Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • nilshomer
    Nils Homer
    • Nov 2008
    • 1283

    #1

    New Journal: Open Research Computation

    I find this extremely exciting for those writing and supporting software tools:!

    Journal:


    Editor's blog:
    Last edited by nilshomer; 12-13-2010, 11:10 AM.
  • simonandrews
    Simon Andrews
    • May 2009
    • 870

    #2
    That's a really interesting take on a computational biology journal. We've been talking for a while now about how there is a lack of suitable places to publish research software.

    I'll be interested to see how strictly they adhere to their rules about documentation and unit tests, and how many high profile projects meet those standards.

    Comment

    • dawe
      Senior Member
      • Apr 2009
      • 258

      #3
      Nice, thanks!
      Let's see what they propose, as they accepting many things, from code snippets to full software...

      Comment

      • dawe
        Senior Member
        • Apr 2009
        • 258

        #4
        I'm a bit scared about the note in the editor's blog:

        The submission criteria for ORC Software Articles are stringent. The source code must be available, on an appropriate public repository under an OSI compliant license. Running code, in the form of executables, or an instance of a service must be made available. Documentation of the code will be expected to a very high standard, consistent with best practice in the language and research domain, and it must cover all public methods and classes. Similarly code testing must be in place covering, by default, 100% of the code. Finally all the claims, use cases, and figures in the paper must have associated with them test data, with examples of both input data and the outputs expected.
        according to this, more than half of the software I've seen couldn't be published :-)

        d

        Comment

        • nilshomer
          Nils Homer
          • Nov 2008
          • 1283

          #5
          It's a high standard, but when one software group starts meeting those standards and promotes itself as the only one that does, others will follow.

          Comment

          • dawe
            Senior Member
            • Apr 2009
            • 258

            #6
            Originally posted by nilshomer View Post
            It's a high standard, but when one software group starts meeting those standards and promotes itself as the only one that does, others will follow.
            I do agree but... take a widely used software for NGS, such as samtools, the code is poorly documented (and commented)... I guess that won't be accepted as is... Also, I think I will spend the next two weeks in commenting and documenting my code to submit it :-)

            Comment

            • cameronneylon
              Junior Member
              • Dec 2010
              • 1

              #7
              Hi All. Glad that you find the journal exciting. The standard is deliberately set pretty high. Our aim is to raise standards across computational research and in many cases (some more than others obviously) there is a long way to raise them.

              The basic requirement that we've set is that testing and documentation has to be at least equal to best practice in the language or research domain. At the end of the day the editors will have to make a judgement as to what this means in practice but you can expect that it means pretty top notch documentation and good coverage for automated tests. We know that some things can't really be tested easily or productively and we won't make people jump through hoops for no reason but at the same time we fully intend that the requirements to be tougher than the majority of current research software reaches.

              The idea is to make publishing with us a mark of the highest quality. That way, you guys want to publish, that helps us to help you to raise standards and we all work together to make research software better than it is at the moment and work towards it being as good as it can be.

              Cheers

              Cameron [ORC Editor in Chief]

              Comment

              • kmcarr
                Senior Member
                • May 2008
                • 1181

                #8
                So it appears this journal is not going to happen. From their website:

                Important notice to authors:

                It is with regret that we wish to inform you that Open Research Computation will no longer be launching as a journal within its own right. Instead, it will be launching as an ongoing thematic series within another BMC journal Source Code for Biology and Medicine.

                This thematics series will aim to continue to promote the innovative ideas central to Open Research Computation, and to provide a platform for the discussion of these ideas.

                If you wish to submit your manuscript to this thematic series, please click here, and clearly indicate within your cover letter that you wish your manuscript to be considered as part of the Open Research Computation thematic series. If you have any queries, please contact the Editor-in-Chief, Cameron Neylon.

                Open Research Computation is due to close on 8th May 2012.

                Comment

                Latest Articles

                Collapse

                • SEQadmin2
                  Beyond CRISPR/Cas9: Understand, Choose, and Use the Right Genome Editing Tool
                  by SEQadmin2



                  CRISPR/Cas9 sparked the gene editing revolution for both research and therapeutics.1 But this system still showed severe issues that limited its applications. The most prominent were the heavy reliance on PAM sequences, delivery limitations, double-stranded breaks that prompt unintended edits and cell death, and editing inefficiency (both in targeting and in knock-in reliability).

                  Despite this, “CRISPR helped turn genome editing from a specialized technique into
                  ...
                  07-31-2026, 11:01 AM
                • SEQadmin2
                  Proteomic Platforms: How to Choose the Right Analytical Strategy to Improve Detection and Clinical Applications
                  by SEQadmin2


                  Proteomics platforms are evolving rapidly, with advances in mass spectrometry and affinity-based approaches expanding what researchers can detect and at what scale. As the field moves toward deeper proteome coverage and clinical applications, scientists face an increasingly complex landscape of tools. This article will explore how researchers are navigating these choices to find the right platform for their work.

                  The systematic characterization of the human proteome has
                  ...
                  07-20-2026, 11:48 AM

                ad_right_rmr

                Collapse

                News

                Collapse

                Topics Statistics Last Post
                Started by SEQadmin2, Yesterday, 10:35 AM
                0 responses
                7 views
                0 reactions
                Last Post SEQadmin2  
                Started by SEQadmin2, 08-06-2026, 07:41 AM
                0 responses
                25 views
                0 reactions
                Last Post SEQadmin2  
                Started by SEQadmin2, 08-03-2026, 10:13 AM
                0 responses
                45 views
                0 reactions
                Last Post SEQadmin2  
                Started by SEQadmin2, 07-31-2026, 02:55 AM
                0 responses
                48 views
                0 reactions
                Last Post SEQadmin2  
                Working...