BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//Research on Research - ECPv6.9.1//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-WR-CALNAME:Research on Research
X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://researchonresearch.org
X-WR-CALDESC:Events for Research on Research
REFRESH-INTERVAL;VALUE=DURATION:PT1H
X-Robots-Tag:noindex
X-PUBLISHED-TTL:PT1H
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:UTC
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0000
TZOFFSETTO:+0000
TZNAME:UTC
DTSTART:20220101T000000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=UTC:20240513T080000
DTEND;TZID=UTC:20240513T170000
DTSTAMP:20250708T070255
CREATED:20250117T110310Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250128T110759Z
UID:2138-1715587200-1715619600@researchonresearch.org
SUMMARY:Launching AFIRE: An accelerator to boost institutional capacity for experiments with research and innovation funding
DESCRIPTION:On 13 May\, 31 research funders from 17 countries participated in the launch of RoRI’s newest project AFIRE (Accelerator For Innovation & Research Funding Experimentation). \n\n\n\nAcross research systems worldwide\, interest in trialing novel methods of research funding and evaluation is growing fast\, but funders are at different points in their engagement and readiness. AFIRE is a collaboration between RoRI\, the Innovation Growth Lab (IGL) and a consortium of our funder partners which aims to boost institutional capacity for the design\, implementation and synthesis of experiments with research and innovation funding. \n\n\n\nAt the launch\, we showcased several new or planned experiments\, and heard from funders working at the vanguard of evidence-informed approaches to peer review\, grant-giving and impact assessment. \n\n\n\nThree opening talks set the scene: \n\n\n\n\nStian Westlake\, Executive Chair\, ESRC (part of UK Research and Innovation) outlined ambitions for the UK government’s Metascience Unit and linked £5 million UKRI and Open Philanthropy funding call;\n\n\n\nHanna Denecke\, Head of Funding Team “Exploration” at the Volkswagen Foundation\, described their latest experiment with distributed peer review;\n\n\n\nCaleb Watney\, Co-founder and Co-CEO of the Institute for Progress in Washington DC\, previewed a new wave of metascience experiments at the US National Science Foundation.\n\n\n\n\n \n  \nDuring the meeting\, we also announced the appointment of Theodore Hodapp (Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation) and Stian Westlake (ESRC & UKRI) as the two Co-Chairs of the AFIRE steering group.  \n\n\n\nStian Westlake praised the AFIRE project for building valuable capacity to support what is becoming a ‘metascientific moment’ for the international research funding community\, characterised by growing enthusiasm and practical support for a culture of experimentation with research funding\, evaluation and decision-making – from the newly launched UKRI grant call to a Metascience Working Group set up by the Federation of American Scientists (FAS). \n\n\n\nTom Stafford (RoRI) and Albert Bravo-Biosca (Innovation Growth Lab) then described in more detail how the AFIRE programme will work. Next steps will include running a forum for peer exchange on novel experimental approaches; sprints tackling a particular issue which aim to achieve substantive progress over a short period of time; and providing ongoing assistance for partners who are in the earlier stages of developing experiments. \n 
URL:https://researchonresearch.org/event/launching-afire-an-accelerator-to-boost-institutional-capacity-for-experiments-with-research-and-innovation-funding/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://researchonresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/pexels-pixabay-87611-scaled.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=UTC:20231117T160000
DTEND;TZID=UTC:20231117T173000
DTSTAMP:20250708T070255
CREATED:20250128T110759Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250128T112456Z
UID:2139-1700236800-1700242200@researchonresearch.org
SUMMARY:Cite Black Women: A Critical Praxis
DESCRIPTION:Christen A. Smith (The Cite Black Women Collective) \n\n\n\nThe politics of citation are often considered a purely academic\, bibliographic exercise. However\, the practice of citation is a keenly political one that is imbricated with race and gender politics. \n\n\n\nIn this talk\, we explore the politics of inequality hidden within the practice of citation by considering the experiences of Black women. What does it look like to dismantle the patriarchal\, white supremacist\, heterosexist\, imperialist impetus of the neoliberal university (and its accomplices) by centering Black women’s ideas and intellectual contributions? \n\n\n\nHistorically\, the university has exploited Black women’s labor\, appropriated our ideas and refused to give us the appropriate credit for our work. Citing Black women is\, therefore\, a project of radical refusal with revolutionary possibilities. \n\n\n\nIf universities and oppressive spaces of knowledge production seek to silence and erase Black women\, then acknowledging and centering us holds revolutionary possibilities. \n\n\n\nThis talk explores the revolutionary possibilities and the political stakes of citation as a radical Black feminist praxis. \n\n\n\nFollowing the experience of the Cite Black Women movement\, it considers how we can redress inequality through a radical engagement with citation as not only intellectual practice but also as political intervention. \n\n\n\nThe Speakers\n\n\n\nChristen A. Smith is a Black feminist anthropologist and the creator of Cite Black Women – a campaign that brings awareness to the race and gender politics of citation\, and the erasure of Black women’s intellectual contributions in global society. In 2018 Cite Black Women was listed as one of the Top 10 Issues by Essence Magazine; featured by The Times Higher Education of London. \n\n\n\nChristen is an associate professor of anthropology and African and African diaspora studies\, and director of the Center for Women and Gender Studies at the University of Texas at Austin. \n\n\n\nJoy Owango from the Training Centre in Communication offers responses to the seminar. The seminar is chaired by Ludo Waltman\, deputy director at the Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS) at Leiden University.
