper has not yet been retracted.

Robert Weinberg, a prominent cancer scientist whose papers often notch hundreds or thousands of citations, has lost a fourth paper, this time a 2009 publication in Cell.

Olivier Voinnet, a researcher at ETH in Zurich is retracting a 2004 paper in The Plant Cell, according to the journal's publisher.

If you are a scientists sharing our concerns you can add your name in the support form on the right.

This dataset contains projects funded by the EU under the H2020. Grant information is provided for each project, including reference, acronym, objective, title, total cost, EC contribution, start date, end date, duration, Call Id, Topic, Funding Scheme, legal basis.

Writing and reviewing journal articles is part of the core business of a scientist. But it’s not an efficient way to communicate research results.

Every cutting-edge science by definition has to be DIY. The super-resolution microscopes for which this year’s Nobel was awarded couldn’t be bought in a store: Betzig, Hell, Moerner and colleagues had to build them themselves.

Consumer-oriented websites allow researchers to compare the merits of scientific journals and review their publishing experiences..

"Open Humans" project backed by Knight and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation invites individuals to share their most personal health information to accelerate medical breakthroughs.

Biomedical researchers look to post-publication peer review to build grant funding case.

ThinkLab is a platform that aims to facilitate and reward a 'massively collaborative', open, online model of research.

The Hague Declaration aims to foster agreement about how to best enable access to facts, data and ideas for knowledge discovery in the Digital Age. Following a period of public comment, our global experts are now preparing the final version of the text.

Data.gov now enables the public to open data directly with apps like Plotly and CartoDB for robust visualization and analysis. New tools are making it easier to visualize and analyze data at the click of a button.

How scientists can use Twitter to expand their social contacts and find jobs.

FundRef provides a standard way to report funding sources for published scholarly research.

If you can read this sentence, you can talk with a scientist. Well, maybe not about the details of her research, but at least you would share a common language.

The website is called The Scientific 23 because each interviewee was asked 23 questions.

The history of the 21st century will be the story of non-hierarchical systems of human organization enabled by the Internet.

We need to assess who gets funded based on research merit, not journal label.

Researcher Edition.