URL:https://researchonresearch.org/event/cite-black-women-a-critical-praxis/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://researchonresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/street-art-south-africa--e1737735831967.jpeg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=UTC:20230705T113000
DTEND;TZID=UTC:20230705T123000
DTSTAMP:20250708T070255
CREATED:20250128T110759Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250128T110759Z
UID:2140-1688556600-1688560200@researchonresearch.org
SUMMARY:The emerging shape of REF 2028
DESCRIPTION:Digesting\, debating and delivering the outcomes of the UK’s Future of Research Assessment Programme \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nSince 1986\, UK universities have lived through eight cycles of national research assessment. Over that time\, the purposes and methods of assessment have evolved and become more complex. The last Research Excellence Framework—REF 2021—involved 157 institutions submitting over 185\,000 research outputs and 6\,700 impact case studies from 76\,000 staff. \n\n\n\nNow the initial rules have been published for the 2028 REF\, with some significant changes in the design of the exercise\, and a sharper focus on the people\, cultures and environments that underpin a vibrant and sustainable research system. \n\n\n\nWith moves towards responsible research assessment gaining momentum across the global research community\, the next REF is an important opportunity to reshape incentives within the UK research system and look afresh at what should be recognised and rewarded. \n\n\n\nThe Speakers\n\n\n\nWelcome and introductory remarks\n\n\n\n\nProf. Geraint Rees\, Vice-Provost for Research\, Innovation & Global Engagement\, UCL\n\n\n\n\nPart 1: Where next for the REF?\n\n\n\n\nChair: Lord Willetts\, Chair\, Foundation for Science and Technology and former Minister for Universities and Science\n\n\n\nRedesigning assessment: outcomes of the FRAP and next steps — Prof. Dame Jessica Corner\, Executive Chair\, Research England\n\n\n\nPurposes\, priorities and pillars of REF 2028 — Dr Steven Hill\, Director of Research\, and Dr Catriona Firth (Associate Director for Research Environment)\, Research England\n\n\n\nPerspective from the International Advisory Group — Sir Peter Gluckman\, Chair FRAP IAG and President\, International Science Council\n\n\n\nA view from CoARA — Dr Elizabeth Gadd\, Vice-Chair\, CoARA and Loughborough University\n\n\n\nQ&A and discussion\n\n\n\n\nPart 2: The formative role of REF in UK research culture\n\n\n\n\nChair: James Wilsdon\, Director\, RoRI & Professor of Research Policy\, UCL\n\n\n\nPanel (opening statements\, followed by questions from participants)\n\n\n\nProf. Louise Bracken\, PVC for Research & Knowledge Exchange\, Northumbria University (TBC)\n\n\n\nDiego Baptista\, Head of Research Funding & Equity\, Wellcome\n\n\n\nProf. Simon Hettrick\, University of Southampton and Chair\, The Hidden REF\n\n\n\nEmma Todd\, Director of Research Culture\, UCL
URL:https://researchonresearch.org/event/the-emerging-shape-of-ref-2028/
CATEGORIES:Research Evaluation
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://researchonresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/technology-face-detection-concept-artificial-inte-2022-12-16-03-28-07-utc-scaled-e1737735302154.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=UTC:20230615T180000
DTEND;TZID=UTC:20230615T193000
DTSTAMP:20250708T070255
CREATED:20250128T110759Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250128T110759Z
UID:2141-1686852000-1686857400@researchonresearch.org
SUMMARY:Can AI predict research impacts?
DESCRIPTION:The success or failure of medical research is judged by patient outcomes far downstream of the strategic decisions that initiate it. Optimising translational impact therefore relies on long range forecasting\, for which no established framework exists. The evaluation of research proposals by expert appraisal of their content is undermined by difficulties with scaling\, reproducibility\, generalisability\, and bias. Evaluation by summary bibliometrics of public reception offers greater objectivity but doubtful fidelity. Both approaches favour the familiar\, the conventional\, the plausible\, and the incremental; and oppose the unusual\, the unorthodox\, the counter-intuitive\, and the disruptive: rare characteristics on which translational success increasingly depends.  \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nIn this talk\, Amy Nelson and Parashkev Nachev (UCL) advocate for a third way\, founded on richly expressive models of research content\, that seeks to combine the finesse of a human expert with the rigour of a machine. They argue such models can successfully capture regularities too intricate to be either intuitively apprehensible or reducible to summary metrics\, thereby illuminating complex characteristics of translational success in which testable hypotheses about optimal research strategy may be grounded.  \n\n\n\nThey describe a proof-of-concept analysis of the comparative predictability of future real-world translation—as indexed by inclusion in patents\, guidelines\, or policy documents—from complex models of title/abstract-level published research content versus citations and metadata alone. Quantifying predictive performance out-of-sample\, ahead of time\, across major domains\, using the entire corpus of biomedical research captured by Microsoft Academic Graph from 1990–2019\, encompassing 43.3 million papers\, they show that high-dimensional models of titles\, abstracts\, and metadata exhibit substantially higher fidelity (AUC > 0.9) than simple models\, generalise across time and domain\, and transfer to recognising the papers of Nobel laureates. Their talk will build on this recent paper in Patterns. \n\n\n\nThe Speakers\n\n\n\nAmy Nelson is a Senior Research Associate in the High Dimensional Neurology Group at UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology\, Research Impact Fellow at the NIHR UCLH Biomedical Research Centre\, and a junior doctor. Dr Nelson builds AI models for clinical\, operational and research impact objectives across computer vision\, deep representation learning\, and natural language processing domains. \n\n\n\nParashkev Nachev is a Professor of Neurology at the UCL Institute of Neurology\, and Honorary Consultant Neurologist at the National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery\, Queen Square. His High-Dimensional Neurology Group develops novel computational methods for drawing representational\, predictive\, and prescriptive intelligence from rich data.
URL:https://researchonresearch.org/event/can-ai-predict-research-impacts/
CATEGORIES:Online,Seminar,Ai
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://researchonresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/artificial-intelligence-ai-and-machine-learning-2023-05-21-04-29-23-utc-scaled-e1737735189337.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=UTC:20230518T180000
DTEND;TZID=UTC:20230518T190000
DTSTAMP:20250708T070255
CREATED:20250128T110800Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250128T110800Z
UID:2142-1684432800-1684436400@researchonresearch.org
SUMMARY:Invert the order! Government's role in shaping a science superpower
DESCRIPTION:What is required for the UK to stay at the cutting edge of science and technology and make harnessing its benefits our national purpose? And what role does the government have in that? \n\n\n\nFormer special adviser on Science & Technology to the UK Prime Minister\, James Phillips\, reflects on his experiences at the nerve centre of UK research and innovation policy.  \n\n\n\nJames argues that there are opportunities and pitfalls that arise from government bureaucracies taking greater interest in S&T. He outlines priorities for a reform agenda over the next decade\, drawing upon his experiences in Number Ten\, as a research scientist\, and as a co-author of the recent Tony Blair-William Hague report ‘A New National Purpose’.  \n\n\n\nJames also outlines a provocative recent paper he co-authored with Paul Nightingale\, which argues that the UK is falling behind the cutting edge in some crucial areas of science. Finally\, he explores how the metascience community could support and advance a new national purpose in science and technology.  \n\n\n\nRead James Phillips’ article which accompanies this talk on Substack here. \n\n\n\nThe Speaker\n\n\n\nJames Phillips is a former special adviser on science and technology to UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson; one of the ‘weirdos and misfits’ hired to work in Number Ten. He worked on setting up ARIA\, which he had called for with others in a 2018 Telegraph op-ed. He also helped to drive rapid lateral flow testing in government\, including being part of the team that published the first modelling of rapid testing in April 2020. Prior to government\, he worked at HHMI’s Janelia Research Campus and did a PhD in Neuroscience at the University of Cambridge\, where he was awarded the British Neuroscience Association’s graduate thesis of the year award. He is currently an honorary senior research fellow at UCL’s Department of Science\, Technology\, Engineering and Public Policy (UCL-STEaPP). He blogs at jameswphillips.substack.com.
URL:https://researchonresearch.org/event/invert-the-order-governments-role-in-shaping-a-science-superpower-2/
CATEGORIES:Online,UCL,Science
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://researchonresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/science-2022-10-31-23-20-34-utc-scaled.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=UTC:20221212T080000
DTEND;TZID=UTC:20221212T170000
DTSTAMP:20250708T070255
CREATED:20250128T110800Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250128T110800Z
UID:2143-1670832000-1670864400@researchonresearch.org
SUMMARY:Machine learning\, metrics & merit: the future of research assessment
DESCRIPTION:The use of quantitative indicators and metrics in research assessment continues to generate a mix of enthusiasm\, hostility and critique. To these possibilities\, we can add growing interest in uses of machine learning and artificial intelligence (AI) to automate assessment processes\, and reduce the cost and bureaucracy of conventional methods of peer and panel-based review. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nNovel methods also bring potential pitfalls\, uncertainties and dilemmas\, and may operate in some tension with moves towards responsible research assessment\, as reflected in the Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) and the new Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment (CoARA). \n\n\n\nAs the UK again reviews its approach to research assessment and the design of the Research Excellence Framework (REF)\, these and other issues are up for discussion through the Future Research Assessment Programme (FRAP)\, initiated by the four UK higher education funding bodies. \n\n\n\nThis workshop launches two new studies that should make significant contributions to the FRAP process. \n\n\n\nThe first\, led by Professor Mike Thelwall\, is a ground-breaking analysis of whether one could run a REF exercise using AI. The second is an updated review of the role of metrics in the UK research assessment system\, which builds on the 2015 review\,The Metric Tide\, which called for responsible approaches to the use of metrics\, and cautioned against purely metric-based approaches to assessment. For more on these studies\, see recent articles in Nature\, Research Professional and Times Higher Education. \n\n\n\nWe were joined by Professor Dame Jessica Corner\, new Executive Chair of Research England who offered opening keynote remarks\, and by two panels of UK and international experts.
URL:https://researchonresearch.org/event/machine-learning-metrics-merit-the-future-of-research-assessment/
CATEGORIES:Seminar,Research Evaluation
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://researchonresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/tide-ocean-waves-beach-scaled-e1737735101368.jpeg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=UTC:20220721T160000
DTEND;TZID=UTC:20220721T170000
DTSTAMP:20250708T070255
CREATED:20250128T110801Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250128T110801Z
UID:2144-1658419200-1658422800@researchonresearch.org
SUMMARY:When priorities don't align with needs: the case of mental health research
DESCRIPTION:Mental ill-health and well-being are increasingly recognised as being intimately linked to a wide range of environmental and social factors. As such\, the ways in which researchers approach\, understand\, and engage with mental health must be broad\, ranging from the biophysiological mechanisms underpinning brain function\, to the societal determinants which alter it. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nThe significance of this connection has been illustrated by the effects of COVID lockdowns on mental health in which: fear\, sudden changes in daily habits\, family roles\, domestic violence\, work burnout\, etc. have all palpably impinged on mental well-being. \n\n\n\nIn this seminar\, Ismael Rafols\, senior researcher at the Centre for Science and Technology studies (CWTS\, Leiden University) and associate faculty at SPRU (Science Policy Research Unit) at the University of Sussex\, presents a recent study\, based on a collaboration between Vinnova and CWTS. \n\n\n\nThis contrasts current research priorities with societal demands through the analysis of publication specialisation of countries\, funders and organisations\, shown in open interactive visualisations. The results suggest a need to diversify mental health research towards more socially engaged approaches. \n\n\n\nSara Nässtrom of Vinnova\, the Swedish Innovation Agency\, who represents Vinnova in Sweden’s National Strategy for Mental Health\, offers her response. \n\n\n\nThis event was part of  RoRI ‘s seminar series on the theme of Culture Shift\, where we aim to spotlight some of the most exciting thinkers\, practitioners and research system entrepreneurs who are at the forefront of analysing\, pioneering and propelling culture shifts across science and research.
URL:https://researchonresearch.org/event/when-priorities-dont-align-with-needs-the-case-of-mental-health-research/
CATEGORIES:Seminar
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://researchonresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/puzzle-wooden-colourful-shapes-scaled-e1737735055172.jpeg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=UTC:20220616T153000
DTEND;TZID=UTC:20220616T163000
DTSTAMP:20250708T070255
CREATED:20250128T110801Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250128T110801Z
UID:2145-1655393400-1655397000@researchonresearch.org
SUMMARY:The Quantified Scholar
DESCRIPTION:Around the world\, the good\, the bad and the ugly in research cultures are the focus of unprecedented scrutiny and debate. Imperatives of equality\, diversity\, inclusion\, impact\, integrity and sustainability are forcing overdue change to institutions\, policies and practices. But there is still a long way to go. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nJuan Pablo Pardo-Guerra\, associate professor of sociology at the University of California\, San Diego and author of the book The Quantified Scholar\, explores how processes of research evaluation themselves shape disciplines\, promote conformity and limit diversity. \n\n\n\nProf. Sarah de Rijcke\, Co-Chair of RoRI and Scientific Director at the Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS)\, Leiden University and Dr Molly Morgan Jones\, Director of Policy at The British Academy\, offer their responses. \n\n\n\nThis seminar was organised by RoRI and Sheffield Metascience Network (MetaNet) at the University of Sheffield.
URL:https://researchonresearch.org/event/the-quantified-scholar/
CATEGORIES:Online,Seminar,Research Evaluation
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://researchonresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/stack-of-books-on-a-chair-e1737735006476.jpg
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR