Way back in 2014, John Hutchinson posted some photos from the Museum of Paleontology Egidio Feruglio in Trelew city, Patagonia, Argentina. John’s original tweets are long gone (quite rightly), but happily we reposted the photos on SV-POW!, so they live on.
\nJohn’s first photo showed what we now known to be Epachthosaurus. But the second photo is more interesting for our present purposes:
\n![\"\"](\"https://svpow.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/bjqghuocqaeri1e.jpg\")
John R. Hutchinson \u200f@JohnRHutchinson
@MikeTaylor Here’s the wide view of that exhibit, with about-to-be-squished abelisaur and sulking Amargasaurus.
This also prominently features the Epachthosaurus mount. But as you can see, the foreground also shows another, smaller, sauropod \u2014 also in a rearing pose. But we don’t know what it is. (In a comment, Nima suggested “The smaller one may be a Neuquensaurus with a very wrong Giraffatitan-based skull model” but gave no reason for this ID.)
\nSo I went to look for other photos of the same exhibit. Wikimedia, which is often the best source, has 145 photos of the museum, and I hoped one of them would show the smaller rearing sauropod and give an ID. But no: it seems that a short time after John’s visit, the display was reworked to replace that sauropod with (admittedly very impressive) forelimb material of Patagotitan:
\n![\"\"](\"https://svpow.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/fosiles_del_titanosauria_del_chubut_en_el_museo_egidio_feruglio_de_trelew_14.jpg\")
Caption from Wikimedia: F\u00f3siles del titanosauria del Chubut en el Museo Egidio Feruglio de Trelew, Chubut, Argentina. Descubiertos en 2013 y presentados en 2014, supuestamente se trata del animal terrestre m\u00e1s grande de la historia de la Tierra. Pesar\u00eda 4 toneladas m\u00e1s que el Argentinosaurus y su f\u00e9mur mide m\u00e1s de dos metros. Translation: Fossils of the Chubut titanosaur at the Egidio Feruglio Museum in Trelew, Chubut, Argentina. Discovered in 2013 and presented in 2014, it is supposedly the largest land animal in Earth’s history. It would have weighed 4 tons more than Argentinosaurus and its femur measures more than two meters.
(Because that photo, like John’s, is from 2014, I briefly wondered whether it was the other way around, and the giant forelimb was replaced by the small rearing sauropod: but no, later photos also show the giant forelimb.)
\nSo it seems that John’s photo is the only one available that shows the old, small, rearing sauropod. (Unless any of you happen to have other such photos?)
\nSo what is it? Wikimedia has a newer photo of a Neuquensaurus mount at the museum, and it looks like it could well be the rearer from the older photo, based on the short cervical ribs, low dorsal neural spines, oddly shaped scapula and hourglass humeri. But it’s hardly a slam-dunk.
\nCan anyone confirm? Is anyone in touch with someone at the museum? And, most of all: does anyone have a good photo of this rearing mount from before it was taken down?
\n\n
The Mexican Meeting on Theoretical Physical Chemistry will have their 25th edition next year (2027). To celebrate it, the journal Theoretical Chemistry Accounts is putting together a special issue, and I\u2019m honored to serve as a guest editor together with a wonderful lineup of Mexican scientists.
\nI want to thank Prof. Juan Carlos Sancho-Garc\u00eda, from the University of Alicante in Spain, and editor in chief for Theo. Chem. Acc. for contacting me and giving us the opportunity to bring into the spotlight the wonderful Comp.Chem. work made by the awesome community who year after year gathers in Mexico to talk and share their research.
\nContributions will be received between May 15th and November 15th, 2026.
\nPlease check the calling at https://link.springer.com/journal/214/collections
\n![\"\"](\"https://joaquinbarroso.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/rmfqt_theochemacc_barroso.jpg\")
NEAL G ANDERSON
\n& GUALTIERO PICCININI
\n
\nTHE PHYSICAL SIGNATURE OF COMPUTATION
REVIEWED BY
\nLuke Kersten
The Physical Signature of Computation: A Robust Mapping Account \u25f3
\nNeal G. Anderson and Gualtiero Piccinini
\nOxford University Press, 2024, \u00a380.00
\nISBN 9780198833642
Cite as:
\nKersten, L. (2026). \u2018Neal G. Anderson & Gualtiero Piccinini’s The Physical Signature of Computation\u2019, BJPS Review of Books,\u00a02026, DOI
What distinguishes a smartphone, a laptop, and a human brain from a bucket of water, a rock, and a solar system? One plausible answer is that the former are all instances of physical computing systems, while the latter are not. The trouble is that this answer, while undoubtedly intuitive, is more difficult to justify than one might initially expect. This is the problem of computational implementation, and it is the task of explaining under what conditions a physical system can be said to implement a computation. Some have suggested the problem requires an appeal to causal structure (Chrisley 1995; Chalmers 2011), others reference to semantic properties (Sprevak 2010; Shagrir 2022), while others still recourse to talk of mechanisms, Piccinini among them (Mi\u0142kowski 2014; Piccinini 2015; Dewhurst 2018; Kersten 2024).
\nIn The Physical Signature of Computation, Anderson and Piccinini put forward a bold new proposal: a physical system is a physical computing system if it bears the physical signature of computation. Anderson and Piccinini dub this the \u2018robust mapping account\u2019, and with it they aim to clarify not only the relation between ordinary physical systems and physical computing systems, but also to resolve important outstanding challenges facing computational description in the physical world. Weaving together insights from computer science, physical information theory, and the metaphysics of mind, The Physical Signature of Computation offers a comprehensive and detailed account of the nature of physical computation, written in the characteristically pellucid style one has come to expect from Anderson and Piccinini\u2019s work.
\nThe book is organized into ten chapters, divided (roughly) into three parts. The first two chapters, which mostly involve stage-setting, find Anderson and Piccinini laying out key notions (abstract and concrete computation), distinguishing different positions (mapping, semantic, and mechanistic accounts), drawing important distinctions (computation versus simulation), and explicating desiderata for an account of physical computation (objectivity, explanation, miscomputation, and taxonomy). For those acquainted with the literature on physical computation, or Piccinini\u2019s earlier work, much of this discussion will feel familiar, but for the uninitiated, it aptly serves as a philosophical primer; chapter 2, in particular, provides an admirably clear discussion of the similarities and differences between computational and physical descriptions of physical systems.
\nChapters 3 and 4 are where the discussion really gets going. Here Anderson and Piccinini lay out and defend what they take to be the four key criteria for computational implementation. The first, what they call criterion S, states that a physical-to-computational description must map at least some physical elements (states or forces) of a physical system onto elements (input, state, or output) of a computational system. They further add to S that all the lawful physical dynamics of the physical system must generate the computational dynamics of the computational system, dubbed \u2018dynamical self-consistency\u2019. The second, labelled criterion P, states that every computational state transition specified within a computational system must correspond to one or more lawful physical state transformations of the corresponding physical system. The third, and arguably most important criterion, states that a physical system\u2019s physical states must bear the same amount of information as the computational states they map to. This notion of \u2018physical\u2013computational equivalence\u2019 (or PCE) is crucial to the account. This is because it ensures that inferences about the computational trajectories of a computational system can be made from the occurrence of each and every physical state of the mapping physical system. The fourth, criterion U, states that a physical system must be usable by an agent for a computational purpose. Together, S, P, PCE, and U form the minimal set of criteria that artefacts or natural systems need to satisfy in order to qualify as physical computing systems.
\nAnderson and Piccinini further suggest that these four criteria can be used to construct an evaluative scheme: a framework for gauging the strength of a given computational implementation. If, for example, a physical-to-computational description can be said to satisfy criteria S and P but not PCE or U, then it is weak; traditional mapping and semantic accounts, for instance, fall into this category. If the description satisfies S, P, and PCE but not U, then it is robust; the mechanistic account lands here. But if it satisfies S, P, PCE, and U, then it is a strong computational description; classic electronic digital computers rise to this level. The strength of each class reflects a distinct, identifiable viewpoint on implementation. Anderson and Piccinini offer a useful flow chart for mapping out assessments according to this scheme (p. 119).
\nChapter 5 puts everything together. A physical system is said to be a physical computing system if and only if the physical states of the physical system (or subsystems) map onto the values of the computational variables (state, input, and output) of a computational system (S) in accord with its computational dynamics (P) such that the physical states bear the same amount of information about the computational trajectory of the computational system as the computational variables (PCE). This is the \u2018physical signature\u2019 of computation. Physical-to-computational descriptions must be equivalent such that no information is lost when one moves from the physical to computational descriptions of a physical system. Much of chapter 5 is dedicated to fleshing out the sense of informational equivalence required to qualify as a robust physical-to-computational description; it also includes a novel and interesting discussion of how the robust mapping account can be formalized using physical information theory, what the authors refer to as the \u2018referential\u2019 approach (pp. 132\u201342).
\nNow, if chapters 3 and 4 build the engine, and chapter 5 assembles the chassis, then chapters 6 to 8 provide the test track. For it is here that the robust mapping account is put through its paces against one of the perennial foes of concrete computation: pan-computationalism. Anderson and Piccinini take aim specifically at three different versions of pan-computationalism: an \u2018unlimited\u2019 formulation, which states that every physical system can perform every computation; a \u2018limited\u2019 formulation, which states that every physical system performs at least one computation; and an ontic formulation, which states that the universe itself is either a digital or quantum computing system. Each formulation gets its own chapter.
\nThe argumentation in these chapters is sustained and meticulous, in several places drawing on the resources developed in the evaluative framework of chapter 4. To provide just one brief example, against a Chalmers-inspired argument for unlimited pan-computationalism using a finite-state automaton (FSA), Anderson and Piccinini argue that at best the construction amounts to offering a weak computational description (it satisfies criteria S and P but violates PCE; pp. 158\u201360). But given that physical\u2013computational equivalence (PCE) is a necessary requirement on physical computation, such an argument fails to establish anything like a robust physical-to-computational description, and so can be rejected. Chapter 8 also has some really nice discussion of how ontic pan-computationalism problematically erases the distinction between a simulator and its simulated target system.
\nIn chapter 9, which I found the most interesting, Anderson and Piccinini shift gears slightly and connect their account to computational theories of mind. After some preliminary stage setting (a mind is defined as a system exhibiting cognitive capacities and possibly consciousness), they argue that while cognition can be explained by neural computation\u2014which is amenable to the robust mapping account\u2014further supplemented with a notion of teleological function, consciousness is a bridge too far. Consciousness, they suggest, involves more than just computation; it likely requires physical qualities that go beyond computational description.
\nThis discussion I found slightly hasty. For example, after nicely laying out several options on the nature of consciousness, including computational functionalism and non-computational functionalism, Anderson and Piccinini respond to the former view: \u2018But eliminativism [illusionism] falls flat. If \u201cconscious phenomenal experience\u201d were purely a matter of structure and causal powers, we should conclude that there would just not be any conscious phenomenal experience. But at least sometimes, we do have phenomenal experiences\u2019 (p. 262). This is a bit too quick. Claiming that \u2018phenomenal\u2019 consciousness is not what some take it to be, as the illusionist does, is not the same as denying that consciousness exists full stop.
\nChapter 10 rounds off discussion by consolidating the robust mapping account, relating it back to the four initial desiderata (objectivity, explanation, miscomputation, and taxonomy) and the three accounts laid out in chapter 1 (mapping, semantic, and mechanistic), along with briefly sketching a unifying account of biological and artefact computation.
\nTaking a slight step back, among the book\u2019s many carefully crafted arguments and insights, there are a few loose ends briefly worth noting. One is that some readers may wonder about the relation between this new account and Piccinini\u2019s previous work on mechanistic computation (for example, Piccinini 2015), which holds that computational explanation is a species of mechanistic explanation, and computational mechanisms are a special type of functional mechanism. While there is some brief discussion of mechanistic computation (chap. 10.3.3), and it is suggested the two accounts are indeed compatible, one may still be left wondering whether this new account, if correct, leaves the mechanistic account in a slightly awkward position. Has the mechanistic account now become obsolete? Should those attracted to this view close up shop or is there more work to be done?
\nA second, somewhat curious omission is the relation between computational description and computational modelling practice in other domains, such as cognitive science and neuroscience. Several authors, for instance, have recently attempted to wed their implementational accounts of computation quite closely to the explanatory practices of these domains; some have even criticized implementational accounts for failing to do so (for example, Shagrir 2022; Chirimuuta 2024). The Physical Signature of Computation, in contrast, is largely occupied with conceptual refinement, formalization, and metaphysical argument, with a heavy emphasis on computer science and engineering. This is certainly valuable and welcomed work, but one may be left wondering how this new account squares with computational explanation and modelling practices elsewhere.
\nFinally, and I offer this more as a warning than criticism, some readers may find the level of detail in certain places of the discussion slightly overwhelming. While much of the formal heavy lifting is postponed to the two appendices, the book can, particularly in the dense thicket of arguments against pan-computationalism, make for some hefty reading, despite Anderson and Piccinini\u2019s admirable efforts to keep things accessible.
\nTaken as a whole, The Physical Signature of Computation is a clear triumph. Anderson and Piccinini have put forward a substantive, meticulously crafted work, not only in terms of a novel and sophisticated account of implementation, but also in terms of working out the formal implications. With expert clarity and attention to detail, Anderson and Piccinini have offered an excellent example of how to assemble a clear-headed, rigorous treatment of physical computation. The book will be of interest not only to philosophers with a taste for metaphysical argument and formal detail, but those more generally interested in understanding the foundations of contemporary cognitive and computational science.
\nLuke Kersten
\nUniversity of Alberta
\nkersten@ualberta.ca
References
\nDewhurst, J. (2018). \u2018Individuation Without Representation\u2019,\u00a0British Journal for the Philosophy of Science,\u00a069, pp. 103\u201316.
\nChalmers, D. (2011). \u2018A Computational Foundation for the Study of Cognition\u2019,\u00a0Journal of Cognitive Science,\u00a012, pp. 323\u201357.
\nChirimuuta, M. (2024). The Brain Abstracted: Simplification in the History of Neuroscience, MIT Press.
\nChrisley, R. (1995). \u2018Why Everything Doesn\u2019t Realize Every Computation\u2019,\u00a0Minds and Machines,\u00a04, pp. 403\u201330.
\nKersten, L. (2024). \u2018An Idealised Account of Mechanistic Computation\u2019,\u00a0Synthese, 203, available at <doi.org/10.1007/s11229-024-04526-x>.
\nMi\u0142kowski, M. (2014). \u2018Computational Mechanism and Models of Cognition\u2019, Philosophia Scientiae,\u00a018, pp. 215\u201328.
\nPiccinini, G. (2015). Physical Computation: A Mechanistic Account, Oxford University Press.
\nShagrir, O. (2022). The Nature of Physical Computation, Oxford University Press.
\nSprevak, M. (2010). \u2018Computation, Individuation and the Received View on Representation\u2019,\u00a0Studies in the History of Philosophy of Science A,\u00a041, pp. 260\u201370.
\n![\"\"](\"https://i0.wp.com/www.thebsps.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/Thumb-Allen.png?resize=398%2C280&ssl=1\")
\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t https://i0.wp.com/www.thebsps.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/Thumb-Allen.png?fit=398%2C280&ssl=1\n\t\t\t\t\t 280\n\t\t\t\t\t 398\n\t\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\tThe BJPS\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t http://www.thebsps.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/BSPS-blue.gif\n\t\t\t\t \n\t\t\t The BJPS2026-05-05 07:00:432026-05-11 17:21:52Susana Mons\u00f3, Playing Possum![\"\"](\"https://i0.wp.com/www.thebsps.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Thumb-Clarke-on-Northcott.png?resize=398%2C280&ssl=1\")
\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t https://i0.wp.com/www.thebsps.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Thumb-Clarke-on-Northcott.png?fit=398%2C280&ssl=1\n\t\t\t\t\t 280\n\t\t\t\t\t 398\n\t\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\tThe BJPS\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t http://www.thebsps.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/BSPS-blue.gif\n\t\t\t\t \n\t\t\t The BJPS2026-04-28 07:00:572026-05-11 17:36:59Robert Northcott, Science for a Fragile World![\"\"](\"https://i0.wp.com/www.thebsps.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/Thumb-Dupre.png?resize=398%2C280&ssl=1\")
\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t https://i0.wp.com/www.thebsps.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/Thumb-Dupre.png?fit=398%2C280&ssl=1\n\t\t\t\t\t 280\n\t\t\t\t\t 398\n\t\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\tThe BJPS\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t http://www.thebsps.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/BSPS-blue.gif\n\t\t\t\t \n\t\t\t The BJPS2026-04-21 07:00:542026-05-11 17:36:50Ellen Clarke, The Units of Life
\n
Sound the clarion! It’s time to help SV-POW! once more!
\nI’m working on a paper about mounted rearing skeletons of sauropods, and I want to include figures that show various examples. To be included in a CC By open-access paper, it’s simplest if the photos are also CC By. But for some of the mounts I know about, I’ve not been able to find CC By images, or contact the owners of otherly-licenced images to ask for an exception.
\nSo I am asking our loyal readers to help out by sending their own photos of the relevant mounts and licensing them CC By (taking new photos if necessary!). Obviously I will mention all contributors in the acknowledgements. You can comment here with links, or email dino@miketaylor.org.uk
\nHere are the ones I need (there may be more in future):
\nThe smaller of the two skeletons in this photo:
\n![\"\"](\"https://svpow.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/f3b5977678fb1a73.jpg\")
This photo is by Ben Miller of Extinct Monsters, who I’m sure would be happy to licence it, but it’s … well, it’s not very good. It has the mount in question as a bit-player, and it’s from an angle that doesn’t do a great job of capturing the rearing. Can anyone do better?
\n![\"\"](\"https://svpow.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/376280514_696547365846381_8541128917881239994_n.jpg\")
This photo is from Facebook with no license specified \u2014 posted by the museum itself, but in my experience I’ve not been able to establish good communication with its staff. If anyone in and around Houston has a good photo, that would be great!
\n![\"\"](\"https://svpow.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/jobaria_in_the_australian_museum.jpg\")
This is in Sydney. The photo is from Wikimedia, but it’s CC By-SA, and I can’t find a way to contact the uploader or photographer.
\n![\"\"](\"https://svpow.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/yjgqu4r9rdpc1.png\")
This one is an oddity. The photo I have here seems to be the only one of the exhibit on the whole Internet. It’s from a Reddit post by a user (EmptySpaceForAHeart) who has been banned, and is consequently uncontactable. So if anyone has, or can find, or can take, another photo of this skeleton, that would be great!
\nThat’s it for now! Thank you, all!
\n\n
Thanks to everyone who’s contributed! I now have decent CC By photos of the Smithsonian juvenile Camarasaurus (from Matt Wedel) and the Houston Galeamopus (from Ben Miller). I have a promise of photos of the Zurich baby diplodocid (from Tom van der Linden) when he visits there shortly. And the photographer of the Australian Museum Jobaria has replied to my comment on the Flickr page. So it looks like I’m all set!
\nThank you all.
\n\n
With the world in its current state, there is a wide interest in both how we preserve what is good in research systems and make necessary improvements. Ensuring sustainability and quality of support in the organisations and communities that make up the research landscape is crucial. But there are also deep problems in our communities and organisations, including structural issues that lead to poor practice and fraud, deep and ongoing inequities and exclusions, and failures in the mentoring and support systems that are needed by the next generations of researchers.
\n\n\n\nIt was against this background that we started a workstream to look at indicators of research culture and environment within the RoRI AGORRA project, culminating in a new Working Paper being published today. AGORRA (standing for A Global Observatory of Responsible Research Assessment) is a project focused on understanding and cataloguing national evaluation systems in different parts of the world. By working closely with the funder representatives on the AGORRA team, we were able to ground our research in a diverse set of national contexts, which shaped the ultimate focus of the paper.
\n\n\n\nAt the beginning I was keen to ensure we try to take a wide perspective on what was meant by \u201cresearch culture\u201d and \u201cresearch environment\u201d. One that was inclusive of the differing contexts represented in AGORRA and RoRI more generally. These terms were being used in the UK as part of the REF (which has included aspects of \u201cresearch environment\u201d previously) with a pilot on \u201cPeople, Culture and Environment\u201d running in parallel with our workstream. I was also keen to get a perspective on where (and whether) the terms were being used in other settings.
\n\n\n\nWhat was clear was that — within contexts of research evaluation or monitoring — the terms \u201cresearch culture\u201d and \u201cresearch environment\u201d were used to focus attention on different (but often overlapping) issues in different contexts. The demographic diversity of research staff was a common, but not universal, issue. In some contexts, research practice and integrity were the most significant issues linked with \u201cculture\u201d, but in others these were one of many. \u201cEnvironment\u201d could refer to the qualities of career structures, the availability of financial or digital resources, or the safety of buildings, alongside the presence of policy instruments.
\n\n\n\nWe don\u2019t always mean the same things by \u201cenvironment\u201d and \u201cculture\u201d. They are used in different ways in different contexts and often without a clear definition. Environment tends to refer to structures and organisations, and culture to communities and people, but there were variations. This makes sense; one person\u2019s culture (say that of a senior researcher in a specific organisation) might be experienced by another as part of the environment in which they have little say (e.g. a junior researcher, or a community stakeholder like an interested patient).
\n\n\n\nThere were many \u201careas of concern\u201d that were common across contexts, but none were a universal priority. Research practice, demographic diversity and inclusion, resourcing, career structures and opportunities, researcher mobility, wider engagement and open communication were all areas that appeared in multiple contexts.
\n\n\n\nWhen it comes to examining these there are many existing indicators that might be applicable in a monitoring or evaluation context for specific areas of concern. Most of these come from two places. The first is existing reporting requirements for organisations, either imposed by government, or as part of programs such as ATHENA Swan focusing on gender diversity and inclusion. The second source is the monitoring of research outputs. Both sources provide a foundation for developing improved indicators.The concentration of these existing and potential indicators in two areas, and the fact that they are relevant to specific areas, leads to a question: is there a way to put indicators in context and define gaps? We need a framework that will help us relate them to one another. For example, there are many existing indicators which might be useful for examining organisations, but very few of these could currently be applied to communities. The data simply isn\u2019t reported that way.
\n\n\n\nThis aspect of communities and organisations plus the presence of many output-based indicators lead us to Ostrom\u2019s Institutional Analysis and Development framework (IAD). IAD is used to understand how characteristics of a setting (made up of organisations, communities and the formal and informal rules they use) come together in specific interactions (called an \u201caction arena\u201d) to generate outcomes which\u00a0 through a process of feedback change the organisations, communities and rules that make up the setting.
\n\n\n\nThe IAD framework reminds us that what matters here is how the feedback from monitoring and evaluation processes is received and leads to change, or leads to stabilisation. While we have many indicators of specific areas of concern, we have few if any that help us to understand whether organisations and communities are ready to process feedback productively. Do they have the capacity to engage with it, and if so, make good use of it?
\n\n\n\nThe project both defined many indicators that might be useful in specific contexts but also, as a result, that no single indicator (or even a \u201cbasket\u201d of them) can capture the complexity of research cultures and environments. Whether the policy goal is change or stabilisation, the IAD framework shows we need to consider how any indicators we do implement are received, and be ready to adapt, change or abandon them if they lead to adverse responses.
\n","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/wyh18-mbt14","funding_references":null,"guid":"https://cameronneylon.net/?p=20109","id":"cf135d0b-7f55-40b1-a378-fc636d042aec","image":"https://cameronneylon.net/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/telescope.jpg","images":[],"indexed":true,"indexed_at":1778520726,"language":"en","parent_doi":null,"published_at":1778519122,"reference":[],"registered_at":0,"relationships":[],"rid":"vkaqy-gqq64","status":"active","summary":"With the world in its current state, there is a wide interest in both how we preserve what is good in research systems and make necessary improvements. Ensuring sustainability and quality of support in the organisations and communities that make up the research landscape is crucial.","tags":["Featured","Agorra","Indicators","Research Culture","Research Environment"],"title":"The more things change, the more they need to stay the same: The challenges and opportunities of monitoring research cultures and environments","updated_at":1778519122,"url":"https://cameronneylon.net/blog/the-more-things-change-the-more-they-need-to-stay-the-same-the-challenges-and-opportunities-of-monitoring-research-cultures-and-environments/","version":"v1"}},{"document":{"abstract":"Die Vernetzungs- und Kompetenzstelle Open Access Brandenburg ist seit M\u00e4rz dieses Jahres assoziiertes Mitglied im National Chapter Germany\u00a0der\u00a0Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment (CoARA). Damit gewinnt das Thema der Forschungsbewertung in Verbindung mit offener Wissenschaft auch f\u00fcr uns eine neue Bedeutung.","archive_url":null,"authors":[{"contributor_roles":[],"family":"Kaden","given":"Ben","url":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8021-1785"}],"blog":{"archive_collection":24084,"archive_host":null,"archive_prefix":null,"archive_timestamps":null,"authors":null,"canonical_url":null,"category":"otherSocialSciences","community_id":"00dd7e11-a802-44c1-9584-5c56d1f8d417","created_at":1706861187,"current_feed_url":null,"description":"Vernetzungs- und Kompetenzstelle Open Access Brandenburg","doi":null,"doi_as_guid":false,"favicon":"https://rogue-scholar.org/api/communities/00dd7e11-a802-44c1-9584-5c56d1f8d417/logo","feed_format":"application/atom+xml","feed_url":"https://open-access-brandenburg.de/feed/atom","filter":null,"funding":null,"generator":"WordPress","generator_raw":"WordPress 6.7.1","home_page_url":"https://open-access-brandenburg.de","id":"f3e666fd-7d84-4c7e-9177-6febb1a076ce","indexed":false,"issn":null,"language":"de","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","mastodon":null,"prefix":"10.59350","registered_at":1729803804,"relative_url":null,"ror":null,"secure":true,"slug":"oabrandenburg","status":"active","subfield":"1802","subfield_validated":null,"title":"Open Access Brandenburg","updated_at":1778662187.421062,"use_api":false,"use_mastodon":false,"user_id":"36565831-b661-4f85-8e3a-fd190dd746a8"},"blog_name":"Open Access Brandenburg","blog_slug":"oabrandenburg","content_html":"Die Vernetzungs- und Kompetenzstelle Open Access Brandenburg ist seit M\u00e4rz dieses Jahres assoziiertes Mitglied im National Chapter Germany\u00a0der\u00a0Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment (CoARA). Damit gewinnt das Thema der Forschungsbewertung in Verbindung mit offener Wissenschaft auch f\u00fcr uns eine neue Bedeutung. Als eine Art Auftaktdokument von unserer Seite legten wir vor Kurzem eine Handreichung vor: Ben Kaden, Philipp Falkenburg, Ellen Euler (2026): Research Assessment Reform: Why CoARA is Essential for Open Science. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19567919.
\nAm 28. April 2026 gab es eine Sitzung des CoARA National Chapter Germany, an der wir ebenfalls teilnahmen. Aus der Veranstaltung lassen sich f\u00fcr die VuK und ihre Arbeit f\u00fcnf Takeaways mitnehmen:\u00a0
\nDie Wirkung von Open-Access-Strategien wird bekanntlich verst\u00e4rkt und durchaus auch kritisch diskutiert. Zugleich stellen sie f\u00fcr die Themensetzung und Aktivierung nach wie vor ein wichtiges Instrument dar. Entsprechend geht es auch bei CoARA\u00a0 weiterhin stark um die Entwicklung von Leitlinien, die einzelne Initiativen, Projekte und Reformans\u00e4tze zusammenf\u00fchren. Das passt gut zur VuK und zur Idee einer kodifizierten brandenburgischen Perspektive auf Open Science und Forschungsbewertung.
\nNeben Leitlinien oder ggf. Policies m\u00fcssen neue oder alternative Modelle der Forschungsbewertung wirksam in die Praxis \u00fcberf\u00fchrt werden. N\u00f6tig sind Anwendungsf\u00e4lle, Pilotierungen und vielleicht auch Prototypen. Die VuK wird gezielt danach schauen, an welchen Stellen entsprechende Kooperationen m\u00f6glich sind.
\nDas Themenfeld und die Ziele von CoARA m\u00fcssen f\u00fcr unterschiedliche Zielgruppen jeweils passend aufbereitet und kommuniziert werden. Zu diesen Zielgruppen geh\u00f6rt ausdr\u00fccklich auch die Wissenschaftspolitik. Die M\u00f6glichkeit, Forschungsbewertung vielf\u00e4ltiger zu denken, und die Rolle von CoARA als Innovationsansatz ben\u00f6tigen mehr Sichtbarkeit. Dies ist prim\u00e4r eine Aufgabe der strategischen Kommunikation. Die VuK verankert das Thema konsequent in ihren Netzwerken, um Stakeholder gezielt zu aktivieren und in den Reformprozess einzubinden.
\nForschungsbewertung und Open-Science-Infrastruktur werden immer enger zusammengedacht. Das sieht auch die DFG so und unterst\u00fctzt, wie Angela Holzer auf der Tagung ausf\u00fchrlich auff\u00e4cherte, unter anderem Open Research Europe (ORE). Gleichzeitig bleibt die Frage, wie praxistaugliche L\u00f6sungen in der Breite implementiert werden k\u00f6nnen. Daraus ergeben sich weitere Kooperationsideen. W\u00e4hrend CoARA hier stark auf die EU-Ebene ausgerichtet ist, kann die VuK diese Aktivit\u00e4ten und Entwicklungen nach Brandenburg zur\u00fcckbinden. Ein Verbindungselement k\u00f6nnte zum Beispiel die gezielte Vermittlung entstehender europ\u00e4ischer Diamond-Open-Access-L\u00f6sungen f\u00fcr die Einrichtungen im Land sein.\u00a0
\nAktivit\u00e4ten von Projekten wie ARRAtools4U und insbesondere auch des Helmholtz Open Science Office zeigen, dass die Entwicklung von Tools, datenbasierten Methoden und neuen Ans\u00e4tzen wie Narrative CVs ein praktischer Weg sind, um neue bzw. alternative Formen der Forschungsbewertung zu realisieren. Auch zu diesen Themen wird die VuK Kompetenzen aufbauen, b\u00fcndeln und weitergeben.
\nDie aktuellen Trends in der Forschungsbewertung bewegen sich weg von abstrakten Reformdebatten hin zu st\u00e4rkerer Kodifizierung, konkreter Umsetzung, zielgruppenspezifischer Kommunikation und toolgest\u00fctzter Entwicklung von praxisrelevanten L\u00f6sungen. F\u00fcr das Land Brandenburg bietet sich darin die Chance, regionale Perspektiven produktiv mit den europ\u00e4ischen Entwicklungen im CoARA-Kontext zu verzahnen. Die VuK wird diesen Prozess aktiv begleiten und die Einrichtungen des Landes dabei unterst\u00fctzen, die notwendigen Transformationsschritte kompetent umzusetzen.
","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/gc87q-3wj90","funding_references":null,"guid":"https://open-access-brandenburg.de/?p=9744","id":"7aed8f2d-2f63-49e7-9a2b-17371a0a1f1d","image":null,"images":[],"indexed":true,"indexed_at":1778517764,"language":"de","parent_doi":null,"published_at":1778515488,"reference":[],"registered_at":0,"relationships":[],"rid":"s5n8t-0ne47","status":"active","summary":"Die Vernetzungs- und Kompetenzstelle Open Access Brandenburg ist seit M\u00e4rz dieses Jahres assoziiertes Mitglied im National Chapter Germany\u00a0der\n\n Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment\n\n(CoARA). Damit gewinnt das Thema der Forschungsbewertung in Verbindung mit offener Wissenschaft auch f\u00fcr uns eine neue Bedeutung.","tags":["OA Takeaways","CoARA","Forschungsbewertung","Open Access Brandenburg","Open Science"],"title":"OA-Takeways: Aktuelle Trends in der Forschungsbewertung bei CoARA und mit Blick auf die VuK","updated_at":1778515488,"url":"https://open-access-brandenburg.de/forschungsbewertung-trends-2026/","version":"v1"}},{"document":{"abstract":"DOI: 10.60804/CQ98-3H62 By Iratxe Puebla Three years ago, I took on the rewarding challenge of leading Make Data Count\u2018s work to build the tools, practices, and community needed to drive recognition for data as a primary research output. As I prepare to transition out of the role as Director of...","archive_url":null,"authors":[{"contributor_roles":[],"name":"Make Data Count"}],"blog":{"archive_collection":23800,"archive_host":null,"archive_prefix":null,"archive_timestamps":null,"authors":null,"canonical_url":null,"category":"computerAndInformationSciences","community_id":"381bb9de-664b-4c4d-8286-4296f154b882","created_at":1733582630,"current_feed_url":null,"description":null,"doi":null,"doi_as_guid":false,"favicon":"https://rogue-scholar.org/api/communities/381bb9de-664b-4c4d-8286-4296f154b882/logo","feed_format":"application/atom+xml","feed_url":"https://makedatacount.org/feed/atom","filter":null,"funding":null,"generator":"WordPress","generator_raw":"WordPress","home_page_url":"https://makedatacount.org/read-our-blog/","id":"8bba2a52-1b3a-4510-97fd-c75b98dc76c8","indexed":true,"issn":null,"language":"en","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","mastodon":null,"prefix":null,"registered_at":0,"relative_url":null,"ror":null,"secure":true,"slug":"mdc","status":"active","subfield":"1710","subfield_validated":null,"title":"Make Data Count","updated_at":1778662012.604909,"use_api":null,"use_mastodon":false,"user_id":"dead81b3-8a8b-45c9-85fe-f01bb3948c77"},"blog_name":"Make Data Count","blog_slug":"mdc","content_html":"\n![\"Image](\"https://makedatacount.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Untitled-3-1024x451.png\")
By Iratxe Puebla
\nThree years ago, I took on the rewarding challenge of leading Make Data Count\u2018s work to build the tools, practices, and community needed to drive recognition for data as a primary research output. As I prepare to transition out of the role as Director of Make Data Count at the end of this month, I wanted to take the opportunity to reflect on what we have accomplished over the last years.
\nOne of the first items I addressed in this role was the development of our strategic plan, informed by input from the Advisory Group and community members. An important exercise to guide the initiative\u2019s work, the strategic plan identified four key areas of focus around infrastructure, research assessment, sustainability, and establishing data metrics as the standard. The plan reflected the initiative\u2019s broad efforts, keeping focus on infrastructure for data-usage tracking, but also spanning beyond into driving positive change in practices and research assessment to make data evaluation and recognition the norm.
\nA key activity to support that cultural change was the Make Data Count Summit. The goal of this event was to crystallize conversations about the use and reach of data as their own topic, shining a light on the importance of meaningful data evaluation as a practice building on, but separate, from data sharing. We picked the designation of a Summit because it reflected the fact that we were still on the journey for data evaluation and recognition to become the norm, and that while the steps ahead may not be easy, we could see the endpoint we were working towards. The success of the Make Data Count Summits highlighted the community\u2019s needs in data evaluation and the support for dedicated efforts to advance on this journey. It was inspiring to see the community\u2019s engagement, and the collaborations that developed from these events. As an example, the discussion about tenure and promotion practices at the Make Data Count Summit led us to collaborate with session panelists to write the \u2018Ten simple rules for recognizing data and software contributions in hiring, promotion, and tenure\u2019.
\nThe Make Data Count Summits and other community forums showcased the increasing interest by groups and organizations in understanding data usage, and also that groups were experimenting with different approaches. Make Data Count had recognized early on that in order for data-usage information to be used, this needs to be captured and shared in ways that enable interpretation across sectors, platforms and domains. This motivated the work to normalize data-usage information through practices and tools such as COUNTER Code of Practice for Research Data and the usage tracker. Continuing on this philosophy, Make Data Count became a co-leader of the Data Usage Typologies Working Group, a community effort to develop a uniform framework to describe data usage, which has recently shared its typology of data uses.
\nInfrastructure has remained a key area of Make Data Count\u2019s work. We have developed the Data Citation Corpus, an open aggregate of data citations to better understand how data is used in the literature. This project brought two key highlights for me. On the personal level, it gave me an opportunity to learn more about key metadata workflows for data and research information. For Make Data Count, it opened up new ways to scale data-usage information and provide the community with a tool to respond to growing data-evaluation needs. I have particularly enjoyed this project\u2019s focus on collaboration. The Corpus aims to elevate the contributions of groups that are already doing important work identifying links between datasets and articles, and it has been great to see the interest in contributing data citations from infrastructure providers such as Europe PMC, funders -ASAP, Chan Zuckerberg Initiative-, and publishers. The identification of data-article links and their inclusion in research information workflows as important metadata is a shared challenge and has received attention through other community efforts such as the Barcelona Declaration and OSMI (Open Science Monitoring Initiative), which Make Data Count contributes to.
\nI am particularly proud of our work supporting inclusion of data in research assessment. This was a new area of activity for Make Data Count, and I value the collaborations we have undertaken to support steps toward recognition of data as important outputs in evaluation. In addition to ongoing collaborations with DORA and other open science and research assessment reform groups, last year I had the privilege of facilitating the collaboration between Make Data Count and HELIOS Open. This was a successful collaboration between institutional representatives and data experts, which resulted in key resources to implement inclusion of data in institutional processes like tenure and promotion.\u00a0
\nOur participation in the SCOSS program has been another valuable opportunity to engage with representatives of institutions and libraries, key constituents in the data space. Make Data Count has attracted important support from institutions in Europe, Canada and Australia, and I thank all of them and the colleagues in the SCOSS-supported infrastructures for their support, encouragement and valuable feedback.
\nMake Data Count\u2019s activities and my own would not be possible without our community members, partners and volunteers. I want to thank you for supporting me and Make Data Count over the last three years. Thank you to the Make Data Count advisers who have contributed their time and energy across all areas of the initiative, from strategic planning, to representing Make Data Count at events, and collaborating on different projects. I am also grateful to the colleagues at DataCite who have generously helped me with metadata and workflow queries, addressed infrastructure needs, and provided feedback and ideas. It has been a privilege to work with Clare Dean on our outreach and in preparation of our resources. And of course, many thanks to our many collaborators from across research, open infrastructure, publishing, funders, and institutions, for sharing valuable insights and for keeping us on track on what matters most to advance recognition for data.
\nMake Data Count will pursue its essential work. There will be more updates from the development of the Data Citation Corpus and approaches to identify data citations later in the year, and the initiative will continue to play a key role in collaborations with community groups to advance research assessment reform to recognize data and other open outputs.
\nThe summit of data being recognized as a primary output is still ahead, but the community is firmly advancing on this path. I am privileged to have contributed to that journey. I\u2019ll remain an advocate of open science and responsible evaluation, and I look forward to seeing what the Make Data Count community will achieve next.
","doi":"https://doi.org/10.60804/cq98-3h62","funding_references":null,"guid":"https://makedatacount.org/?p=1791","id":"71882dda-2d19-40d5-9db1-85b64d80729e","image":"https://makedatacount.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Untitled-3-1024x451.png","images":[{"alt":"Image by Sebastien Spagnou, CC BY license.","height":"330","sizes":"(max-width: 750px) 100vw, 750px","src":"https://makedatacount.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Untitled-3-1024x451.png","srcset":"https://makedatacount.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Untitled-3-1024x451.png, https://makedatacount.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Untitled-3-600x264.png, https://makedatacount.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Untitled-3-768x338.png, https://makedatacount.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Untitled-3-1536x677.png, https://makedatacount.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Untitled-3-1568x691.png, https://makedatacount.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Untitled-3.png","width":"750"},{"alt":"Image by Sebastien Spagnou, CC BY license.","src":"https://makedatacount.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Untitled-3-1024x451.png"}],"indexed":false,"indexed_at":0,"language":"en","parent_doi":null,"published_at":1778513983,"reference":[],"registered_at":0,"relationships":[],"rid":null,"status":"active","summary":"DOI: 10.60804/CQ98-3H62\n\n By Iratxe Puebla\n\nThree years ago, I took on the rewarding challenge of leading Make Data Count\u2018s work to build the tools, practices, and community needed to drive recognition for data as a primary research output.","tags":["Community","Data Citation Corpus","Leadership","Outreach","Summit"],"title":"On the ascent and with the summit in sight \u2013 Reflections on three years at Make Data Count","updated_at":1778513983,"url":"https://makedatacount.org/read-our-blog/on-the-ascent/","version":"v1"}},{"document":{"abstract":null,"archive_url":null,"authors":[{"affiliation":[{"id":"https://ror.org/04h13ss13","name":"The Geneva Learning Foundation"}],"contributor_roles":[],"family":"Sadki","given":"Reda","url":"https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4051-0606"}],"blog":{"archive_collection":null,"archive_host":null,"archive_prefix":null,"archive_timestamps":null,"authors":null,"canonical_url":null,"category":"educationalSciences","community_id":"7e26491f-41c6-4665-9088-5aa6643a1ba8","created_at":1731211871,"current_feed_url":null,"description":"Learning to make a difference","doi":null,"doi_as_guid":false,"favicon":null,"feed_format":"application/atom+xml","feed_url":"https://redasadki.me/feed/atom/","filter":null,"funding":null,"generator":"WordPress","generator_raw":"WordPress 6.7.1","home_page_url":"https://redasadki.me","id":"88b8caba-b485-4654-96ce-a21547abaab3","indexed":true,"issn":null,"language":"en","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","mastodon":"https://techhub.social/@redasadki","prefix":"10.59350","registered_at":0,"relative_url":null,"ror":null,"secure":true,"slug":"redasadki","status":"active","subfield":"3304","subfield_validated":null,"title":"Reda Sadki","updated_at":1778662357.186458,"use_api":true,"use_mastodon":false,"user_id":"0d34dfde-a007-4ec9-9bc6-7b0318fa2c5e"},"blog_name":"Reda Sadki","blog_slug":"redasadki","content_html":"\nKINSHASA (9 mai 2026) \u2013 Un samedi matin, dans une salle de l\u2019Universit\u00e9 Mazenod de Kitambo, les premiers arriv\u00e9s ouvrent les fen\u00eatres et alignent des chaises.
\n\n\n\nPlusieurs portent un maillot blanc marqu\u00e9 du nom de la Fondation Apprendre Gen\u00e8ve.
\n\n\n\nCent trente-deux Scholars congolais avaient confirm\u00e9 leur participation.
\n\n\n\nQuarante-trois se sont connect\u00e9s depuis Mbandaka, Kasumbalesa, Lubumbashi, Bukavu, Kalemie.
\n\n\n\n\u00c0 l\u2019\u00e9cran, des coll\u00e8gues d\u2019autres pays attendent aussi.
\n\n\n\nOn retrouve le Cameroun, le Mali, la C\u00f4te d\u2019Ivoire, le Niger, le B\u00e9nin, le Tchad, le Togo, la Tanzanie.
\n\n\n\n![\"\"](\"https://i0.wp.com/redasadki.me/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/20260509.MALARIA-RDC-01.Patrice-BAMULENGA.jpg?resize=203%2C300&ssl=1\")
Patrice Bamulenga est un des Ambassadeurs de la Fondation pour la R\u00e9publique d\u00e9mocratique du Congo. Il avait lanc\u00e9 l\u2019id\u00e9e de cette r\u00e9union, et c\u2019est lui qui prend le premier micro.
\nQui d\u2019autre se retrouve au croisement des chemins, entre ceux de Kinshasa et ceux d\u2019ailleurs ?
\n\n\n\nHenri Stanley NYAFE est infirmier \u00e0 Mbandaka.
\n\n\n\nViviane Mukalay est infirmi\u00e8re au centre de sant\u00e9 Neema, dans la zone de sant\u00e9 de Sakania, \u00e0 la fronti\u00e8re avec la Zambie.
\n\n\n\nElle s\u2019est connect\u00e9e depuis Kasumbalesa.
\n\n\n\nFran\u00e7ois Mufolo Balimumu a pass\u00e9 vingt ans \u00e0 l\u2019h\u00f4pital Sendwe de Lubumbashi avant de partir en mission avec M\u00e9decins sans fronti\u00e8res et Alima.
\n\n\n\nCette ann\u00e9e, la Fondation Apprendre Gen\u00e8ve f\u00eate dix ans d\u2019existence.
\n\n\n\n\u00c0 Kinshasa, ce sont les Scholars de la RDC qui ont d\u00e9cid\u00e9 de f\u00eater ce qu\u2019ils appellent sans d\u00e9tour leurs dix ans.
\n\n\n\nIls ont retenu la salle, fait imprimer les maillots, recrut\u00e9 un panel d\u2019experts qui ont accept\u00e9 de venir un samedi matin.
\n\n\n\nIls ont plac\u00e9, en cl\u00f4ture, l\u2019inscription au prochain programme commun de la Fondation, sur le paludisme.
\n\n\n\nCharlotte Mbuh, directrice des programmes de la Fondation, s\u2019est connect\u00e9e depuis \u00c9bolowa, au Cameroun.
\n\n\n\nReda Sadki, fondateur, depuis Gen\u00e8ve.
\n\n\n\nLes deux ont \u00e9cout\u00e9 plus de trois heures avant de prendre la parole.
\n\n\n\n![\"\"](\"https://i0.wp.com/redasadki.me/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/20260509.MALARIA-RDC-15.jpg?resize=438%2C729&ssl=1\")
![\"\"](\"https://i0.wp.com/redasadki.me/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/20260509.MALARIA-RDC-13.jpg?resize=436%2C320&ssl=1\")
![\"\"](\"https://i0.wp.com/redasadki.me/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/20260509.MALARIA-RDC-12.jpg?resize=440%2C428&ssl=1\")
![\"\"](\"https://i0.wp.com/redasadki.me/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/20260509.MALARIA-RDC-11.jpg?resize=435%2C377&ssl=1\")
![\"\"](\"https://i0.wp.com/redasadki.me/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/20260509.MALARIA-RDC-01.Patrice-BAMULENGA-1.jpg?resize=437%2C646&ssl=1\")
![\"\"](\"https://i0.wp.com/redasadki.me/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/20260509.MALARIA-RDC-10.jpg?resize=438%2C196&ssl=1\")
![\"\"](\"https://i0.wp.com/redasadki.me/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/20260509.MALARIA-RDC-05.jpg?resize=435%2C197&ssl=1\")
![\"\"](\"https://i0.wp.com/redasadki.me/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/20260509.MALARIA-RDC-14.jpg?resize=437%2C623&ssl=1\")
![\"\"](\"https://i0.wp.com/redasadki.me/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/20260509.MALARIA-RDC-07.jpg?resize=436%2C415&ssl=1\")
![\"\"](\"https://i0.wp.com/redasadki.me/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/20260509.MALARIA-RDC-06.jpg?resize=434%2C292&ssl=1\")
![\"\"](\"https://i0.wp.com/redasadki.me/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/20260509.MALARIA-RDC-04.jpg?resize=435%2C327&ssl=1\")
![\"\"](\"https://i0.wp.com/redasadki.me/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/20260509.MALARIA-RDC-09.jpg?resize=436%2C435&ssl=1\")
La RDC concentre, selon l\u2019Organisation mondiale de la sant\u00e9, 12,6 % des cas de paludisme dans le monde et plus d\u2019un d\u00e9c\u00e8s sur dix qui en r\u00e9sultent.
\n\n\n\nElle est, apr\u00e8s le Nig\u00e9ria, le pays le plus touch\u00e9 de la plan\u00e8te.
\n\n\n\nCes chiffres ne sont pas un d\u00e9cor.
\n\n\n\nChaque cas reste, pour la famille concern\u00e9e, le co\u00fbt d\u2019un m\u00e9dicament, d\u2019un test, d\u2019un transport, d\u2019un repas qui ne sera pas pris.
\n\n\n\n\u00c0 l\u2019ouverture, Charlotte Mbuh r\u00e9sume ce que la matin\u00e9e doit \u00eatre. \u00ab Aujourd\u2019hui, ce n\u2019est pas une formation, c\u2019est une c\u00e9l\u00e9bration. Nous c\u00e9l\u00e9brons dix ans d\u2019apprentissage par les pairs, dix ans de partage d\u2019exp\u00e9rience, dix ans d\u2019am\u00e9lioration de la qualit\u00e9 du service que nous offrons \u00e0 nos communaut\u00e9s. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nElle encha\u00eene sans transition. \u00ab Dix ans, ce n\u2019est pas la fin. C\u2019est juste une nouvelle \u00e9tape qui commence, et nous voulons lancer cette nouvelle \u00e9tape avec notre programme du paludisme, Inverser la tendance du paludisme. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nLe ma\u00eetre de c\u00e9r\u00e9monie, Papa Emmanuel Kibambe, m\u00e9decin au minist\u00e8re de la Sant\u00e9, donne le ton. \u00ab Aujourd\u2019hui, c\u2019est un samedi. Quelqu\u2019un abandonne tout pour venir partager l\u2019exp\u00e9rience, et gratuitement. C\u2019est \u00e0 nous. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nTrois experts ont accept\u00e9 de venir.
\n\n\n\nLe Dr Meshach Motombo, sp\u00e9cialiste du paludisme.
\n\n\n\nLe P\u00e8re Robert Bougard, pr\u00eatre missionnaire, \u00e9cologiste, responsable du Mouvement Laudato Si\u2019 au Congo.
\n\n\n\nLe Dr L\u00e9opold, \u00e0 la direction de la formation continue du secr\u00e9tariat g\u00e9n\u00e9ral \u00e0 la Sant\u00e9.
\n\n\n\nAucun ne vient promouvoir un projet.
\n\n\n\nAucun ne vient pr\u00e9senter un produit.
\n\n\n\nUne organisation qui inscrit, dans la m\u00eame matin\u00e9e, la c\u00e9l\u00e9bration de ses dix ans et le lancement op\u00e9rationnel de son prochain programme assume sa nature.
\n\n\n\nLa Fondation Apprendre Gen\u00e8ve se pr\u00e9sente, dans ses textes fondateurs, comme une organisation du \u00ab faire \u00bb.
\n\n\n\nLa c\u00e9l\u00e9bration en est, \u00e0 Kinshasa, la mise en application litt\u00e9rale.
\n\n\n\nLa science du paludisme est connue.
\n\n\n\nLes m\u00e9dicaments fonctionnent.
\n\n\n\nLes moustiquaires impr\u00e9gn\u00e9es fonctionnent.
\n\n\n\nLe vaccin R21, introduit dans le calendrier vaccinal de la RDC en octobre 2024 (OMS Afro, 18 d\u00e9cembre 2024), commence \u00e0 diffuser, par paliers, dans les zones de sant\u00e9 pilotes du Kongo central.
\n\n\n\nLes directives existent.
\n\n\n\nEt pourtant, le pays a enregistr\u00e9 pr\u00e8s de deux millions de cas suppl\u00e9mentaires entre deux exercices cons\u00e9cutifs.
\n\n\n\nL\u2019\u00e9cart entre ce qui est \u00e9crit dans les plans et ce qui se passe dans une zone de sant\u00e9 porte un nom dans la litt\u00e9rature, l\u2019\u00e9cart \u00ab savoir-faire \u00bb.
\n\n\n\n\u00c0 Kitambo, ce 9 mai, ce sont les Scholars de la RDC qui le nomment, et qui d\u00e9crivent, dans leurs propres mots, ce qu\u2019il faut pour le r\u00e9duire.
\n\n\n\nLe savoir technique, contenu dans les directives.
\n\n\n\nLe savoir local, qui vient des communaut\u00e9s.
\n\n\n\nLe savoir entre pairs, qui circule lorsque des coll\u00e8gues d\u2019une autre province racontent comment elles s\u2019y sont prises.
\n\n\n\nViviane Mukalay, infirmi\u00e8re \u00e0 Sakania, raconte le moment o\u00f9 sa pratique a chang\u00e9.
\n\n\n\n\u00ab Souvent, on \u00e9tait l\u00e0 en train de se borner au niveau de la structure. On ne pouvait pas croire qu\u2019il fallait associer les relais communautaires et travailler vraiment en collaboration avec la communaut\u00e9. Mais quand j\u2019ai particip\u00e9 \u00e0 la r\u00e9union ici, j\u2019ai eu le courage d\u2019aller vers la communaut\u00e9, de travailler avec la communaut\u00e9 et de prendre des d\u00e9cisions avec la communaut\u00e9, surtout ensemble avec les relais communautaires. Quand il y a des absents pour la vaccination, on donne les cas de visite au relais communautaire qui vont, selon l\u2019adresse, chercher les absents pour les ramener. Et ce qui a fait \u00e0 ce que le nombre d\u2019enfants sous-vaccin\u00e9s et qui ont manqu\u00e9 la premi\u00e8re dose, \u00e7a diminue. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nLe dipl\u00f4me de Mme Mukalay, ses protocoles, sa connaissance des m\u00e9dicaments, ne pouvaient pas suffire \u00e0 eux seuls.
\n\n\n\nLa pratique a boug\u00e9 lorsque le savoir des relais communautaires, qui connaissent les adresses, et l\u2019exp\u00e9rience de coll\u00e8gues d\u2019autres zones de sant\u00e9, transmise dans les r\u00e9unions du r\u00e9seau, sont entr\u00e9s en dialogue avec ce qu\u2019elle savait d\u00e9j\u00e0.
\n\n\n\nHenri Stanley NYAFE, en ligne depuis Mbandaka, prend le micro pendant la s\u00e9ance du panel.
\n\n\n\nIl s\u2019adresse au Dr Meshach avec courtoisie, et il pose une question que les tableaux officiels ne posent pas. \u00ab Vous remarquez, au moment o\u00f9 vous dites qu\u2019il y a baisse des cas de paludisme, nous observons cependant qu\u2019il y a plus de d\u00e9c\u00e8s li\u00e9s \u00e0 cette maladie. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nPuis il ajoute, sur l\u2019usage de la moustiquaire impr\u00e9gn\u00e9e. \u00ab Vous oubliez un aspect. Ces moustiques nous infectent autour de 17 heures \u00e0 19 heures. La population active, c\u2019est cette population qui est sous les arbres, et l\u00e0, il n\u2019y a pas de moustiquaires. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nL\u2019observation de M. NYAFE, formul\u00e9e dans une ville du nord-ouest, ouvre une question pratique que la directive universelle ne couvre pas, l\u2019exposition pendant la fen\u00eatre cr\u00e9pusculaire, hors du domicile.
\n\n\n\nC\u2019est dans ce dialogue que des approches nouvelles peuvent s\u2019imaginer, et que les approches existantes se renforcent.
\n\n\n\nSur le canal de discussion, Fran\u00e7ois Mufolo Balimumu \u00e9crit depuis Lubumbashi. \u00ab Les donn\u00e9es pr\u00e9sent\u00e9es par l\u2019expert sont sous-notifi\u00e9es. Nous avons beaucoup de tradipraticiens dans nos quartiers et villages qui ne rapportent jamais \u00e0 la structure m\u00e8re de l\u2019aire de sant\u00e9. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nLe constat n\u2019est pas isol\u00e9.
\n\n\n\nIl rejoint l\u2019une des huit conclusions du nouveau rapport de la Fondation, Paludisme: inverser la tendance, selon laquelle plus de 60 % des soins li\u00e9s \u00e0 la fi\u00e8vre ont lieu, dans plusieurs pays cit\u00e9s par le rapport, en dehors des structures publiques.
\n\n\n\nUne participante, depuis une zone difficile d\u2019acc\u00e8s, parle des populations d\u00e9plac\u00e9es.
\n\n\n\n\u00ab Ils sont d\u00e9j\u00e0 en fait avec l\u2019\u00e9quit\u00e9. Ils ne b\u00e9n\u00e9ficient pas de la pr\u00e9sence des intrants, des personnels qualifi\u00e9s. Ils sont sacrifi\u00e9s, abandonn\u00e9s \u00e0 eux-m\u00eames. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nPlus tard dans la matin\u00e9e, Francklin Muzo Mukungu, responsable de programme \u00e0 l\u2019organisation non gouvernementale DJPDI, demande la parole pour signaler une rupture de m\u00e9dicaments dans les zones de sant\u00e9 de Pinga et de Kibua, dans le territoire de Walikale, avec une multiplication des cas de paludisme, de diarrh\u00e9e et de rougeole.
\n\n\n\nLors de son inscription, il avait \u00e9crit. \u00ab Nous traversons des violences au Nord Kivu. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nIl sait que la salle ne r\u00e9soudra pas le probl\u00e8me.
\n\n\n\nIl sait aussi que ce qu\u2019il vient de dire entrera dans la m\u00e9moire active du r\u00e9seau, et que d\u2019autres coll\u00e8gues, dans d\u2019autres provinces, sauront d\u00e9sormais que cela existe.
\n\n\n\nLe P\u00e8re Robert Bougard prend ensuite la parole, et fait pivoter le d\u00e9bat.
\n\n\n\n\u00ab On sait que ce que le Dr Meshach a expliqu\u00e9, il a \u00e9t\u00e9 plus sur l\u2019aspect curatif. Et nous, comme \u00e9cologistes, nous sommes sur l\u2019aspect pr\u00e9ventif. Nous voulons pr\u00e9venir. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nIl invite la salle \u00e0 regarder ce qui ne se voit pas dans les chiffres officiels.
\n\n\n\nL\u2019eau qui stagne dans les caniveaux.
\n\n\n\nLa chaleur croissante.
\n\n\n\n\u00ab Un peu d\u2019eau qui reste quelque part pendant quelques jours constitue de vrais h\u00f4tels, de vraies chambres, de vrais endroits o\u00f9 se d\u00e9veloppent les moustiques. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nL\u2019image rejoint, l\u00e0 encore, une observation du rapport de \u00abInverser la tendance\u00bb, sur la maintenance volontaire des caniveaux par des groupes de jeunes \u00e0 Kinshasa et sur l\u2019\u00e9levage de canards mangeurs de larves \u00e0 Madagascar.
\n\n\n\nLe moment le plus inattendu de la matin\u00e9e est venu de l\u2019expert lui-m\u00eame.
\n\n\n\nPress\u00e9 sur la question institutionnelle par les questions qui montaient de la salle, le Dr Meshach a fini par dire ce qu\u2019un fonctionnaire dit rarement en public.
\n\n\n\n\u00ab Le programme de lutte contre le paludisme doit quitter d\u2019\u00eatre un enfant de la DSSP et remonter, soit \u00eatre attach\u00e9 au cabinet du ministre, soit du premier ministre, soit \u00e0 la pr\u00e9sidence. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nL\u2019exp\u00e9rience pratique des Scholars, dans la salle, a pouss\u00e9 l\u2019argument plus loin que le cadre administratif o\u00f9 il \u00e9tait log\u00e9.
\n\n\n\nC\u2019est pr\u00e9cis\u00e9ment ce que le r\u00e9seau revendique, depuis dix ans, comme sa contribution propre.
\n\n\n\nLe savoir technique se renforce lorsqu\u2019il rencontre, en public, le savoir local et le savoir entre pairs.
\n\n\n\nLe programme avait pr\u00e9vu, avant le panel, deux t\u00e9moignages.
\n\n\n\n![\"\"](\"https://i0.wp.com/redasadki.me/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/20260509.MALARIA-RDC-02.NOELLY-ZOLA-WATUSADISI.jpg?resize=436%2C229&ssl=1\")
La Dre Noelly Zola, m\u00e9decin g\u00e9n\u00e9raliste, ambassadrice de la Fondation, raconte d\u2019abord ce qui n\u2019a pas march\u00e9.
\n\n\n\nElle voulait int\u00e9grer les organismes internationaux.
\n\n\n\nL\u2019OMS, l\u2019Unicef.
\n\n\n\nIl aurait fallu un master en sant\u00e9 publique.
\n\n\n\nElle a postul\u00e9 pour des bourses.
\n\n\n\nCela n\u2019a pas march\u00e9.
\n\n\n\n\u00ab Au moment o\u00f9 j\u2019\u00e9tais d\u00e9courag\u00e9e, j\u2019ai re\u00e7u un courriel de la Fondation. Ma maman Charlotte m\u2019a sollicit\u00e9e d\u2019adh\u00e9rer \u00e0 la plateforme d\u2019apprentissage. C\u2019est ainsi que j\u2019ai commenc\u00e9 \u00e0 apprendre en ligne. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nElle a appris la m\u00e9thode dite des cinq pourquoi.
\n\n\n\nElle l\u2019a appliqu\u00e9e, dans sa zone de sant\u00e9, pour identifier les causes profondes derri\u00e8re les probl\u00e8mes que ses coll\u00e8gues lisaient comme techniques.
\n\n\n\nElle dit, \u00e0 voix \u00e9gale, les sacrifices requis : \u00ab J\u2019ai aussi perdu certains contacts proches parce que j\u2019\u00e9tais tout le temps en train de travailler. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nAujourd\u2019hui, elle est Ambassadrice de la Fondation, et m\u00e8ne la mobilisation des Scholars autour de la formation paludisme.
\n\n\n\nLe Dr Stanis Mutamba, m\u00e9decin-chef d\u2019un centre hospitalier, vient ensuite.
\n\n\n\nEn 2020, il devait conduire une mission de pr\u00e9l\u00e8vement d\u2019\u00e9chantillons d\u2019eau \u00e0 Nagika.
\n\n\n\nIl suivait, en parall\u00e8le, un programme de la Fondation sur la bilharziose g\u00e9nitale chez la femme.
\n\n\n\nLe lien entre les deux n\u2019avait rien d\u2019\u00e9vident, jusqu\u2019\u00e0 ce qu\u2019il regarde, sur le terrain, les patientes du village avec les outils de la formation.
\n\n\n\nIl a identifi\u00e9 des cas que personne, dans la zone, n\u2019aurait diagnostiqu\u00e9s.
\n\n\n\nIl a accompagn\u00e9 les femmes, expliqu\u00e9 la maladie, organis\u00e9 une r\u00e9ponse.
\n\n\n\nSa formule, simple, ferme la s\u00e9quence. \u00ab Former un expert, c\u2019est une communaut\u00e9 transform\u00e9e. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nPapa Emmanuel Kibambe, le ma\u00eetre de c\u00e9r\u00e9monie, glisse son propre t\u00e9moignage entre deux questions. \u00ab Je suis Scholar depuis 2019. J\u2019ai d\u00e9j\u00e0 sept \u00e0 huit certifications avec cette Fondation. \u00bb Il d\u00e9crit ce que sa pratique a gagn\u00e9 : \u00ab Dans la connaissance et l\u2019apprenti
\n\n\n\nsage, on n\u2019a pas besoin de grandes connaissances. Ce sont des petites astuces qui changent le probl\u00e8me en solution. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nTrois trajectoires, trois mani\u00e8res de tenir le dipl\u00f4me par un bout, l\u2019exp\u00e9rience par l\u2019autre, et de r\u00e9unir les deux dans une salle.
\n\n\n\nLa densit\u00e9 de l\u2019engagement \u00e0 Kinshasa n\u2019est pas un effet de cadrage.
\n\n\n\nSur les 314 ambassadeurs nomm\u00e9s \u00e0 la Fondation au moment o\u00f9 l\u2019appel international a \u00e9t\u00e9 ouvert, cent soixante-sept167 r\u00e9sident en RDC.
\n\n\n\nLe titre vient avec un mandat : lier les pairs, combler l\u2019\u00e9cart entre orientations internationales et action locale, construire le r\u00e9seau de l\u2019int\u00e9rieur.
\n\n\n\nPour qualifier, il faut avoir termin\u00e9 au moins un programme de la Fondation, suivi un programme d\u2019activation de quatre semaines.
\n\n\n\nC\u2019est cette m\u00e9canique qui a produit, en RDC, le \u00ab Mouvement congolais pour la vaccination \u00bb.
\n\n\n\nIl est n\u00e9 d\u2019une habitude prise pendant la pand\u00e9mie, en juillet 2019, lorsque les Scholars congolais commenc\u00e8rent \u00e0 se r\u00e9unir tous les samedis \u00e0 17 heures, par Zoom, pour s\u2019\u00e9changer des nouvelles, des solutions, des doutes.
\n\n\n\nCette r\u00e9union hebdomadaire a \u00e9volu\u00e9, ces derni\u00e8res ann\u00e9es, vers une conversation plus large, sur WhatsApp et en visioconf\u00e9rence, qui ne s\u2019est jamais arr\u00eat\u00e9e.
\n\n\n\nCe que la salle de Kitambo a fait le 9 mai, c\u2019est rendre visible cette infrastructure-l\u00e0.
\n\n\n\nOlenga Okitengeno Rita, agent de sant\u00e9 communautaire \u00e0 Kinshasa, a \u00e9crit, pour le recueil des r\u00e9cits du dixi\u00e8me anniversaire, comment elle avait identifi\u00e9 121 enfants pass\u00e9s \u00e0 travers le syst\u00e8me de vaccination dans une premi\u00e8re zone de sant\u00e9, et atteint plus de 80 % d\u2019entre eux.
\n\n\n\nElle a recommenc\u00e9 l\u2019op\u00e9ration dans une autre zone.
\n\n\n\nMarcel Muntu Ilunga, expert en sant\u00e9 publique en zone de d\u00e9plac\u00e9s, a vaccin\u00e9 quatre-vingt-treize enfants \u00e2g\u00e9s de 0 \u00e0 23 mois en trente jours.
\n\n\n\nAndr\u00e9 Claude Mukinayi Kalamba, infirmier \u00e0 Kalemie, est mont\u00e9 pour la premi\u00e8re fois dans une pirogue de fortune pour aller vacciner une population d\u2019une rive auparavant hostile \u00e0 la vaccination.
\n\n\n\nAucun de ces r\u00e9cits n\u2019a fait l\u2019objet d\u2019un projet financ\u00e9.
\n\n\n\nTous ont eu lieu.
\n\n\n\nLa Fondation a publi\u00e9, le 23 avril 2026, \u00e0 la veille de la Journ\u00e9e mondiale de lutte contre le paludisme, son nouveau rapport, Paludisme: inverser la tendance.
\n\n\n\nIl rassemble les contributions de plus de mille agents de sant\u00e9 dans soixante-huit pays, parmi lesquels la RDC.
\n\n\n\nL\u2019une de ses huit conclusions s\u2019ouvre sur un t\u00e9moignage congolais.
\n\n\n\nLe Dr Bisimwa Muzusa Emmanuel, m\u00e9decin \u00e0 Bukavu, y d\u00e9crit ses propres enfants atteints du paludisme malgr\u00e9 les moustiquaires. \u00ab Trois de mes enfants, \u00e2g\u00e9s de un, trois et cinq ans, ont souffert du paludisme, alors m\u00eame qu\u2019ils dorment sous moustiquaire. Le plus jeune a \u00e9t\u00e9 hospitalis\u00e9. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nUne autre conclusion fait r\u00e9f\u00e9rence aux campagnes communautaires d\u2019entretien des caniveaux \u00e0 Kinshasa, exactement le sujet que le Fr\u00e8re Robert a port\u00e9 dans la salle de Kitambo.
\n\n\n\nLe rapport fait le lien entre action sur le terrain et directives de l\u2019Organisation mondiale de la sant\u00e9.
\n\n\n\nIl documente la couche que les directives n\u2019avaient pas vocation \u00e0 recueillir, et que les syst\u00e8mes de surveillance peinent \u00e0 capturer.
\n\n\n\nIl se pr\u00e9sente comme un savoir d\u2019usage.
\n\n\n\nReda Sadki, prenant la parole en fin de matin\u00e9e, le formule ainsi : \u00ab C\u2019est quelque chose de nouveau en termes de type de savoir qui peut renseigner un praticien. Vous n\u2019allez pas trouver la ligne directrice qui vous dit ce qu\u2019il faut faire dans tel ou tel cas. Par contre, vous allez pouvoir y lire, vous nourrir des exp\u00e9riences d\u2019acteurs de la sant\u00e9, y compris ceux qui ne sont pas m\u00e9decins, des agents de sant\u00e9 communautaires, des infirmi\u00e8res, des sages-femmes. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nLe rapport est disponible, en fran\u00e7ais et en anglais.
\n\n\n\nUne note d\u2019analyse en huit points en restitue les principaux r\u00e9sultats.
\n\n\n\nUne lecture parue le jour de la Journ\u00e9e mondiale du paludisme en propose la grille de lecture.
\n\n\n\nPatrice Bamulenga cl\u00f4t la s\u00e9ance par une image de chantier. \u00ab Ce que nous avons initi\u00e9 aujourd\u2019hui, c\u2019est une pierre de la fondation. Demain, nous allons \u00e9lever les murs. Le lendemain, il y aura d\u00e9j\u00e0 une toiture. Et le lendemain sera aussi un b\u00e2timent qui sera habit\u00e9. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nTrois choses concr\u00e8tes en sortent.
\n\n\n\nLa formation Paludisme: inverser la tendance, dont l\u2019inscription est ouverte aux Scholars pr\u00e9sents et \u00e0 leurs coll\u00e8gues.
\n\n\n\nLa prochaine r\u00e9union mensuelle de la Fondation, le 14 mai, o\u00f9 les congolais peuvent rejoindre les confr\u00e8res du monde entier pour d\u00e9couvrir l\u2019\u00e9ventail complet des opportunit\u00e9s de formation, d\u2019action et de leadership.
\n\n\n\nEt la possibilit\u00e9, d\u00e9sormais document\u00e9e, qu\u2019une cellule nationale de Scholars puisse organiser, par ses propres moyens, un \u00e9v\u00e9nement de cette ampleur.
\n\n\n\nPendant que la salle entonne, dans la derni\u00e8re demi-heure, l\u2019hymne national avant la photo de famille, sur l\u2019\u00e9cran les commentaires arrivent.
\n\n\n\nMathieu Kalemayi, depuis le bureau congolais d\u2019une organisation partenaire, \u00e9crit: \u00ab Nous y serons pour r\u00e9unir nos efforts face \u00e0 ce fl\u00e9au qui nous endeuille. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nBeno\u00eet S\u00ead\u00e9gnon, consultant pour l\u2019Unicef au B\u00e9nin, demande comment le r\u00e9seau b\u00e9ninois pourrait se redynamiser sur le mod\u00e8le congolais.
\n\n\n\nAbdramane Oumarou, syndicaliste de la sant\u00e9 \u00e0 Niamey, \u00e9crit que \u00ab c\u2019est un \u00e9v\u00e9nement tr\u00e8s utile surtout pour nous agents de sant\u00e9 pour pouvoir am\u00e9liorer nos connaissances \u00bb.
\n\n\n\nDaniel Mafini, m\u00e9decin du R\u00e9seau des ambassadeurs de la maison d\u2019Art\u00e9misia, s\u2019interroge sur la mani\u00e8re d\u2019apporter son expertise.
\n\n\n\nLouise Nkusu Lusangu, ambassadrice congolaise install\u00e9e en Afrique du Sud, soul\u00e8ve la question d\u2019un avenir acad\u00e9mique et de partenariats universitaires pour celles et ceux qui ont pris ce chemin.
\n\n\n\nLa salle de Kitambo n\u2019est qu\u2019un point d\u2019un dessin plus large, qui se prolonge d\u00e9j\u00e0 ailleurs.
\n\n\n\n\u00c0 Mbandaka, \u00e0 dix-sept heures, la fen\u00eatre d\u2019exposition au moustique s\u2019ouvrira.
\n\n\n\nSur le t\u00e9l\u00e9phone d\u2019Henri Stanley NYAFE, comme sur celui de Viviane Mukalay \u00e0 Kasumbalesa, les messages continueront de circuler.
\n\n\n\nScientific articles are theoretically rich in details about antibodies, cell lines, model organisms, or software tools. However, these details are often poorly reported and remain locked in unstructured text, making it difficult, or impossible, to reproduce experiments. Mentions are often ambiguous, inconsistent, or difficult to track across studies. This is where Research Resource Identifiers (RRIDs) come to the rescue. RRIDs are unique persistent identifiers (PIDs) assigned to key research resources and are structured (for example, RRID:AB_572263) to transform a vague mention (like \u201canti-GFP antibody\u201d) into something precise, traceable, and comparable across studies. Unlike plain text mentions, these PIDs are globally unique, machine-readable, and linked to curated metadata.
\n\n\n\nRRIDs are developed and maintained by the FAIR Data Informatics laboratory at the University of California at San Diego and RRIDs.org (a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization) is the organization that owns RRIDs. The RRID platform aggregates and curates biomedical resource information and links to usage of RRIDs in the scientific literature to create a structured, traceable connection between a resource and its documented use. Correctly reported resources are easier to find, but sometimes resources are mentioned but not properly identified, are ambiguous, or even incorrect. SciCrunch has developed machine learning methods to identify these harder-to-find connections. This enrichment layer enables downstream platforms like Europe PMC to surface RRIDs even when authors did not explicitly structure them in the article text, the supplemental files, or reagent tables. These previously opaque references can, therefore, become discoverable, queryable, and reusable, which is an important step toward more transparent and reproducible research.
\n\n\n\nRRIDs are integrated into Europe PMC through the annotation platform. RRIDs provided by SciCrunch are associated with articles within the Europe PMC database, making them available through search, integrated into the SciLite annotations tool, and retrievable programmatically through the Annotations API. API access allows developers to retrieve and use RRID annotations linked to literature in Europe PMC in their own applications and researchers retrieve the data for analysis.
\n\n\n\nRRIDs can be searched within Europe PMC through the Advanced search tool. In the \u2018Links to data records\u2019 section, tick the \u2018Find an accession or data DOI\u2019 checkbox and then select the \u2018RRID (Research resource identifiers)\u2019 under the \u2018Data type\u2019 drop-down.
\n\n\n\n![\"Europe](\"https://blog.europepmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-11-at-14.15.47.png\")
You may then enter an RRID in the \u201cAccession number or data DOI\u201d box and add this to your search. For example, the RRID for HeLa cells is RRID:CVCL_0030. Searching for this using Advanced search produces the following results.
\n\n\n\n![\"Europe](\"https://blog.europepmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-11-at-13.52.17.png\")
Reading an article, you can find references to RRIDs using the SciLite tool.
\n\n\n\n![\"A](\"https://blog.europepmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-11-at-14.43.44.png\")
Through this collaboration, Europe PMC now indexes over one million RRIDs (in over a hundred thousand papers), transforming previously fragmented data into a structured, discoverable dataset of literature and associated RRIDs combined. This integration enhances reproducibility, supports large-scale meta-analyses, and enables downstream reuse in emerging tools and workflows. By combining RRIDs with other search terms, users can perform precise, targeted queries, significantly improving the specificity and utility of searches across the Europe PMC platform.
\n\n\n\nAs RRID coverage and adoption continue to grow, these connections could support new approaches to reproducibility monitoring, resource validation, trend analysis, and AI-driven discovery tools built on structured scientific knowledge rather than unstructured text alone.
\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nWritten by Matthew Jeffryes and Melissa Harrison from Europe PMC and Anita Bandrowski and Martijn Roelandse from SciCrunch.
\n","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/mhkgg-p7m28","funding_references":null,"guid":"https://blog.europepmc.org/?p=1719","id":"0e4f73c1-8647-4c13-adb7-7efed3b42b62","image":"https://blog.europepmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-11-at-14.15.47.png","images":[{"alt":"Europe PMC Advanced Search Query Builder interface, showing the \"Links to data records\" section expanded. The \"Find an accession or data DOI\" checkbox is ticked, and the Data type dropdown menu is open, with \"RRID (Research resource identifiers)\" highlighted in the drop-down.","height":"600","sizes":"(max-width: 729px) 100vw, 729px","src":"https://blog.europepmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-11-at-14.15.47.png","srcset":"https://blog.europepmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-11-at-14.15.47.png, https://blog.europepmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-11-at-14.15.47-300x247.png","width":"729"},{"alt":"Europe PMC search results page showing 1,444 articles returned for the query searching for RRID:CVCL_0030 (the HeLa cell line identifier). The syntax for this query is (ACCESSION_TYPE:\"rrid\") AND (ACCESSION_ID:\"RRID:CVCL_0030\"). Results are sorted by relevance and include research articles, review articles, and preprints. A bar chart on the left shows publication counts from 2016 to 2026, with a clear upward trend in recent years.","height":"578","sizes":"(max-width: 735px) 100vw, 735px","src":"https://blog.europepmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-11-at-13.52.17.png","srcset":"https://blog.europepmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-11-at-13.52.17.png, https://blog.europepmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-11-at-13.52.17-300x236.png","width":"735"},{"alt":"A full-text article view in Europe PMC showing the Methods section of a paper. On the right, the SciLite annotations panel is open, displaying accession numbers identified by text mining. \"RRID: CVCL_0030 (1/1)\" is checked in the panel, which causes the HeLa cell line identifier (RRID:CVCL_0030) to be highlighted in yellow within the article text.","height":"764","sizes":"(max-width: 930px) 100vw, 930px","src":"https://blog.europepmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-11-at-14.43.44.png","srcset":"https://blog.europepmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-11-at-14.43.44.png, https://blog.europepmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-11-at-14.43.44-300x246.png, https://blog.europepmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-11-at-14.43.44-768x631.png","width":"930"},{"src":"https://blog.europepmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-11-at-14.15.47.png"},{"src":"https://blog.europepmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-11-at-13.52.17.png"},{"src":"https://blog.europepmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-11-at-14.43.44.png"}],"indexed":true,"indexed_at":1778509984,"language":"en","parent_doi":null,"published_at":1778506562,"reference":[],"registered_at":0,"relationships":[],"rid":"s818f-0b038","status":"active","summary":"Scientific articles are theoretically rich in details about antibodies, cell lines, model organisms, or software tools. However, these details are often poorly reported and remain locked in unstructured text, making it difficult, or impossible, to reproduce experiments. Mentions are often ambiguous, inconsistent, or difficult to track across studies. This is where Research Resource Identifiers (RRIDs) come to the rescue.","tags":["Editor's Picks","Guest Posts","Advanced Search","Annotations API","FAIR"],"title":"From text to traceability: RRID integration in Europe PMC","updated_at":1778508322,"url":"https://blog.europepmc.org/2026/05/from-text-to-traceability-rrid-integration-in-europe-pmc.html","version":"v1"}},{"document":{"abstract":"Previously I had alluded to some of the major projects I\u2019ve been working on. One has come to fruition and can be found on the arXiv and in the Astrophysical Journal&. It has taken many years to assemble the data in this paper, during which time the models purporting to explain some of it have \u2026 Continue reading Extended Tully-Fisher relations \u2192","archive_url":null,"authors":[{"affiliation":[{"id":"https://ror.org/051fd9666","name":"Case Western Reserve University"}],"contributor_roles":[],"family":"McGaugh","given":"Stacy","url":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9762-0980"}],"blog":{"archive_collection":null,"archive_host":null,"archive_prefix":null,"archive_timestamps":null,"authors":null,"canonical_url":null,"category":"physicalSciences","community_id":"82262dc6-3666-40e2-939a-d4d637d0fd8f","created_at":1713369760,"current_feed_url":null,"description":"A Blog About the Science and Sociology of Cosmology and Dark Matter","doi":null,"doi_as_guid":false,"favicon":"https://rogue-scholar.org/api/communities/82262dc6-3666-40e2-939a-d4d637d0fd8f/logo","feed_format":"application/atom+xml","feed_url":"https://tritonstation.com/feed/atom/","filter":null,"funding":null,"generator":"WordPress.com","generator_raw":"WordPress.com","home_page_url":"https://tritonstation.com/new-blog-page/","id":"651203f2-4bfe-4788-b4d0-2971b1f8cfe5","indexed":true,"issn":null,"language":"en","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","mastodon":"https://mastodon.social/@DudeDarkmatter","prefix":"10.59350","registered_at":1729029144,"relative_url":null,"ror":null,"secure":true,"slug":"tritonstation","status":"active","subfield":"3103","subfield_validated":null,"title":"Triton Station","updated_at":1778662734.074666,"use_api":true,"use_mastodon":false,"user_id":"83dddbbe-93dc-445b-accd-b0ecfd19f65f"},"blog_name":"Triton Station","blog_slug":"tritonstation","content_html":"\nPreviously I had alluded to some of the major projects I’ve been working on. One has come to fruition and can be found on the arXiv and in the Astrophysical Journal&. It has taken many years to assemble the data in this paper, during which time the models purporting to explain some of it have evolved considerably while consistently failing to address the real problems they raise. There is a lot to explore, so it will take more than one post.
\n\n\n\nHere I start with the empirical basis: the stellar mass and baryonic Tully-Fisher relations. The Tully-Fisher relation was originally discovered as a relation between luminosity and linewidth in rotationally supported galaxies – spirals and irregulars. It immediately proved useful as an extragalactic distance indicator. As such, it was instrumental in breaking the impasse in the Hubble constant* debate (back when it was 50 vs. 100, not 67 vs. 73), and it remains useful in this role.
\n\n\n\nPhysically, the obvious interpretation was that luminosity is a proxy for stellar mass and linewidth*^ is a proxy for rotation speed. This is correct. Of the various rotation speeds one can define and measure, the one that works best, in terms of minimizing the scatter in the relation, is the flat rotation speed measured in the outer parts of extended rotation curves. See Stark et al. (2009) and Trachternach et al. (2009) for further examples. The scatter is basically a function of data quality.
\n\n\n\nOn the mass axis, converting measured flux to luminosity to mass is a bit dicier, as we need to know the distance for the first step and the stellar mass-to-light ratio for the second. There is inevitably some intrinsic scatter in the mass-to-light ratio of a stellar population. While I don’t doubt that luminosity is a proxy for stellar mass, improving on it is hard to do: there are many instances in which simply assuming a straight mapping of light to mass can be as effective as applying fancier population models. We might^ finally be getting past that, so it is worth discussing a bit.
\n\n\n\nThe procedure to convert starlight into stellar mass involves the construction of stellar population models that use the color(s) or spectral energy distribution of a galaxy to infer the types of stars that make the light. This is a long-argued subject; suffice it to say there are a number of points where it can go wrong. The most obvious is the IMF; the initial spectrum of masses with which stars are born. Most of the light we see from galaxies is produced by its higher mass stars, which are disproportionately bright (there is a steep scaling of stellar luminosity with mass). But most of the mass is locked up in low mass stars that contribute little to the total luminosity. So we are, in effect, using the light of the few to represent the mass of the many. That would go badly wrong if we don’t know the relative mix, i.e., the shape of the IMF. This has been the subject of much research, and over many decades has been narrowed down pretty well. While I hope that this is almost settled, the specter of the IMF lurks as a menace to all stellar mass determinations.
\n\n\n\nThere is a lot else we need to know to build a stellar population model. This includes such essentials as the spectra of individual stars of each and every type and stellar evolution as a function of mass and composition including exotic phases like the asymptotic giant branch. There are a lot of places where this can go badly wrong, and sometimes^% does. So I wouldn’t say we know how to do this perfectly, but we have become pretty good at it.
\n\n\n\nConverting light to mass suffices to plot the stellar mass Tully-Fisher relation. That accounts for most of the baryonic mass of high mass spirals, but it ignores the mass of the interstellar gas. This can be appreciable in lower mass systems. Indeed, the standard issue dwarf galaxy in the field is more gas than stars:
\n\n\n\n![\"\"](\"https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/MgMst.png?resize=700%2C618&ssl=1\")
With measurements of mass and rotation speed, we can construct the Tully-Fisher relation:
\n\n\n\n![\"\"](\"https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/BTFR.png?resize=700%2C467&ssl=1\")
The stellar mass Tully-Fisher relation is a good correlation by the standards of extragalactic astronomy. The majority of studies in the literature are restricted to massive% galaxies, mostly those with M* > 1010 M\u2609 where stars dominate the baryonic mass budget so the omission of gas is not obvious. As we look to lower masses, the relation bends and the scatter increases. That this happens right where gas starts to become important to the mass budget suggests that we’re missing an important component, and voila – a nice, continuous relation that is linear in log space is restored when we plot the baryonic mass Mb = M*+Mg. Indeed, the data are consistent with a simple power law
\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nwith A = 50 M\u2609 km-4 s4. The intercept A has consistently been measured within 10% of this value over the past couple of decades. That this is an integer power law so that the intercept has real physical units is intriguing. That doesn’t happen in most astronomical scaling laws, which are usually more happenstance, like the mass-luminosity relation for main sequence stars.
\n\n\n\nWhy limit ourselves to rotationally supported galaxies? Let’s plots every known type of gravitationally bound extragalactic object, from the smallest ultrafaint dwarfs to the largest clusters of galaxies. Note that I’ve flipped the axes to accommodate the huge dynamic range in baryonic mass, roughly twelve (12) orders of magnitude. This is like having gnats at one end of the scale and blue whales at the other. On that scale, a person is a regular galaxy like the Milky Way.
\n\n\n\n![\"\"](\"https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Fig_VfMstMb.png?resize=700%2C608&ssl=1\")
One improvement from twenty years ago, aside from the greater number of objects and the increase in dynamic range, is the accuracy of the mass measurements. I tried a number of prescriptions for the stellar mass-to-light ratio in McGaugh (2005), which resulted in a range of possible slopes. Now we just use the stellar mass from precise population models (Duey et al. 2025) and recover my best estimate from back then. The room to dodge the obvious conclusion about the slope of the relation by complaining about the choice of stellar mass estimator – a popular course of action back then – is gone. Another technical issue we’ve spent a lot of effort working on is how to put all these very different systems on the same scale of Vf. I won’t elaborate on this here: if you’re interested in that level of detail, you can go read the paper and references there in. If we got this wrong, it would add to the scatter in the relation, and/or create offsets between different types of data.
\n\n\n\nBoth of the extended Tully-Fisher relations, that in stellar mass (top panel) and that in baryonic mass (bottom panel, the extended BTFR) are good correlations. That in baryonic mass is clearly better in the sense that it is tighter over a larger dynamic range. From small dwarf galaxies (Mb ~ 5 x 105) to groups of galaxies (5 x 1012 M\u2609), the data are consistent with a single power law (Mb ~ Vf4) for all systems with remarkably little scatter. Outside this range, the data for both the lowest and the highest mass systems deviate from a straight line towards higher mass at a given flat velocity. I don’t put much credence in the smallest systems as I think there is little chance that their measured velocity dispersions are representative of their equilibrium gravitational potential. For all practical purposes, our knowledge runs out as we hit the regime of ultrafaint# dwarfs. The deviations of the most massive systems, clusters of galaxies, are more difficult to dismiss.
\n\n\n\nRestricting our attention for the moment to the range where a single power law suffices to describe the data, we note that there is not much scatter in the BTFR. Some of it is from random uncertainties; these dominate most studies and lead to a lot more scatter than seen here: these data are very good. We can account for the known observational errors and subtract off their contribution to estimate the intrinsic scatter in the relation. This is the variance of the data from a perfect line. The intrinsic scatter for the best data (the WISE-SPARC sample of Duey et al. 2026) is about 0.11 dex in mass – about what we expect$ for stellar populations. That doesn’t leave much room for other sources of scatter, so the underlying physical relation has to be very tight indeed: essentially perfect over the range 5 x 105 < Mb < 5 x 1012 M\u2609.
\n\n\n\nScatter will also occur if our mass budget is incomplete. We can see this in the transition from the stars-only relation to the BTFR. There is a lot of scatter in the stellar mass Tully-Fisher relation around 107 < Mb < 109 M\u2609. Galaxies in this mass range are sometimes star-dominated and sometimes gas-dominated. The gas fraction is all over the place. This shows up as scatter in the stellar mass Tully-Fisher relation. That’s not real; it is a sign that we’ve missed an important mass reservoir. This is cured when we add in the gas mass, which is dominated by atomic gas (HI to spectroscopists and astronomers). That this addition removes the scatter and restores a single power law relation strongly suggests that there are no further substantial reservoirs** of baryonic material that we’re missing.
\n\n\n\nThis logic applies to other systems as well. Bright spirals do not need much correction because their baryonic mass is dominated by stars. Their stellar mass Tully-Fisher relation is pretty much already their BTFR.
\n\n\n\nPerhaps this applies to clusters of galaxies as well? There was a huge correction from stars-only to stars plus gas. The gas in this case is the hot, ionized plasma of the intracluster medium (ICM) that belongs to the cluster itself and not any individual galaxy within it. That goes most of the way to close the gap between the stars-only cluster data and the extrapolation of the BTFR fit to individual galaxies, but not all the way. So perhaps we are still missing an important baryonic mass component? It happened before – we didn’t know about the ICM for decades after Zwicky first identified the missing mass problem in clusters – so perhaps there are still more baryons to discover there.
\n\n\n\nIt could also be that the apparent offset occurs because we’ve failed to put clusters on the same Vf scale as galaxies. This is not easy to do, and we’ve spent a lot of time worrying about it. I don’t think this is what’s going on, though it would make my life a lot simpler if it were. Different indicators – dynamics vs. ICM hydrostatics vs. gravitational lensing – can give somewhat different answers, but not in a way that “fixes” the problem: I see no viable path in which the offset turns out to be a simple difference in the way the depth of the gravitational potential is measured. I would love to be wrong here, but I’m not dismissing the offset for clusters as I am for ultrafaint dwarfs (which don’t do lightly).
\n\n\n\nPerhaps the extrapolation of the BTFR from individual galaxies to clusters is simply not appropriate. They’re very different kinds of systems, after all. To dig into that, we need some theoretical perspective – why does the observed power law happen? Should we expect different systems to share the same BTFR?
\n\n\n\nTheory is something I’ve studiously avoided in this post: the possibility that there are baryons that remain to be discovered in clusters can be inferred empirically. All the other data line up, so why not clusters? But unless and until these hypothetical additional baryons are discovered, that’s just one possibility. How likely this possibility seems to be diverges rapidly once we overlay a theoretical preference, which I will leave to future posts. (I did warn it would take more than one.)
\n\n\n\n&This paper appears in ApJ volume 1001. The literature has grown quite a bit since I started contributing to it in volume 342. The Astrophysical Journal was founded in 1895. So I’ve been contributing to it for a little over a quarter of its temporal existence, but nearly twice the number of volumes have been published in that shorter time. It’s no wonder none of us can keep up.
\n\n\n\n*Indeed, Tully & Fisher’s “preliminary estimate of the Hubble constant is H0 = 80 km/s/Mpc” remains correct to this day, within the uncertainties (hard to estimate at the time, but roughly \u00b110 km/s/Mpc).
\n\n\n\n*^There appears to be an irreducible intrinsic scatter in the linewidth: it is not a perfect proxy for rotation speed. Linewidths are observationally easier to obtain than resolved, extended rotation curves, so the numbers of galaxies in samples using linewidths can be very large without ever approaching the quality provided by resolved interferometric observations. Bigger samples are not necessarily better.
\n\n\n\n^I emphasize might here because the community seems to have moved towards reporting stellar masses as if we observe these rather than the luminosities and colors/SEDs that the mass estimates are based upon. The latter are data – observed quantities – while stellar masses are a derived quantity that is inevitably model dependent. This doesn’t stop being true just because we decide to invest a lot of faith in our models.
\n\n\n\n*^The Sloan Digital Sky Survey provides stellar masses based on models that are known to be wrong in the near infrared. Since SDSS itself is entirely optical, one might not notice. If one mixes SDSS data with near-IR data, one will get the wrong answer.
\n\n\n\n%This is a classic selection effect. Brighter objects can be seen at a much greater distance than dim ones, so probe a much larger volume. Consequently, their raw numbers always dominate surveys even if their number density is low. Stars are a great example: most of the stars you can see at night are intrinsically luminous: bright stars that are rather far away. Mundane, low mass stars do not stand out even when nearby.
\n\n\n\n#This isn’t for lack of observations of ultrafaint dwarfs, it’s the underlying assumptions.
\n\n\n\n$No amount of information suffices to perfectly specify the stellar mass that produces an observed luminosity and SED (spectral energy distribution/set of colors), so one always expects at least some intrinsic scatter in the stellar mass-to-light ratio. I’ve seen estimates that range from 0.1 – 0.2 dex for near-IR colors. That’s as good as it can get as there is always some transient population (e.g., AGB stars) that produce an amount of light that depends on the star formation rate some time ago, not what we measure now. Optical colors are worse in the sense of having more intrinsic scatter, as they are more susceptible to the comings and goings of bright but short-lived stars whose numbers fluctuate with the stochastic star formation rate. Finding 0.11 dex intrinstic scatter is pretty much as good as it can get. (By dex we mean the scatter in log space.)
\n\n\n\n**We noted this effect in the original BTFR paper to argue that it was unlikely that we were missing substantial amounts of molecular gas (H2), which was a concern at the time. Flash forward, and we were right: the molecular gas mass is almost always a distant third behind stars and atomic gas in the baryonic mass budgets of individual galaxies. Nowadays, the concern is about the mass of baryons in the circumgalactic medium (CGM). That’s getting ahead of the story, which I’ll save for a future post. For now, it suffices to note that any baryonic mass in the CGM is far beyond the radius where the flat velocity is measured, so is not relevant to the sums here.
\n","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/kjhq3-pw883","funding_references":null,"guid":"https://tritonstation.com/?p=12429","id":"16210475-cf4e-4ba9-acdd-90353e66a052","image":"https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Fig_VfMstMb.png?fit=2205%2C1917&ssl=1","images":[{"height":"618","sizes":"auto, (max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px","src":"https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/MgMst.png?resize=700%2C618&ssl=1","srcset":"https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/MgMst.png?w=1638&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/MgMst.png?resize=300%2C265&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/MgMst.png?resize=1024%2C904&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/MgMst.png?resize=768%2C678&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/MgMst.png?resize=1536%2C1356&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/MgMst.png?resize=1200%2C1059&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/MgMst.png?w=1400&ssl=1","width":"700"},{"height":"467","sizes":"auto, (max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px","src":"https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/BTFR.png?resize=700%2C467&ssl=1","srcset":"https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/BTFR.png?w=2091&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/BTFR.png?resize=300%2C200&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/BTFR.png?resize=1024%2C683&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/BTFR.png?resize=768%2C512&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/BTFR.png?resize=1536%2C1025&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/BTFR.png?resize=2048%2C1366&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/BTFR.png?resize=1200%2C801&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/BTFR.png?w=1400&ssl=1","width":"700"},{"height":"608","sizes":"auto, (max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px","src":"https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Fig_VfMstMb.png?resize=700%2C608&ssl=1","srcset":"https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Fig_VfMstMb.png?resize=1024%2C890&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Fig_VfMstMb.png?resize=300%2C261&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Fig_VfMstMb.png?resize=768%2C668&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Fig_VfMstMb.png?resize=1536%2C1335&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Fig_VfMstMb.png?resize=2048%2C1781&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Fig_VfMstMb.png?resize=1200%2C1043&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Fig_VfMstMb.png?w=1400&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Fig_VfMstMb.png?w=2100&ssl=1","width":"700"}],"indexed":true,"indexed_at":1778506445,"language":"en","parent_doi":null,"published_at":1778504580,"reference":[],"registered_at":0,"relationships":[],"rid":"czvte-0ra03","status":"active","summary":"Previously I had alluded to some of the major projects I\u2019ve been working on. One has come to fruition and can be found on the arXiv and in the Astrophysical Journal\n\n &\n\n. It has taken many years to assemble the data in this paper, during which time the models purporting to explain some of it have evolved considerably while consistently failing to address the real problems they raise.","tags":["Data Interpretation","Galaxy Evolution","Galaxy Formation","Laws Of Nature","Personal Experience"],"title":"Extended Tully-Fisher relations","updated_at":1778462947,"url":"https://tritonstation.com/2026/05/11/extended-tully-fisher-relations/","version":"v1"}}],"items":[{"abstract":"Way back in 2014, John Hutchinson posted some photos from the Museum of Paleontology Egidio Feruglio in Trelew city, Patagonia, Argentina. John\u2019s original tweets are long gone (quite rightly), but happily we reposted the photos on SV-POW!, so they live on. John\u2019s first photo showed what we now known to be Epachthosaurus.","archive_url":null,"authors":[{"affiliation":[{"id":"https://ror.org/0524sp257","name":"University of Bristol"}],"contributor_roles":[],"family":"Taylor","given":"Mike","url":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1003-5675"}],"blog":{"archive_collection":22153,"archive_host":null,"archive_prefix":"https://wayback.archive-it.org/22153/20231105213934/","archive_timestamps":null,"authors":[{"name":"Mike Taylor"}],"canonical_url":null,"category":"earthAndRelatedEnvironmentalSciences","community_id":"0e13541f-417e-46c0-a859-65927249df72","created_at":1675209600,"current_feed_url":null,"description":"SV-POW! ... All sauropod vertebrae, except when we're talking about Open Access. ISSN 3033-3695","doi":null,"doi_as_guid":false,"favicon":null,"feed_format":"application/atom+xml","feed_url":"https://svpow.com/feed/atom/","filter":null,"funding":null,"generator":"WordPress.com","generator_raw":"WordPress.com","home_page_url":"https://svpow.com","id":"c6cbbd2e-4675-4680-8a3f-784388009821","indexed":false,"issn":"3033-3695","language":"en","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","mastodon":null,"prefix":"10.59350","registered_at":1729882329,"relative_url":null,"ror":null,"secure":true,"slug":"svpow","status":"active","subfield":"1911","subfield_validated":true,"title":"Sauropod Vertebra Picture of the Week","updated_at":1778662651.316354,"use_api":true,"use_mastodon":false,"user_id":"04d03585-c8bb-40f2-9619-5076a5e0aed2"},"blog_name":"Sauropod Vertebra Picture of the Week","blog_slug":"svpow","content_html":"Way back in 2014, John Hutchinson posted some photos from the Museum of Paleontology Egidio Feruglio in Trelew city, Patagonia, Argentina. John’s original tweets are long gone (quite rightly), but happily we reposted the photos on SV-POW!, so they live on.
\nJohn’s first photo showed what we now known to be Epachthosaurus. But the second photo is more interesting for our present purposes:
\nJohn R. Hutchinson \u200f@JohnRHutchinson
@MikeTaylor Here’s the wide view of that exhibit, with about-to-be-squished abelisaur and sulking Amargasaurus.
This also prominently features the Epachthosaurus mount. But as you can see, the foreground also shows another, smaller, sauropod \u2014 also in a rearing pose. But we don’t know what it is. (In a comment, Nima suggested “The smaller one may be a Neuquensaurus with a very wrong Giraffatitan-based skull model” but gave no reason for this ID.)
\nSo I went to look for other photos of the same exhibit. Wikimedia, which is often the best source, has 145 photos of the museum, and I hoped one of them would show the smaller rearing sauropod and give an ID. But no: it seems that a short time after John’s visit, the display was reworked to replace that sauropod with (admittedly very impressive) forelimb material of Patagotitan:
\nCaption from Wikimedia: F\u00f3siles del titanosauria del Chubut en el Museo Egidio Feruglio de Trelew, Chubut, Argentina. Descubiertos en 2013 y presentados en 2014, supuestamente se trata del animal terrestre m\u00e1s grande de la historia de la Tierra. Pesar\u00eda 4 toneladas m\u00e1s que el Argentinosaurus y su f\u00e9mur mide m\u00e1s de dos metros. Translation: Fossils of the Chubut titanosaur at the Egidio Feruglio Museum in Trelew, Chubut, Argentina. Discovered in 2013 and presented in 2014, it is supposedly the largest land animal in Earth’s history. It would have weighed 4 tons more than Argentinosaurus and its femur measures more than two meters.
(Because that photo, like John’s, is from 2014, I briefly wondered whether it was the other way around, and the giant forelimb was replaced by the small rearing sauropod: but no, later photos also show the giant forelimb.)
\nSo it seems that John’s photo is the only one available that shows the old, small, rearing sauropod. (Unless any of you happen to have other such photos?)
\nSo what is it? Wikimedia has a newer photo of a Neuquensaurus mount at the museum, and it looks like it could well be the rearer from the older photo, based on the short cervical ribs, low dorsal neural spines, oddly shaped scapula and hourglass humeri. But it’s hardly a slam-dunk.
\nCan anyone confirm? Is anyone in touch with someone at the museum? And, most of all: does anyone have a good photo of this rearing mount from before it was taken down?
\n\n
The Mexican Meeting on Theoretical Physical Chemistry will have their 25th edition next year (2027). To celebrate it, the journal Theoretical Chemistry Accounts is putting together a special issue, and I\u2019m honored to serve as a guest editor together with a wonderful lineup of Mexican scientists.
\nI want to thank Prof. Juan Carlos Sancho-Garc\u00eda, from the University of Alicante in Spain, and editor in chief for Theo. Chem. Acc. for contacting me and giving us the opportunity to bring into the spotlight the wonderful Comp.Chem. work made by the awesome community who year after year gathers in Mexico to talk and share their research.
\nContributions will be received between May 15th and November 15th, 2026.
\nPlease check the calling at https://link.springer.com/journal/214/collections
\nNEAL G ANDERSON
\n& GUALTIERO PICCININI
\n
\nTHE PHYSICAL SIGNATURE OF COMPUTATION
REVIEWED BY
\nLuke Kersten
The Physical Signature of Computation: A Robust Mapping Account \u25f3
\nNeal G. Anderson and Gualtiero Piccinini
\nOxford University Press, 2024, \u00a380.00
\nISBN 9780198833642
Cite as:
\nKersten, L. (2026). \u2018Neal G. Anderson & Gualtiero Piccinini’s The Physical Signature of Computation\u2019, BJPS Review of Books,\u00a02026, DOI
What distinguishes a smartphone, a laptop, and a human brain from a bucket of water, a rock, and a solar system? One plausible answer is that the former are all instances of physical computing systems, while the latter are not. The trouble is that this answer, while undoubtedly intuitive, is more difficult to justify than one might initially expect. This is the problem of computational implementation, and it is the task of explaining under what conditions a physical system can be said to implement a computation. Some have suggested the problem requires an appeal to causal structure (Chrisley 1995; Chalmers 2011), others reference to semantic properties (Sprevak 2010; Shagrir 2022), while others still recourse to talk of mechanisms, Piccinini among them (Mi\u0142kowski 2014; Piccinini 2015; Dewhurst 2018; Kersten 2024).
\nIn The Physical Signature of Computation, Anderson and Piccinini put forward a bold new proposal: a physical system is a physical computing system if it bears the physical signature of computation. Anderson and Piccinini dub this the \u2018robust mapping account\u2019, and with it they aim to clarify not only the relation between ordinary physical systems and physical computing systems, but also to resolve important outstanding challenges facing computational description in the physical world. Weaving together insights from computer science, physical information theory, and the metaphysics of mind, The Physical Signature of Computation offers a comprehensive and detailed account of the nature of physical computation, written in the characteristically pellucid style one has come to expect from Anderson and Piccinini\u2019s work.
\nThe book is organized into ten chapters, divided (roughly) into three parts. The first two chapters, which mostly involve stage-setting, find Anderson and Piccinini laying out key notions (abstract and concrete computation), distinguishing different positions (mapping, semantic, and mechanistic accounts), drawing important distinctions (computation versus simulation), and explicating desiderata for an account of physical computation (objectivity, explanation, miscomputation, and taxonomy). For those acquainted with the literature on physical computation, or Piccinini\u2019s earlier work, much of this discussion will feel familiar, but for the uninitiated, it aptly serves as a philosophical primer; chapter 2, in particular, provides an admirably clear discussion of the similarities and differences between computational and physical descriptions of physical systems.
\nChapters 3 and 4 are where the discussion really gets going. Here Anderson and Piccinini lay out and defend what they take to be the four key criteria for computational implementation. The first, what they call criterion S, states that a physical-to-computational description must map at least some physical elements (states or forces) of a physical system onto elements (input, state, or output) of a computational system. They further add to S that all the lawful physical dynamics of the physical system must generate the computational dynamics of the computational system, dubbed \u2018dynamical self-consistency\u2019. The second, labelled criterion P, states that every computational state transition specified within a computational system must correspond to one or more lawful physical state transformations of the corresponding physical system. The third, and arguably most important criterion, states that a physical system\u2019s physical states must bear the same amount of information as the computational states they map to. This notion of \u2018physical\u2013computational equivalence\u2019 (or PCE) is crucial to the account. This is because it ensures that inferences about the computational trajectories of a computational system can be made from the occurrence of each and every physical state of the mapping physical system. The fourth, criterion U, states that a physical system must be usable by an agent for a computational purpose. Together, S, P, PCE, and U form the minimal set of criteria that artefacts or natural systems need to satisfy in order to qualify as physical computing systems.
\nAnderson and Piccinini further suggest that these four criteria can be used to construct an evaluative scheme: a framework for gauging the strength of a given computational implementation. If, for example, a physical-to-computational description can be said to satisfy criteria S and P but not PCE or U, then it is weak; traditional mapping and semantic accounts, for instance, fall into this category. If the description satisfies S, P, and PCE but not U, then it is robust; the mechanistic account lands here. But if it satisfies S, P, PCE, and U, then it is a strong computational description; classic electronic digital computers rise to this level. The strength of each class reflects a distinct, identifiable viewpoint on implementation. Anderson and Piccinini offer a useful flow chart for mapping out assessments according to this scheme (p. 119).
\nChapter 5 puts everything together. A physical system is said to be a physical computing system if and only if the physical states of the physical system (or subsystems) map onto the values of the computational variables (state, input, and output) of a computational system (S) in accord with its computational dynamics (P) such that the physical states bear the same amount of information about the computational trajectory of the computational system as the computational variables (PCE). This is the \u2018physical signature\u2019 of computation. Physical-to-computational descriptions must be equivalent such that no information is lost when one moves from the physical to computational descriptions of a physical system. Much of chapter 5 is dedicated to fleshing out the sense of informational equivalence required to qualify as a robust physical-to-computational description; it also includes a novel and interesting discussion of how the robust mapping account can be formalized using physical information theory, what the authors refer to as the \u2018referential\u2019 approach (pp. 132\u201342).
\nNow, if chapters 3 and 4 build the engine, and chapter 5 assembles the chassis, then chapters 6 to 8 provide the test track. For it is here that the robust mapping account is put through its paces against one of the perennial foes of concrete computation: pan-computationalism. Anderson and Piccinini take aim specifically at three different versions of pan-computationalism: an \u2018unlimited\u2019 formulation, which states that every physical system can perform every computation; a \u2018limited\u2019 formulation, which states that every physical system performs at least one computation; and an ontic formulation, which states that the universe itself is either a digital or quantum computing system. Each formulation gets its own chapter.
\nThe argumentation in these chapters is sustained and meticulous, in several places drawing on the resources developed in the evaluative framework of chapter 4. To provide just one brief example, against a Chalmers-inspired argument for unlimited pan-computationalism using a finite-state automaton (FSA), Anderson and Piccinini argue that at best the construction amounts to offering a weak computational description (it satisfies criteria S and P but violates PCE; pp. 158\u201360). But given that physical\u2013computational equivalence (PCE) is a necessary requirement on physical computation, such an argument fails to establish anything like a robust physical-to-computational description, and so can be rejected. Chapter 8 also has some really nice discussion of how ontic pan-computationalism problematically erases the distinction between a simulator and its simulated target system.
\nIn chapter 9, which I found the most interesting, Anderson and Piccinini shift gears slightly and connect their account to computational theories of mind. After some preliminary stage setting (a mind is defined as a system exhibiting cognitive capacities and possibly consciousness), they argue that while cognition can be explained by neural computation\u2014which is amenable to the robust mapping account\u2014further supplemented with a notion of teleological function, consciousness is a bridge too far. Consciousness, they suggest, involves more than just computation; it likely requires physical qualities that go beyond computational description.
\nThis discussion I found slightly hasty. For example, after nicely laying out several options on the nature of consciousness, including computational functionalism and non-computational functionalism, Anderson and Piccinini respond to the former view: \u2018But eliminativism [illusionism] falls flat. If \u201cconscious phenomenal experience\u201d were purely a matter of structure and causal powers, we should conclude that there would just not be any conscious phenomenal experience. But at least sometimes, we do have phenomenal experiences\u2019 (p. 262). This is a bit too quick. Claiming that \u2018phenomenal\u2019 consciousness is not what some take it to be, as the illusionist does, is not the same as denying that consciousness exists full stop.
\nChapter 10 rounds off discussion by consolidating the robust mapping account, relating it back to the four initial desiderata (objectivity, explanation, miscomputation, and taxonomy) and the three accounts laid out in chapter 1 (mapping, semantic, and mechanistic), along with briefly sketching a unifying account of biological and artefact computation.
\nTaking a slight step back, among the book\u2019s many carefully crafted arguments and insights, there are a few loose ends briefly worth noting. One is that some readers may wonder about the relation between this new account and Piccinini\u2019s previous work on mechanistic computation (for example, Piccinini 2015), which holds that computational explanation is a species of mechanistic explanation, and computational mechanisms are a special type of functional mechanism. While there is some brief discussion of mechanistic computation (chap. 10.3.3), and it is suggested the two accounts are indeed compatible, one may still be left wondering whether this new account, if correct, leaves the mechanistic account in a slightly awkward position. Has the mechanistic account now become obsolete? Should those attracted to this view close up shop or is there more work to be done?
\nA second, somewhat curious omission is the relation between computational description and computational modelling practice in other domains, such as cognitive science and neuroscience. Several authors, for instance, have recently attempted to wed their implementational accounts of computation quite closely to the explanatory practices of these domains; some have even criticized implementational accounts for failing to do so (for example, Shagrir 2022; Chirimuuta 2024). The Physical Signature of Computation, in contrast, is largely occupied with conceptual refinement, formalization, and metaphysical argument, with a heavy emphasis on computer science and engineering. This is certainly valuable and welcomed work, but one may be left wondering how this new account squares with computational explanation and modelling practices elsewhere.
\nFinally, and I offer this more as a warning than criticism, some readers may find the level of detail in certain places of the discussion slightly overwhelming. While much of the formal heavy lifting is postponed to the two appendices, the book can, particularly in the dense thicket of arguments against pan-computationalism, make for some hefty reading, despite Anderson and Piccinini\u2019s admirable efforts to keep things accessible.
\nTaken as a whole, The Physical Signature of Computation is a clear triumph. Anderson and Piccinini have put forward a substantive, meticulously crafted work, not only in terms of a novel and sophisticated account of implementation, but also in terms of working out the formal implications. With expert clarity and attention to detail, Anderson and Piccinini have offered an excellent example of how to assemble a clear-headed, rigorous treatment of physical computation. The book will be of interest not only to philosophers with a taste for metaphysical argument and formal detail, but those more generally interested in understanding the foundations of contemporary cognitive and computational science.
\nLuke Kersten
\nUniversity of Alberta
\nkersten@ualberta.ca
References
\nDewhurst, J. (2018). \u2018Individuation Without Representation\u2019,\u00a0British Journal for the Philosophy of Science,\u00a069, pp. 103\u201316.
\nChalmers, D. (2011). \u2018A Computational Foundation for the Study of Cognition\u2019,\u00a0Journal of Cognitive Science,\u00a012, pp. 323\u201357.
\nChirimuuta, M. (2024). The Brain Abstracted: Simplification in the History of Neuroscience, MIT Press.
\nChrisley, R. (1995). \u2018Why Everything Doesn\u2019t Realize Every Computation\u2019,\u00a0Minds and Machines,\u00a04, pp. 403\u201330.
\nKersten, L. (2024). \u2018An Idealised Account of Mechanistic Computation\u2019,\u00a0Synthese, 203, available at <doi.org/10.1007/s11229-024-04526-x>.
\nMi\u0142kowski, M. (2014). \u2018Computational Mechanism and Models of Cognition\u2019, Philosophia Scientiae,\u00a018, pp. 215\u201328.
\nPiccinini, G. (2015). Physical Computation: A Mechanistic Account, Oxford University Press.
\nShagrir, O. (2022). The Nature of Physical Computation, Oxford University Press.
\nSprevak, M. (2010). \u2018Computation, Individuation and the Received View on Representation\u2019,\u00a0Studies in the History of Philosophy of Science A,\u00a041, pp. 260\u201370.
\n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t https://i0.wp.com/www.thebsps.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/Thumb-Allen.png?fit=398%2C280&ssl=1\n\t\t\t\t\t 280\n\t\t\t\t\t 398\n\t\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\tThe BJPS\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t http://www.thebsps.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/BSPS-blue.gif\n\t\t\t\t \n\t\t\t The BJPS2026-05-05 07:00:432026-05-11 17:21:52Susana Mons\u00f3, Playing Possum\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t https://i0.wp.com/www.thebsps.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Thumb-Clarke-on-Northcott.png?fit=398%2C280&ssl=1\n\t\t\t\t\t 280\n\t\t\t\t\t 398\n\t\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\tThe BJPS\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t http://www.thebsps.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/BSPS-blue.gif\n\t\t\t\t \n\t\t\t The BJPS2026-04-28 07:00:572026-05-11 17:36:59Robert Northcott, Science for a Fragile World\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t https://i0.wp.com/www.thebsps.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/Thumb-Dupre.png?fit=398%2C280&ssl=1\n\t\t\t\t\t 280\n\t\t\t\t\t 398\n\t\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\tThe BJPS\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t http://www.thebsps.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/BSPS-blue.gif\n\t\t\t\t \n\t\t\t The BJPS2026-04-21 07:00:542026-05-11 17:36:50Ellen Clarke, The Units of Life
\n
Sound the clarion! It’s time to help SV-POW! once more!
\nI’m working on a paper about mounted rearing skeletons of sauropods, and I want to include figures that show various examples. To be included in a CC By open-access paper, it’s simplest if the photos are also CC By. But for some of the mounts I know about, I’ve not been able to find CC By images, or contact the owners of otherly-licenced images to ask for an exception.
\nSo I am asking our loyal readers to help out by sending their own photos of the relevant mounts and licensing them CC By (taking new photos if necessary!). Obviously I will mention all contributors in the acknowledgements. You can comment here with links, or email dino@miketaylor.org.uk
\nHere are the ones I need (there may be more in future):
\nThe smaller of the two skeletons in this photo:
\n
This photo is by Ben Miller of Extinct Monsters, who I’m sure would be happy to licence it, but it’s … well, it’s not very good. It has the mount in question as a bit-player, and it’s from an angle that doesn’t do a great job of capturing the rearing. Can anyone do better?
\n
This photo is from Facebook with no license specified \u2014 posted by the museum itself, but in my experience I’ve not been able to establish good communication with its staff. If anyone in and around Houston has a good photo, that would be great!
\n
This is in Sydney. The photo is from Wikimedia, but it’s CC By-SA, and I can’t find a way to contact the uploader or photographer.
\n
This one is an oddity. The photo I have here seems to be the only one of the exhibit on the whole Internet. It’s from a Reddit post by a user (EmptySpaceForAHeart) who has been banned, and is consequently uncontactable. So if anyone has, or can find, or can take, another photo of this skeleton, that would be great!
\nThat’s it for now! Thank you, all!
\n\n
Thanks to everyone who’s contributed! I now have decent CC By photos of the Smithsonian juvenile Camarasaurus (from Matt Wedel) and the Houston Galeamopus (from Ben Miller). I have a promise of photos of the Zurich baby diplodocid (from Tom van der Linden) when he visits there shortly. And the photographer of the Australian Museum Jobaria has replied to my comment on the Flickr page. So it looks like I’m all set!
\nThank you all.
\n\n
With the world in its current state, there is a wide interest in both how we preserve what is good in research systems and make necessary improvements. Ensuring sustainability and quality of support in the organisations and communities that make up the research landscape is crucial. But there are also deep problems in our communities and organisations, including structural issues that lead to poor practice and fraud, deep and ongoing inequities and exclusions, and failures in the mentoring and support systems that are needed by the next generations of researchers.
\n\n\n\nIt was against this background that we started a workstream to look at indicators of research culture and environment within the RoRI AGORRA project, culminating in a new Working Paper being published today. AGORRA (standing for A Global Observatory of Responsible Research Assessment) is a project focused on understanding and cataloguing national evaluation systems in different parts of the world. By working closely with the funder representatives on the AGORRA team, we were able to ground our research in a diverse set of national contexts, which shaped the ultimate focus of the paper.
\n\n\n\nAt the beginning I was keen to ensure we try to take a wide perspective on what was meant by \u201cresearch culture\u201d and \u201cresearch environment\u201d. One that was inclusive of the differing contexts represented in AGORRA and RoRI more generally. These terms were being used in the UK as part of the REF (which has included aspects of \u201cresearch environment\u201d previously) with a pilot on \u201cPeople, Culture and Environment\u201d running in parallel with our workstream. I was also keen to get a perspective on where (and whether) the terms were being used in other settings.
\n\n\n\nWhat was clear was that — within contexts of research evaluation or monitoring — the terms \u201cresearch culture\u201d and \u201cresearch environment\u201d were used to focus attention on different (but often overlapping) issues in different contexts. The demographic diversity of research staff was a common, but not universal, issue. In some contexts, research practice and integrity were the most significant issues linked with \u201cculture\u201d, but in others these were one of many. \u201cEnvironment\u201d could refer to the qualities of career structures, the availability of financial or digital resources, or the safety of buildings, alongside the presence of policy instruments.
\n\n\n\nWe don\u2019t always mean the same things by \u201cenvironment\u201d and \u201cculture\u201d. They are used in different ways in different contexts and often without a clear definition. Environment tends to refer to structures and organisations, and culture to communities and people, but there were variations. This makes sense; one person\u2019s culture (say that of a senior researcher in a specific organisation) might be experienced by another as part of the environment in which they have little say (e.g. a junior researcher, or a community stakeholder like an interested patient).
\n\n\n\nThere were many \u201careas of concern\u201d that were common across contexts, but none were a universal priority. Research practice, demographic diversity and inclusion, resourcing, career structures and opportunities, researcher mobility, wider engagement and open communication were all areas that appeared in multiple contexts.
\n\n\n\nWhen it comes to examining these there are many existing indicators that might be applicable in a monitoring or evaluation context for specific areas of concern. Most of these come from two places. The first is existing reporting requirements for organisations, either imposed by government, or as part of programs such as ATHENA Swan focusing on gender diversity and inclusion. The second source is the monitoring of research outputs. Both sources provide a foundation for developing improved indicators.The concentration of these existing and potential indicators in two areas, and the fact that they are relevant to specific areas, leads to a question: is there a way to put indicators in context and define gaps? We need a framework that will help us relate them to one another. For example, there are many existing indicators which might be useful for examining organisations, but very few of these could currently be applied to communities. The data simply isn\u2019t reported that way.
\n\n\n\nThis aspect of communities and organisations plus the presence of many output-based indicators lead us to Ostrom\u2019s Institutional Analysis and Development framework (IAD). IAD is used to understand how characteristics of a setting (made up of organisations, communities and the formal and informal rules they use) come together in specific interactions (called an \u201caction arena\u201d) to generate outcomes which\u00a0 through a process of feedback change the organisations, communities and rules that make up the setting.
\n\n\n\nThe IAD framework reminds us that what matters here is how the feedback from monitoring and evaluation processes is received and leads to change, or leads to stabilisation. While we have many indicators of specific areas of concern, we have few if any that help us to understand whether organisations and communities are ready to process feedback productively. Do they have the capacity to engage with it, and if so, make good use of it?
\n\n\n\nThe project both defined many indicators that might be useful in specific contexts but also, as a result, that no single indicator (or even a \u201cbasket\u201d of them) can capture the complexity of research cultures and environments. Whether the policy goal is change or stabilisation, the IAD framework shows we need to consider how any indicators we do implement are received, and be ready to adapt, change or abandon them if they lead to adverse responses.
\n","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/wyh18-mbt14","funding_references":null,"guid":"https://cameronneylon.net/?p=20109","id":"cf135d0b-7f55-40b1-a378-fc636d042aec","image":"https://cameronneylon.net/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/telescope.jpg","images":[],"indexed":true,"indexed_at":1778520726,"language":"en","parent_doi":null,"published_at":1778519122,"reference":[],"registered_at":0,"relationships":[],"rid":"vkaqy-gqq64","status":"active","summary":"With the world in its current state, there is a wide interest in both how we preserve what is good in research systems and make necessary improvements. Ensuring sustainability and quality of support in the organisations and communities that make up the research landscape is crucial.","tags":["Featured","Agorra","Indicators","Research Culture","Research Environment"],"title":"The more things change, the more they need to stay the same: The challenges and opportunities of monitoring research cultures and environments","updated_at":1778519122,"url":"https://cameronneylon.net/blog/the-more-things-change-the-more-they-need-to-stay-the-same-the-challenges-and-opportunities-of-monitoring-research-cultures-and-environments/","version":"v1"},{"abstract":"Die Vernetzungs- und Kompetenzstelle Open Access Brandenburg ist seit M\u00e4rz dieses Jahres assoziiertes Mitglied im National Chapter Germany\u00a0der\u00a0Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment (CoARA). Damit gewinnt das Thema der Forschungsbewertung in Verbindung mit offener Wissenschaft auch f\u00fcr uns eine neue Bedeutung.","archive_url":null,"authors":[{"contributor_roles":[],"family":"Kaden","given":"Ben","url":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8021-1785"}],"blog":{"archive_collection":24084,"archive_host":null,"archive_prefix":null,"archive_timestamps":null,"authors":null,"canonical_url":null,"category":"otherSocialSciences","community_id":"00dd7e11-a802-44c1-9584-5c56d1f8d417","created_at":1706861187,"current_feed_url":null,"description":"Vernetzungs- und Kompetenzstelle Open Access Brandenburg","doi":null,"doi_as_guid":false,"favicon":"https://rogue-scholar.org/api/communities/00dd7e11-a802-44c1-9584-5c56d1f8d417/logo","feed_format":"application/atom+xml","feed_url":"https://open-access-brandenburg.de/feed/atom","filter":null,"funding":null,"generator":"WordPress","generator_raw":"WordPress 6.7.1","home_page_url":"https://open-access-brandenburg.de","id":"f3e666fd-7d84-4c7e-9177-6febb1a076ce","indexed":false,"issn":null,"language":"de","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","mastodon":null,"prefix":"10.59350","registered_at":1729803804,"relative_url":null,"ror":null,"secure":true,"slug":"oabrandenburg","status":"active","subfield":"1802","subfield_validated":null,"title":"Open Access Brandenburg","updated_at":1778662187.421062,"use_api":false,"use_mastodon":false,"user_id":"36565831-b661-4f85-8e3a-fd190dd746a8"},"blog_name":"Open Access Brandenburg","blog_slug":"oabrandenburg","content_html":"Die Vernetzungs- und Kompetenzstelle Open Access Brandenburg ist seit M\u00e4rz dieses Jahres assoziiertes Mitglied im National Chapter Germany\u00a0der\u00a0Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment (CoARA). Damit gewinnt das Thema der Forschungsbewertung in Verbindung mit offener Wissenschaft auch f\u00fcr uns eine neue Bedeutung. Als eine Art Auftaktdokument von unserer Seite legten wir vor Kurzem eine Handreichung vor: Ben Kaden, Philipp Falkenburg, Ellen Euler (2026): Research Assessment Reform: Why CoARA is Essential for Open Science. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19567919.
\nAm 28. April 2026 gab es eine Sitzung des CoARA National Chapter Germany, an der wir ebenfalls teilnahmen. Aus der Veranstaltung lassen sich f\u00fcr die VuK und ihre Arbeit f\u00fcnf Takeaways mitnehmen:\u00a0
\nDie Wirkung von Open-Access-Strategien wird bekanntlich verst\u00e4rkt und durchaus auch kritisch diskutiert. Zugleich stellen sie f\u00fcr die Themensetzung und Aktivierung nach wie vor ein wichtiges Instrument dar. Entsprechend geht es auch bei CoARA\u00a0 weiterhin stark um die Entwicklung von Leitlinien, die einzelne Initiativen, Projekte und Reformans\u00e4tze zusammenf\u00fchren. Das passt gut zur VuK und zur Idee einer kodifizierten brandenburgischen Perspektive auf Open Science und Forschungsbewertung.
\nNeben Leitlinien oder ggf. Policies m\u00fcssen neue oder alternative Modelle der Forschungsbewertung wirksam in die Praxis \u00fcberf\u00fchrt werden. N\u00f6tig sind Anwendungsf\u00e4lle, Pilotierungen und vielleicht auch Prototypen. Die VuK wird gezielt danach schauen, an welchen Stellen entsprechende Kooperationen m\u00f6glich sind.
\nDas Themenfeld und die Ziele von CoARA m\u00fcssen f\u00fcr unterschiedliche Zielgruppen jeweils passend aufbereitet und kommuniziert werden. Zu diesen Zielgruppen geh\u00f6rt ausdr\u00fccklich auch die Wissenschaftspolitik. Die M\u00f6glichkeit, Forschungsbewertung vielf\u00e4ltiger zu denken, und die Rolle von CoARA als Innovationsansatz ben\u00f6tigen mehr Sichtbarkeit. Dies ist prim\u00e4r eine Aufgabe der strategischen Kommunikation. Die VuK verankert das Thema konsequent in ihren Netzwerken, um Stakeholder gezielt zu aktivieren und in den Reformprozess einzubinden.
\nForschungsbewertung und Open-Science-Infrastruktur werden immer enger zusammengedacht. Das sieht auch die DFG so und unterst\u00fctzt, wie Angela Holzer auf der Tagung ausf\u00fchrlich auff\u00e4cherte, unter anderem Open Research Europe (ORE). Gleichzeitig bleibt die Frage, wie praxistaugliche L\u00f6sungen in der Breite implementiert werden k\u00f6nnen. Daraus ergeben sich weitere Kooperationsideen. W\u00e4hrend CoARA hier stark auf die EU-Ebene ausgerichtet ist, kann die VuK diese Aktivit\u00e4ten und Entwicklungen nach Brandenburg zur\u00fcckbinden. Ein Verbindungselement k\u00f6nnte zum Beispiel die gezielte Vermittlung entstehender europ\u00e4ischer Diamond-Open-Access-L\u00f6sungen f\u00fcr die Einrichtungen im Land sein.\u00a0
\nAktivit\u00e4ten von Projekten wie ARRAtools4U und insbesondere auch des Helmholtz Open Science Office zeigen, dass die Entwicklung von Tools, datenbasierten Methoden und neuen Ans\u00e4tzen wie Narrative CVs ein praktischer Weg sind, um neue bzw. alternative Formen der Forschungsbewertung zu realisieren. Auch zu diesen Themen wird die VuK Kompetenzen aufbauen, b\u00fcndeln und weitergeben.
\nDie aktuellen Trends in der Forschungsbewertung bewegen sich weg von abstrakten Reformdebatten hin zu st\u00e4rkerer Kodifizierung, konkreter Umsetzung, zielgruppenspezifischer Kommunikation und toolgest\u00fctzter Entwicklung von praxisrelevanten L\u00f6sungen. F\u00fcr das Land Brandenburg bietet sich darin die Chance, regionale Perspektiven produktiv mit den europ\u00e4ischen Entwicklungen im CoARA-Kontext zu verzahnen. Die VuK wird diesen Prozess aktiv begleiten und die Einrichtungen des Landes dabei unterst\u00fctzen, die notwendigen Transformationsschritte kompetent umzusetzen.
","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/gc87q-3wj90","funding_references":null,"guid":"https://open-access-brandenburg.de/?p=9744","id":"7aed8f2d-2f63-49e7-9a2b-17371a0a1f1d","image":null,"images":[],"indexed":true,"indexed_at":1778517764,"language":"de","parent_doi":null,"published_at":1778515488,"reference":[],"registered_at":0,"relationships":[],"rid":"s5n8t-0ne47","status":"active","summary":"Die Vernetzungs- und Kompetenzstelle Open Access Brandenburg ist seit M\u00e4rz dieses Jahres assoziiertes Mitglied im National Chapter Germany\u00a0der\n\n Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment\n\n(CoARA). Damit gewinnt das Thema der Forschungsbewertung in Verbindung mit offener Wissenschaft auch f\u00fcr uns eine neue Bedeutung.","tags":["OA Takeaways","CoARA","Forschungsbewertung","Open Access Brandenburg","Open Science"],"title":"OA-Takeways: Aktuelle Trends in der Forschungsbewertung bei CoARA und mit Blick auf die VuK","updated_at":1778515488,"url":"https://open-access-brandenburg.de/forschungsbewertung-trends-2026/","version":"v1"},{"abstract":"DOI: 10.60804/CQ98-3H62 By Iratxe Puebla Three years ago, I took on the rewarding challenge of leading Make Data Count\u2018s work to build the tools, practices, and community needed to drive recognition for data as a primary research output. As I prepare to transition out of the role as Director of...","archive_url":null,"authors":[{"contributor_roles":[],"name":"Make Data Count"}],"blog":{"archive_collection":23800,"archive_host":null,"archive_prefix":null,"archive_timestamps":null,"authors":null,"canonical_url":null,"category":"computerAndInformationSciences","community_id":"381bb9de-664b-4c4d-8286-4296f154b882","created_at":1733582630,"current_feed_url":null,"description":null,"doi":null,"doi_as_guid":false,"favicon":"https://rogue-scholar.org/api/communities/381bb9de-664b-4c4d-8286-4296f154b882/logo","feed_format":"application/atom+xml","feed_url":"https://makedatacount.org/feed/atom","filter":null,"funding":null,"generator":"WordPress","generator_raw":"WordPress","home_page_url":"https://makedatacount.org/read-our-blog/","id":"8bba2a52-1b3a-4510-97fd-c75b98dc76c8","indexed":true,"issn":null,"language":"en","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","mastodon":null,"prefix":null,"registered_at":0,"relative_url":null,"ror":null,"secure":true,"slug":"mdc","status":"active","subfield":"1710","subfield_validated":null,"title":"Make Data Count","updated_at":1778662012.604909,"use_api":null,"use_mastodon":false,"user_id":"dead81b3-8a8b-45c9-85fe-f01bb3948c77"},"blog_name":"Make Data Count","blog_slug":"mdc","content_html":"\nBy Iratxe Puebla
\nThree years ago, I took on the rewarding challenge of leading Make Data Count\u2018s work to build the tools, practices, and community needed to drive recognition for data as a primary research output. As I prepare to transition out of the role as Director of Make Data Count at the end of this month, I wanted to take the opportunity to reflect on what we have accomplished over the last years.
\nOne of the first items I addressed in this role was the development of our strategic plan, informed by input from the Advisory Group and community members. An important exercise to guide the initiative\u2019s work, the strategic plan identified four key areas of focus around infrastructure, research assessment, sustainability, and establishing data metrics as the standard. The plan reflected the initiative\u2019s broad efforts, keeping focus on infrastructure for data-usage tracking, but also spanning beyond into driving positive change in practices and research assessment to make data evaluation and recognition the norm.
\nA key activity to support that cultural change was the Make Data Count Summit. The goal of this event was to crystallize conversations about the use and reach of data as their own topic, shining a light on the importance of meaningful data evaluation as a practice building on, but separate, from data sharing. We picked the designation of a Summit because it reflected the fact that we were still on the journey for data evaluation and recognition to become the norm, and that while the steps ahead may not be easy, we could see the endpoint we were working towards. The success of the Make Data Count Summits highlighted the community\u2019s needs in data evaluation and the support for dedicated efforts to advance on this journey. It was inspiring to see the community\u2019s engagement, and the collaborations that developed from these events. As an example, the discussion about tenure and promotion practices at the Make Data Count Summit led us to collaborate with session panelists to write the \u2018Ten simple rules for recognizing data and software contributions in hiring, promotion, and tenure\u2019.
\nThe Make Data Count Summits and other community forums showcased the increasing interest by groups and organizations in understanding data usage, and also that groups were experimenting with different approaches. Make Data Count had recognized early on that in order for data-usage information to be used, this needs to be captured and shared in ways that enable interpretation across sectors, platforms and domains. This motivated the work to normalize data-usage information through practices and tools such as COUNTER Code of Practice for Research Data and the usage tracker. Continuing on this philosophy, Make Data Count became a co-leader of the Data Usage Typologies Working Group, a community effort to develop a uniform framework to describe data usage, which has recently shared its typology of data uses.
\nInfrastructure has remained a key area of Make Data Count\u2019s work. We have developed the Data Citation Corpus, an open aggregate of data citations to better understand how data is used in the literature. This project brought two key highlights for me. On the personal level, it gave me an opportunity to learn more about key metadata workflows for data and research information. For Make Data Count, it opened up new ways to scale data-usage information and provide the community with a tool to respond to growing data-evaluation needs. I have particularly enjoyed this project\u2019s focus on collaboration. The Corpus aims to elevate the contributions of groups that are already doing important work identifying links between datasets and articles, and it has been great to see the interest in contributing data citations from infrastructure providers such as Europe PMC, funders -ASAP, Chan Zuckerberg Initiative-, and publishers. The identification of data-article links and their inclusion in research information workflows as important metadata is a shared challenge and has received attention through other community efforts such as the Barcelona Declaration and OSMI (Open Science Monitoring Initiative), which Make Data Count contributes to.
\nI am particularly proud of our work supporting inclusion of data in research assessment. This was a new area of activity for Make Data Count, and I value the collaborations we have undertaken to support steps toward recognition of data as important outputs in evaluation. In addition to ongoing collaborations with DORA and other open science and research assessment reform groups, last year I had the privilege of facilitating the collaboration between Make Data Count and HELIOS Open. This was a successful collaboration between institutional representatives and data experts, which resulted in key resources to implement inclusion of data in institutional processes like tenure and promotion.\u00a0
\nOur participation in the SCOSS program has been another valuable opportunity to engage with representatives of institutions and libraries, key constituents in the data space. Make Data Count has attracted important support from institutions in Europe, Canada and Australia, and I thank all of them and the colleagues in the SCOSS-supported infrastructures for their support, encouragement and valuable feedback.
\nMake Data Count\u2019s activities and my own would not be possible without our community members, partners and volunteers. I want to thank you for supporting me and Make Data Count over the last three years. Thank you to the Make Data Count advisers who have contributed their time and energy across all areas of the initiative, from strategic planning, to representing Make Data Count at events, and collaborating on different projects. I am also grateful to the colleagues at DataCite who have generously helped me with metadata and workflow queries, addressed infrastructure needs, and provided feedback and ideas. It has been a privilege to work with Clare Dean on our outreach and in preparation of our resources. And of course, many thanks to our many collaborators from across research, open infrastructure, publishing, funders, and institutions, for sharing valuable insights and for keeping us on track on what matters most to advance recognition for data.
\nMake Data Count will pursue its essential work. There will be more updates from the development of the Data Citation Corpus and approaches to identify data citations later in the year, and the initiative will continue to play a key role in collaborations with community groups to advance research assessment reform to recognize data and other open outputs.
\nThe summit of data being recognized as a primary output is still ahead, but the community is firmly advancing on this path. I am privileged to have contributed to that journey. I\u2019ll remain an advocate of open science and responsible evaluation, and I look forward to seeing what the Make Data Count community will achieve next.
","doi":"https://doi.org/10.60804/cq98-3h62","funding_references":null,"guid":"https://makedatacount.org/?p=1791","id":"71882dda-2d19-40d5-9db1-85b64d80729e","image":"https://makedatacount.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Untitled-3-1024x451.png","images":[{"alt":"Image by Sebastien Spagnou, CC BY license.","height":"330","sizes":"(max-width: 750px) 100vw, 750px","src":"https://makedatacount.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Untitled-3-1024x451.png","srcset":"https://makedatacount.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Untitled-3-1024x451.png, https://makedatacount.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Untitled-3-600x264.png, https://makedatacount.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Untitled-3-768x338.png, https://makedatacount.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Untitled-3-1536x677.png, https://makedatacount.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Untitled-3-1568x691.png, https://makedatacount.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Untitled-3.png","width":"750"},{"alt":"Image by Sebastien Spagnou, CC BY license.","src":"https://makedatacount.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Untitled-3-1024x451.png"}],"indexed":false,"indexed_at":0,"language":"en","parent_doi":null,"published_at":1778513983,"reference":[],"registered_at":0,"relationships":[],"rid":null,"status":"active","summary":"DOI: 10.60804/CQ98-3H62\n\n By Iratxe Puebla\n\nThree years ago, I took on the rewarding challenge of leading Make Data Count\u2018s work to build the tools, practices, and community needed to drive recognition for data as a primary research output.","tags":["Community","Data Citation Corpus","Leadership","Outreach","Summit"],"title":"On the ascent and with the summit in sight \u2013 Reflections on three years at Make Data Count","updated_at":1778513983,"url":"https://makedatacount.org/read-our-blog/on-the-ascent/","version":"v1"},{"abstract":null,"archive_url":null,"authors":[{"affiliation":[{"id":"https://ror.org/04h13ss13","name":"The Geneva Learning Foundation"}],"contributor_roles":[],"family":"Sadki","given":"Reda","url":"https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4051-0606"}],"blog":{"archive_collection":null,"archive_host":null,"archive_prefix":null,"archive_timestamps":null,"authors":null,"canonical_url":null,"category":"educationalSciences","community_id":"7e26491f-41c6-4665-9088-5aa6643a1ba8","created_at":1731211871,"current_feed_url":null,"description":"Learning to make a difference","doi":null,"doi_as_guid":false,"favicon":null,"feed_format":"application/atom+xml","feed_url":"https://redasadki.me/feed/atom/","filter":null,"funding":null,"generator":"WordPress","generator_raw":"WordPress 6.7.1","home_page_url":"https://redasadki.me","id":"88b8caba-b485-4654-96ce-a21547abaab3","indexed":true,"issn":null,"language":"en","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","mastodon":"https://techhub.social/@redasadki","prefix":"10.59350","registered_at":0,"relative_url":null,"ror":null,"secure":true,"slug":"redasadki","status":"active","subfield":"3304","subfield_validated":null,"title":"Reda Sadki","updated_at":1778662357.186458,"use_api":true,"use_mastodon":false,"user_id":"0d34dfde-a007-4ec9-9bc6-7b0318fa2c5e"},"blog_name":"Reda Sadki","blog_slug":"redasadki","content_html":"\nKINSHASA (9 mai 2026) \u2013 Un samedi matin, dans une salle de l\u2019Universit\u00e9 Mazenod de Kitambo, les premiers arriv\u00e9s ouvrent les fen\u00eatres et alignent des chaises.
\n\n\n\nPlusieurs portent un maillot blanc marqu\u00e9 du nom de la Fondation Apprendre Gen\u00e8ve.
\n\n\n\nCent trente-deux Scholars congolais avaient confirm\u00e9 leur participation.
\n\n\n\nQuarante-trois se sont connect\u00e9s depuis Mbandaka, Kasumbalesa, Lubumbashi, Bukavu, Kalemie.
\n\n\n\n\u00c0 l\u2019\u00e9cran, des coll\u00e8gues d\u2019autres pays attendent aussi.
\n\n\n\nOn retrouve le Cameroun, le Mali, la C\u00f4te d\u2019Ivoire, le Niger, le B\u00e9nin, le Tchad, le Togo, la Tanzanie.
\n\n\n\nPatrice Bamulenga est un des Ambassadeurs de la Fondation pour la R\u00e9publique d\u00e9mocratique du Congo. Il avait lanc\u00e9 l\u2019id\u00e9e de cette r\u00e9union, et c\u2019est lui qui prend le premier micro.
\nQui d\u2019autre se retrouve au croisement des chemins, entre ceux de Kinshasa et ceux d\u2019ailleurs ?
\n\n\n\nHenri Stanley NYAFE est infirmier \u00e0 Mbandaka.
\n\n\n\nViviane Mukalay est infirmi\u00e8re au centre de sant\u00e9 Neema, dans la zone de sant\u00e9 de Sakania, \u00e0 la fronti\u00e8re avec la Zambie.
\n\n\n\nElle s\u2019est connect\u00e9e depuis Kasumbalesa.
\n\n\n\nFran\u00e7ois Mufolo Balimumu a pass\u00e9 vingt ans \u00e0 l\u2019h\u00f4pital Sendwe de Lubumbashi avant de partir en mission avec M\u00e9decins sans fronti\u00e8res et Alima.
\n\n\n\nCette ann\u00e9e, la Fondation Apprendre Gen\u00e8ve f\u00eate dix ans d\u2019existence.
\n\n\n\n\u00c0 Kinshasa, ce sont les Scholars de la RDC qui ont d\u00e9cid\u00e9 de f\u00eater ce qu\u2019ils appellent sans d\u00e9tour leurs dix ans.
\n\n\n\nIls ont retenu la salle, fait imprimer les maillots, recrut\u00e9 un panel d\u2019experts qui ont accept\u00e9 de venir un samedi matin.
\n\n\n\nIls ont plac\u00e9, en cl\u00f4ture, l\u2019inscription au prochain programme commun de la Fondation, sur le paludisme.
\n\n\n\nCharlotte Mbuh, directrice des programmes de la Fondation, s\u2019est connect\u00e9e depuis \u00c9bolowa, au Cameroun.
\n\n\n\nReda Sadki, fondateur, depuis Gen\u00e8ve.
\n\n\n\nLes deux ont \u00e9cout\u00e9 plus de trois heures avant de prendre la parole.
\n\n\n\nLa RDC concentre, selon l\u2019Organisation mondiale de la sant\u00e9, 12,6 % des cas de paludisme dans le monde et plus d\u2019un d\u00e9c\u00e8s sur dix qui en r\u00e9sultent.
\n\n\n\nElle est, apr\u00e8s le Nig\u00e9ria, le pays le plus touch\u00e9 de la plan\u00e8te.
\n\n\n\nCes chiffres ne sont pas un d\u00e9cor.
\n\n\n\nChaque cas reste, pour la famille concern\u00e9e, le co\u00fbt d\u2019un m\u00e9dicament, d\u2019un test, d\u2019un transport, d\u2019un repas qui ne sera pas pris.
\n\n\n\n\u00c0 l\u2019ouverture, Charlotte Mbuh r\u00e9sume ce que la matin\u00e9e doit \u00eatre. \u00ab Aujourd\u2019hui, ce n\u2019est pas une formation, c\u2019est une c\u00e9l\u00e9bration. Nous c\u00e9l\u00e9brons dix ans d\u2019apprentissage par les pairs, dix ans de partage d\u2019exp\u00e9rience, dix ans d\u2019am\u00e9lioration de la qualit\u00e9 du service que nous offrons \u00e0 nos communaut\u00e9s. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nElle encha\u00eene sans transition. \u00ab Dix ans, ce n\u2019est pas la fin. C\u2019est juste une nouvelle \u00e9tape qui commence, et nous voulons lancer cette nouvelle \u00e9tape avec notre programme du paludisme, Inverser la tendance du paludisme. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nLe ma\u00eetre de c\u00e9r\u00e9monie, Papa Emmanuel Kibambe, m\u00e9decin au minist\u00e8re de la Sant\u00e9, donne le ton. \u00ab Aujourd\u2019hui, c\u2019est un samedi. Quelqu\u2019un abandonne tout pour venir partager l\u2019exp\u00e9rience, et gratuitement. C\u2019est \u00e0 nous. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nTrois experts ont accept\u00e9 de venir.
\n\n\n\nLe Dr Meshach Motombo, sp\u00e9cialiste du paludisme.
\n\n\n\nLe P\u00e8re Robert Bougard, pr\u00eatre missionnaire, \u00e9cologiste, responsable du Mouvement Laudato Si\u2019 au Congo.
\n\n\n\nLe Dr L\u00e9opold, \u00e0 la direction de la formation continue du secr\u00e9tariat g\u00e9n\u00e9ral \u00e0 la Sant\u00e9.
\n\n\n\nAucun ne vient promouvoir un projet.
\n\n\n\nAucun ne vient pr\u00e9senter un produit.
\n\n\n\nUne organisation qui inscrit, dans la m\u00eame matin\u00e9e, la c\u00e9l\u00e9bration de ses dix ans et le lancement op\u00e9rationnel de son prochain programme assume sa nature.
\n\n\n\nLa Fondation Apprendre Gen\u00e8ve se pr\u00e9sente, dans ses textes fondateurs, comme une organisation du \u00ab faire \u00bb.
\n\n\n\nLa c\u00e9l\u00e9bration en est, \u00e0 Kinshasa, la mise en application litt\u00e9rale.
\n\n\n\nLa science du paludisme est connue.
\n\n\n\nLes m\u00e9dicaments fonctionnent.
\n\n\n\nLes moustiquaires impr\u00e9gn\u00e9es fonctionnent.
\n\n\n\nLe vaccin R21, introduit dans le calendrier vaccinal de la RDC en octobre 2024 (OMS Afro, 18 d\u00e9cembre 2024), commence \u00e0 diffuser, par paliers, dans les zones de sant\u00e9 pilotes du Kongo central.
\n\n\n\nLes directives existent.
\n\n\n\nEt pourtant, le pays a enregistr\u00e9 pr\u00e8s de deux millions de cas suppl\u00e9mentaires entre deux exercices cons\u00e9cutifs.
\n\n\n\nL\u2019\u00e9cart entre ce qui est \u00e9crit dans les plans et ce qui se passe dans une zone de sant\u00e9 porte un nom dans la litt\u00e9rature, l\u2019\u00e9cart \u00ab savoir-faire \u00bb.
\n\n\n\n\u00c0 Kitambo, ce 9 mai, ce sont les Scholars de la RDC qui le nomment, et qui d\u00e9crivent, dans leurs propres mots, ce qu\u2019il faut pour le r\u00e9duire.
\n\n\n\nLe savoir technique, contenu dans les directives.
\n\n\n\nLe savoir local, qui vient des communaut\u00e9s.
\n\n\n\nLe savoir entre pairs, qui circule lorsque des coll\u00e8gues d\u2019une autre province racontent comment elles s\u2019y sont prises.
\n\n\n\nViviane Mukalay, infirmi\u00e8re \u00e0 Sakania, raconte le moment o\u00f9 sa pratique a chang\u00e9.
\n\n\n\n\u00ab Souvent, on \u00e9tait l\u00e0 en train de se borner au niveau de la structure. On ne pouvait pas croire qu\u2019il fallait associer les relais communautaires et travailler vraiment en collaboration avec la communaut\u00e9. Mais quand j\u2019ai particip\u00e9 \u00e0 la r\u00e9union ici, j\u2019ai eu le courage d\u2019aller vers la communaut\u00e9, de travailler avec la communaut\u00e9 et de prendre des d\u00e9cisions avec la communaut\u00e9, surtout ensemble avec les relais communautaires. Quand il y a des absents pour la vaccination, on donne les cas de visite au relais communautaire qui vont, selon l\u2019adresse, chercher les absents pour les ramener. Et ce qui a fait \u00e0 ce que le nombre d\u2019enfants sous-vaccin\u00e9s et qui ont manqu\u00e9 la premi\u00e8re dose, \u00e7a diminue. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nLe dipl\u00f4me de Mme Mukalay, ses protocoles, sa connaissance des m\u00e9dicaments, ne pouvaient pas suffire \u00e0 eux seuls.
\n\n\n\nLa pratique a boug\u00e9 lorsque le savoir des relais communautaires, qui connaissent les adresses, et l\u2019exp\u00e9rience de coll\u00e8gues d\u2019autres zones de sant\u00e9, transmise dans les r\u00e9unions du r\u00e9seau, sont entr\u00e9s en dialogue avec ce qu\u2019elle savait d\u00e9j\u00e0.
\n\n\n\nHenri Stanley NYAFE, en ligne depuis Mbandaka, prend le micro pendant la s\u00e9ance du panel.
\n\n\n\nIl s\u2019adresse au Dr Meshach avec courtoisie, et il pose une question que les tableaux officiels ne posent pas. \u00ab Vous remarquez, au moment o\u00f9 vous dites qu\u2019il y a baisse des cas de paludisme, nous observons cependant qu\u2019il y a plus de d\u00e9c\u00e8s li\u00e9s \u00e0 cette maladie. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nPuis il ajoute, sur l\u2019usage de la moustiquaire impr\u00e9gn\u00e9e. \u00ab Vous oubliez un aspect. Ces moustiques nous infectent autour de 17 heures \u00e0 19 heures. La population active, c\u2019est cette population qui est sous les arbres, et l\u00e0, il n\u2019y a pas de moustiquaires. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nL\u2019observation de M. NYAFE, formul\u00e9e dans une ville du nord-ouest, ouvre une question pratique que la directive universelle ne couvre pas, l\u2019exposition pendant la fen\u00eatre cr\u00e9pusculaire, hors du domicile.
\n\n\n\nC\u2019est dans ce dialogue que des approches nouvelles peuvent s\u2019imaginer, et que les approches existantes se renforcent.
\n\n\n\nSur le canal de discussion, Fran\u00e7ois Mufolo Balimumu \u00e9crit depuis Lubumbashi. \u00ab Les donn\u00e9es pr\u00e9sent\u00e9es par l\u2019expert sont sous-notifi\u00e9es. Nous avons beaucoup de tradipraticiens dans nos quartiers et villages qui ne rapportent jamais \u00e0 la structure m\u00e8re de l\u2019aire de sant\u00e9. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nLe constat n\u2019est pas isol\u00e9.
\n\n\n\nIl rejoint l\u2019une des huit conclusions du nouveau rapport de la Fondation, Paludisme: inverser la tendance, selon laquelle plus de 60 % des soins li\u00e9s \u00e0 la fi\u00e8vre ont lieu, dans plusieurs pays cit\u00e9s par le rapport, en dehors des structures publiques.
\n\n\n\nUne participante, depuis une zone difficile d\u2019acc\u00e8s, parle des populations d\u00e9plac\u00e9es.
\n\n\n\n\u00ab Ils sont d\u00e9j\u00e0 en fait avec l\u2019\u00e9quit\u00e9. Ils ne b\u00e9n\u00e9ficient pas de la pr\u00e9sence des intrants, des personnels qualifi\u00e9s. Ils sont sacrifi\u00e9s, abandonn\u00e9s \u00e0 eux-m\u00eames. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nPlus tard dans la matin\u00e9e, Francklin Muzo Mukungu, responsable de programme \u00e0 l\u2019organisation non gouvernementale DJPDI, demande la parole pour signaler une rupture de m\u00e9dicaments dans les zones de sant\u00e9 de Pinga et de Kibua, dans le territoire de Walikale, avec une multiplication des cas de paludisme, de diarrh\u00e9e et de rougeole.
\n\n\n\nLors de son inscription, il avait \u00e9crit. \u00ab Nous traversons des violences au Nord Kivu. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nIl sait que la salle ne r\u00e9soudra pas le probl\u00e8me.
\n\n\n\nIl sait aussi que ce qu\u2019il vient de dire entrera dans la m\u00e9moire active du r\u00e9seau, et que d\u2019autres coll\u00e8gues, dans d\u2019autres provinces, sauront d\u00e9sormais que cela existe.
\n\n\n\nLe P\u00e8re Robert Bougard prend ensuite la parole, et fait pivoter le d\u00e9bat.
\n\n\n\n\u00ab On sait que ce que le Dr Meshach a expliqu\u00e9, il a \u00e9t\u00e9 plus sur l\u2019aspect curatif. Et nous, comme \u00e9cologistes, nous sommes sur l\u2019aspect pr\u00e9ventif. Nous voulons pr\u00e9venir. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nIl invite la salle \u00e0 regarder ce qui ne se voit pas dans les chiffres officiels.
\n\n\n\nL\u2019eau qui stagne dans les caniveaux.
\n\n\n\nLa chaleur croissante.
\n\n\n\n\u00ab Un peu d\u2019eau qui reste quelque part pendant quelques jours constitue de vrais h\u00f4tels, de vraies chambres, de vrais endroits o\u00f9 se d\u00e9veloppent les moustiques. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nL\u2019image rejoint, l\u00e0 encore, une observation du rapport de \u00abInverser la tendance\u00bb, sur la maintenance volontaire des caniveaux par des groupes de jeunes \u00e0 Kinshasa et sur l\u2019\u00e9levage de canards mangeurs de larves \u00e0 Madagascar.
\n\n\n\nLe moment le plus inattendu de la matin\u00e9e est venu de l\u2019expert lui-m\u00eame.
\n\n\n\nPress\u00e9 sur la question institutionnelle par les questions qui montaient de la salle, le Dr Meshach a fini par dire ce qu\u2019un fonctionnaire dit rarement en public.
\n\n\n\n\u00ab Le programme de lutte contre le paludisme doit quitter d\u2019\u00eatre un enfant de la DSSP et remonter, soit \u00eatre attach\u00e9 au cabinet du ministre, soit du premier ministre, soit \u00e0 la pr\u00e9sidence. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nL\u2019exp\u00e9rience pratique des Scholars, dans la salle, a pouss\u00e9 l\u2019argument plus loin que le cadre administratif o\u00f9 il \u00e9tait log\u00e9.
\n\n\n\nC\u2019est pr\u00e9cis\u00e9ment ce que le r\u00e9seau revendique, depuis dix ans, comme sa contribution propre.
\n\n\n\nLe savoir technique se renforce lorsqu\u2019il rencontre, en public, le savoir local et le savoir entre pairs.
\n\n\n\nLe programme avait pr\u00e9vu, avant le panel, deux t\u00e9moignages.
\n\n\n\nLa Dre Noelly Zola, m\u00e9decin g\u00e9n\u00e9raliste, ambassadrice de la Fondation, raconte d\u2019abord ce qui n\u2019a pas march\u00e9.
\n\n\n\nElle voulait int\u00e9grer les organismes internationaux.
\n\n\n\nL\u2019OMS, l\u2019Unicef.
\n\n\n\nIl aurait fallu un master en sant\u00e9 publique.
\n\n\n\nElle a postul\u00e9 pour des bourses.
\n\n\n\nCela n\u2019a pas march\u00e9.
\n\n\n\n\u00ab Au moment o\u00f9 j\u2019\u00e9tais d\u00e9courag\u00e9e, j\u2019ai re\u00e7u un courriel de la Fondation. Ma maman Charlotte m\u2019a sollicit\u00e9e d\u2019adh\u00e9rer \u00e0 la plateforme d\u2019apprentissage. C\u2019est ainsi que j\u2019ai commenc\u00e9 \u00e0 apprendre en ligne. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nElle a appris la m\u00e9thode dite des cinq pourquoi.
\n\n\n\nElle l\u2019a appliqu\u00e9e, dans sa zone de sant\u00e9, pour identifier les causes profondes derri\u00e8re les probl\u00e8mes que ses coll\u00e8gues lisaient comme techniques.
\n\n\n\nElle dit, \u00e0 voix \u00e9gale, les sacrifices requis : \u00ab J\u2019ai aussi perdu certains contacts proches parce que j\u2019\u00e9tais tout le temps en train de travailler. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nAujourd\u2019hui, elle est Ambassadrice de la Fondation, et m\u00e8ne la mobilisation des Scholars autour de la formation paludisme.
\n\n\n\nLe Dr Stanis Mutamba, m\u00e9decin-chef d\u2019un centre hospitalier, vient ensuite.
\n\n\n\nEn 2020, il devait conduire une mission de pr\u00e9l\u00e8vement d\u2019\u00e9chantillons d\u2019eau \u00e0 Nagika.
\n\n\n\nIl suivait, en parall\u00e8le, un programme de la Fondation sur la bilharziose g\u00e9nitale chez la femme.
\n\n\n\nLe lien entre les deux n\u2019avait rien d\u2019\u00e9vident, jusqu\u2019\u00e0 ce qu\u2019il regarde, sur le terrain, les patientes du village avec les outils de la formation.
\n\n\n\nIl a identifi\u00e9 des cas que personne, dans la zone, n\u2019aurait diagnostiqu\u00e9s.
\n\n\n\nIl a accompagn\u00e9 les femmes, expliqu\u00e9 la maladie, organis\u00e9 une r\u00e9ponse.
\n\n\n\nSa formule, simple, ferme la s\u00e9quence. \u00ab Former un expert, c\u2019est une communaut\u00e9 transform\u00e9e. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nPapa Emmanuel Kibambe, le ma\u00eetre de c\u00e9r\u00e9monie, glisse son propre t\u00e9moignage entre deux questions. \u00ab Je suis Scholar depuis 2019. J\u2019ai d\u00e9j\u00e0 sept \u00e0 huit certifications avec cette Fondation. \u00bb Il d\u00e9crit ce que sa pratique a gagn\u00e9 : \u00ab Dans la connaissance et l\u2019apprenti
\n\n\n\nsage, on n\u2019a pas besoin de grandes connaissances. Ce sont des petites astuces qui changent le probl\u00e8me en solution. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nTrois trajectoires, trois mani\u00e8res de tenir le dipl\u00f4me par un bout, l\u2019exp\u00e9rience par l\u2019autre, et de r\u00e9unir les deux dans une salle.
\n\n\n\nLa densit\u00e9 de l\u2019engagement \u00e0 Kinshasa n\u2019est pas un effet de cadrage.
\n\n\n\nSur les 314 ambassadeurs nomm\u00e9s \u00e0 la Fondation au moment o\u00f9 l\u2019appel international a \u00e9t\u00e9 ouvert, cent soixante-sept167 r\u00e9sident en RDC.
\n\n\n\nLe titre vient avec un mandat : lier les pairs, combler l\u2019\u00e9cart entre orientations internationales et action locale, construire le r\u00e9seau de l\u2019int\u00e9rieur.
\n\n\n\nPour qualifier, il faut avoir termin\u00e9 au moins un programme de la Fondation, suivi un programme d\u2019activation de quatre semaines.
\n\n\n\nC\u2019est cette m\u00e9canique qui a produit, en RDC, le \u00ab Mouvement congolais pour la vaccination \u00bb.
\n\n\n\nIl est n\u00e9 d\u2019une habitude prise pendant la pand\u00e9mie, en juillet 2019, lorsque les Scholars congolais commenc\u00e8rent \u00e0 se r\u00e9unir tous les samedis \u00e0 17 heures, par Zoom, pour s\u2019\u00e9changer des nouvelles, des solutions, des doutes.
\n\n\n\nCette r\u00e9union hebdomadaire a \u00e9volu\u00e9, ces derni\u00e8res ann\u00e9es, vers une conversation plus large, sur WhatsApp et en visioconf\u00e9rence, qui ne s\u2019est jamais arr\u00eat\u00e9e.
\n\n\n\nCe que la salle de Kitambo a fait le 9 mai, c\u2019est rendre visible cette infrastructure-l\u00e0.
\n\n\n\nOlenga Okitengeno Rita, agent de sant\u00e9 communautaire \u00e0 Kinshasa, a \u00e9crit, pour le recueil des r\u00e9cits du dixi\u00e8me anniversaire, comment elle avait identifi\u00e9 121 enfants pass\u00e9s \u00e0 travers le syst\u00e8me de vaccination dans une premi\u00e8re zone de sant\u00e9, et atteint plus de 80 % d\u2019entre eux.
\n\n\n\nElle a recommenc\u00e9 l\u2019op\u00e9ration dans une autre zone.
\n\n\n\nMarcel Muntu Ilunga, expert en sant\u00e9 publique en zone de d\u00e9plac\u00e9s, a vaccin\u00e9 quatre-vingt-treize enfants \u00e2g\u00e9s de 0 \u00e0 23 mois en trente jours.
\n\n\n\nAndr\u00e9 Claude Mukinayi Kalamba, infirmier \u00e0 Kalemie, est mont\u00e9 pour la premi\u00e8re fois dans une pirogue de fortune pour aller vacciner une population d\u2019une rive auparavant hostile \u00e0 la vaccination.
\n\n\n\nAucun de ces r\u00e9cits n\u2019a fait l\u2019objet d\u2019un projet financ\u00e9.
\n\n\n\nTous ont eu lieu.
\n\n\n\nLa Fondation a publi\u00e9, le 23 avril 2026, \u00e0 la veille de la Journ\u00e9e mondiale de lutte contre le paludisme, son nouveau rapport, Paludisme: inverser la tendance.
\n\n\n\nIl rassemble les contributions de plus de mille agents de sant\u00e9 dans soixante-huit pays, parmi lesquels la RDC.
\n\n\n\nL\u2019une de ses huit conclusions s\u2019ouvre sur un t\u00e9moignage congolais.
\n\n\n\nLe Dr Bisimwa Muzusa Emmanuel, m\u00e9decin \u00e0 Bukavu, y d\u00e9crit ses propres enfants atteints du paludisme malgr\u00e9 les moustiquaires. \u00ab Trois de mes enfants, \u00e2g\u00e9s de un, trois et cinq ans, ont souffert du paludisme, alors m\u00eame qu\u2019ils dorment sous moustiquaire. Le plus jeune a \u00e9t\u00e9 hospitalis\u00e9. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nUne autre conclusion fait r\u00e9f\u00e9rence aux campagnes communautaires d\u2019entretien des caniveaux \u00e0 Kinshasa, exactement le sujet que le Fr\u00e8re Robert a port\u00e9 dans la salle de Kitambo.
\n\n\n\nLe rapport fait le lien entre action sur le terrain et directives de l\u2019Organisation mondiale de la sant\u00e9.
\n\n\n\nIl documente la couche que les directives n\u2019avaient pas vocation \u00e0 recueillir, et que les syst\u00e8mes de surveillance peinent \u00e0 capturer.
\n\n\n\nIl se pr\u00e9sente comme un savoir d\u2019usage.
\n\n\n\nReda Sadki, prenant la parole en fin de matin\u00e9e, le formule ainsi : \u00ab C\u2019est quelque chose de nouveau en termes de type de savoir qui peut renseigner un praticien. Vous n\u2019allez pas trouver la ligne directrice qui vous dit ce qu\u2019il faut faire dans tel ou tel cas. Par contre, vous allez pouvoir y lire, vous nourrir des exp\u00e9riences d\u2019acteurs de la sant\u00e9, y compris ceux qui ne sont pas m\u00e9decins, des agents de sant\u00e9 communautaires, des infirmi\u00e8res, des sages-femmes. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nLe rapport est disponible, en fran\u00e7ais et en anglais.
\n\n\n\nUne note d\u2019analyse en huit points en restitue les principaux r\u00e9sultats.
\n\n\n\nUne lecture parue le jour de la Journ\u00e9e mondiale du paludisme en propose la grille de lecture.
\n\n\n\nPatrice Bamulenga cl\u00f4t la s\u00e9ance par une image de chantier. \u00ab Ce que nous avons initi\u00e9 aujourd\u2019hui, c\u2019est une pierre de la fondation. Demain, nous allons \u00e9lever les murs. Le lendemain, il y aura d\u00e9j\u00e0 une toiture. Et le lendemain sera aussi un b\u00e2timent qui sera habit\u00e9. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nTrois choses concr\u00e8tes en sortent.
\n\n\n\nLa formation Paludisme: inverser la tendance, dont l\u2019inscription est ouverte aux Scholars pr\u00e9sents et \u00e0 leurs coll\u00e8gues.
\n\n\n\nLa prochaine r\u00e9union mensuelle de la Fondation, le 14 mai, o\u00f9 les congolais peuvent rejoindre les confr\u00e8res du monde entier pour d\u00e9couvrir l\u2019\u00e9ventail complet des opportunit\u00e9s de formation, d\u2019action et de leadership.
\n\n\n\nEt la possibilit\u00e9, d\u00e9sormais document\u00e9e, qu\u2019une cellule nationale de Scholars puisse organiser, par ses propres moyens, un \u00e9v\u00e9nement de cette ampleur.
\n\n\n\nPendant que la salle entonne, dans la derni\u00e8re demi-heure, l\u2019hymne national avant la photo de famille, sur l\u2019\u00e9cran les commentaires arrivent.
\n\n\n\nMathieu Kalemayi, depuis le bureau congolais d\u2019une organisation partenaire, \u00e9crit: \u00ab Nous y serons pour r\u00e9unir nos efforts face \u00e0 ce fl\u00e9au qui nous endeuille. \u00bb
\n\n\n\nBeno\u00eet S\u00ead\u00e9gnon, consultant pour l\u2019Unicef au B\u00e9nin, demande comment le r\u00e9seau b\u00e9ninois pourrait se redynamiser sur le mod\u00e8le congolais.
\n\n\n\nAbdramane Oumarou, syndicaliste de la sant\u00e9 \u00e0 Niamey, \u00e9crit que \u00ab c\u2019est un \u00e9v\u00e9nement tr\u00e8s utile surtout pour nous agents de sant\u00e9 pour pouvoir am\u00e9liorer nos connaissances \u00bb.
\n\n\n\nDaniel Mafini, m\u00e9decin du R\u00e9seau des ambassadeurs de la maison d\u2019Art\u00e9misia, s\u2019interroge sur la mani\u00e8re d\u2019apporter son expertise.
\n\n\n\nLouise Nkusu Lusangu, ambassadrice congolaise install\u00e9e en Afrique du Sud, soul\u00e8ve la question d\u2019un avenir acad\u00e9mique et de partenariats universitaires pour celles et ceux qui ont pris ce chemin.
\n\n\n\nLa salle de Kitambo n\u2019est qu\u2019un point d\u2019un dessin plus large, qui se prolonge d\u00e9j\u00e0 ailleurs.
\n\n\n\n\u00c0 Mbandaka, \u00e0 dix-sept heures, la fen\u00eatre d\u2019exposition au moustique s\u2019ouvrira.
\n\n\n\nSur le t\u00e9l\u00e9phone d\u2019Henri Stanley NYAFE, comme sur celui de Viviane Mukalay \u00e0 Kasumbalesa, les messages continueront de circuler.
\n\n\n\nScientific articles are theoretically rich in details about antibodies, cell lines, model organisms, or software tools. However, these details are often poorly reported and remain locked in unstructured text, making it difficult, or impossible, to reproduce experiments. Mentions are often ambiguous, inconsistent, or difficult to track across studies. This is where Research Resource Identifiers (RRIDs) come to the rescue. RRIDs are unique persistent identifiers (PIDs) assigned to key research resources and are structured (for example, RRID:AB_572263) to transform a vague mention (like \u201canti-GFP antibody\u201d) into something precise, traceable, and comparable across studies. Unlike plain text mentions, these PIDs are globally unique, machine-readable, and linked to curated metadata.
\n\n\n\nRRIDs are developed and maintained by the FAIR Data Informatics laboratory at the University of California at San Diego and RRIDs.org (a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization) is the organization that owns RRIDs. The RRID platform aggregates and curates biomedical resource information and links to usage of RRIDs in the scientific literature to create a structured, traceable connection between a resource and its documented use. Correctly reported resources are easier to find, but sometimes resources are mentioned but not properly identified, are ambiguous, or even incorrect. SciCrunch has developed machine learning methods to identify these harder-to-find connections. This enrichment layer enables downstream platforms like Europe PMC to surface RRIDs even when authors did not explicitly structure them in the article text, the supplemental files, or reagent tables. These previously opaque references can, therefore, become discoverable, queryable, and reusable, which is an important step toward more transparent and reproducible research.
\n\n\n\nRRIDs are integrated into Europe PMC through the annotation platform. RRIDs provided by SciCrunch are associated with articles within the Europe PMC database, making them available through search, integrated into the SciLite annotations tool, and retrievable programmatically through the Annotations API. API access allows developers to retrieve and use RRID annotations linked to literature in Europe PMC in their own applications and researchers retrieve the data for analysis.
\n\n\n\nRRIDs can be searched within Europe PMC through the Advanced search tool. In the \u2018Links to data records\u2019 section, tick the \u2018Find an accession or data DOI\u2019 checkbox and then select the \u2018RRID (Research resource identifiers)\u2019 under the \u2018Data type\u2019 drop-down.
\n\n\n\nYou may then enter an RRID in the \u201cAccession number or data DOI\u201d box and add this to your search. For example, the RRID for HeLa cells is RRID:CVCL_0030. Searching for this using Advanced search produces the following results.
\n\n\n\nReading an article, you can find references to RRIDs using the SciLite tool.
\n\n\n\nThrough this collaboration, Europe PMC now indexes over one million RRIDs (in over a hundred thousand papers), transforming previously fragmented data into a structured, discoverable dataset of literature and associated RRIDs combined. This integration enhances reproducibility, supports large-scale meta-analyses, and enables downstream reuse in emerging tools and workflows. By combining RRIDs with other search terms, users can perform precise, targeted queries, significantly improving the specificity and utility of searches across the Europe PMC platform.
\n\n\n\nAs RRID coverage and adoption continue to grow, these connections could support new approaches to reproducibility monitoring, resource validation, trend analysis, and AI-driven discovery tools built on structured scientific knowledge rather than unstructured text alone.
\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nWritten by Matthew Jeffryes and Melissa Harrison from Europe PMC and Anita Bandrowski and Martijn Roelandse from SciCrunch.
\n","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/mhkgg-p7m28","funding_references":null,"guid":"https://blog.europepmc.org/?p=1719","id":"0e4f73c1-8647-4c13-adb7-7efed3b42b62","image":"https://blog.europepmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-11-at-14.15.47.png","images":[{"alt":"Europe PMC Advanced Search Query Builder interface, showing the \"Links to data records\" section expanded. The \"Find an accession or data DOI\" checkbox is ticked, and the Data type dropdown menu is open, with \"RRID (Research resource identifiers)\" highlighted in the drop-down.","height":"600","sizes":"(max-width: 729px) 100vw, 729px","src":"https://blog.europepmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-11-at-14.15.47.png","srcset":"https://blog.europepmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-11-at-14.15.47.png, https://blog.europepmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-11-at-14.15.47-300x247.png","width":"729"},{"alt":"Europe PMC search results page showing 1,444 articles returned for the query searching for RRID:CVCL_0030 (the HeLa cell line identifier). The syntax for this query is (ACCESSION_TYPE:\"rrid\") AND (ACCESSION_ID:\"RRID:CVCL_0030\"). Results are sorted by relevance and include research articles, review articles, and preprints. A bar chart on the left shows publication counts from 2016 to 2026, with a clear upward trend in recent years.","height":"578","sizes":"(max-width: 735px) 100vw, 735px","src":"https://blog.europepmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-11-at-13.52.17.png","srcset":"https://blog.europepmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-11-at-13.52.17.png, https://blog.europepmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-11-at-13.52.17-300x236.png","width":"735"},{"alt":"A full-text article view in Europe PMC showing the Methods section of a paper. On the right, the SciLite annotations panel is open, displaying accession numbers identified by text mining. \"RRID: CVCL_0030 (1/1)\" is checked in the panel, which causes the HeLa cell line identifier (RRID:CVCL_0030) to be highlighted in yellow within the article text.","height":"764","sizes":"(max-width: 930px) 100vw, 930px","src":"https://blog.europepmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-11-at-14.43.44.png","srcset":"https://blog.europepmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-11-at-14.43.44.png, https://blog.europepmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-11-at-14.43.44-300x246.png, https://blog.europepmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-11-at-14.43.44-768x631.png","width":"930"},{"src":"https://blog.europepmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-11-at-14.15.47.png"},{"src":"https://blog.europepmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-11-at-13.52.17.png"},{"src":"https://blog.europepmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-11-at-14.43.44.png"}],"indexed":true,"indexed_at":1778509984,"language":"en","parent_doi":null,"published_at":1778506562,"reference":[],"registered_at":0,"relationships":[],"rid":"s818f-0b038","status":"active","summary":"Scientific articles are theoretically rich in details about antibodies, cell lines, model organisms, or software tools. However, these details are often poorly reported and remain locked in unstructured text, making it difficult, or impossible, to reproduce experiments. Mentions are often ambiguous, inconsistent, or difficult to track across studies. This is where Research Resource Identifiers (RRIDs) come to the rescue.","tags":["Editor's Picks","Guest Posts","Advanced Search","Annotations API","FAIR"],"title":"From text to traceability: RRID integration in Europe PMC","updated_at":1778508322,"url":"https://blog.europepmc.org/2026/05/from-text-to-traceability-rrid-integration-in-europe-pmc.html","version":"v1"},{"abstract":"Previously I had alluded to some of the major projects I\u2019ve been working on. One has come to fruition and can be found on the arXiv and in the Astrophysical Journal&. It has taken many years to assemble the data in this paper, during which time the models purporting to explain some of it have \u2026 Continue reading Extended Tully-Fisher relations \u2192","archive_url":null,"authors":[{"affiliation":[{"id":"https://ror.org/051fd9666","name":"Case Western Reserve University"}],"contributor_roles":[],"family":"McGaugh","given":"Stacy","url":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9762-0980"}],"blog":{"archive_collection":null,"archive_host":null,"archive_prefix":null,"archive_timestamps":null,"authors":null,"canonical_url":null,"category":"physicalSciences","community_id":"82262dc6-3666-40e2-939a-d4d637d0fd8f","created_at":1713369760,"current_feed_url":null,"description":"A Blog About the Science and Sociology of Cosmology and Dark Matter","doi":null,"doi_as_guid":false,"favicon":"https://rogue-scholar.org/api/communities/82262dc6-3666-40e2-939a-d4d637d0fd8f/logo","feed_format":"application/atom+xml","feed_url":"https://tritonstation.com/feed/atom/","filter":null,"funding":null,"generator":"WordPress.com","generator_raw":"WordPress.com","home_page_url":"https://tritonstation.com/new-blog-page/","id":"651203f2-4bfe-4788-b4d0-2971b1f8cfe5","indexed":true,"issn":null,"language":"en","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","mastodon":"https://mastodon.social/@DudeDarkmatter","prefix":"10.59350","registered_at":1729029144,"relative_url":null,"ror":null,"secure":true,"slug":"tritonstation","status":"active","subfield":"3103","subfield_validated":null,"title":"Triton Station","updated_at":1778662734.074666,"use_api":true,"use_mastodon":false,"user_id":"83dddbbe-93dc-445b-accd-b0ecfd19f65f"},"blog_name":"Triton Station","blog_slug":"tritonstation","content_html":"\nPreviously I had alluded to some of the major projects I’ve been working on. One has come to fruition and can be found on the arXiv and in the Astrophysical Journal&. It has taken many years to assemble the data in this paper, during which time the models purporting to explain some of it have evolved considerably while consistently failing to address the real problems they raise. There is a lot to explore, so it will take more than one post.
\n\n\n\nHere I start with the empirical basis: the stellar mass and baryonic Tully-Fisher relations. The Tully-Fisher relation was originally discovered as a relation between luminosity and linewidth in rotationally supported galaxies – spirals and irregulars. It immediately proved useful as an extragalactic distance indicator. As such, it was instrumental in breaking the impasse in the Hubble constant* debate (back when it was 50 vs. 100, not 67 vs. 73), and it remains useful in this role.
\n\n\n\nPhysically, the obvious interpretation was that luminosity is a proxy for stellar mass and linewidth*^ is a proxy for rotation speed. This is correct. Of the various rotation speeds one can define and measure, the one that works best, in terms of minimizing the scatter in the relation, is the flat rotation speed measured in the outer parts of extended rotation curves. See Stark et al. (2009) and Trachternach et al. (2009) for further examples. The scatter is basically a function of data quality.
\n\n\n\nOn the mass axis, converting measured flux to luminosity to mass is a bit dicier, as we need to know the distance for the first step and the stellar mass-to-light ratio for the second. There is inevitably some intrinsic scatter in the mass-to-light ratio of a stellar population. While I don’t doubt that luminosity is a proxy for stellar mass, improving on it is hard to do: there are many instances in which simply assuming a straight mapping of light to mass can be as effective as applying fancier population models. We might^ finally be getting past that, so it is worth discussing a bit.
\n\n\n\nThe procedure to convert starlight into stellar mass involves the construction of stellar population models that use the color(s) or spectral energy distribution of a galaxy to infer the types of stars that make the light. This is a long-argued subject; suffice it to say there are a number of points where it can go wrong. The most obvious is the IMF; the initial spectrum of masses with which stars are born. Most of the light we see from galaxies is produced by its higher mass stars, which are disproportionately bright (there is a steep scaling of stellar luminosity with mass). But most of the mass is locked up in low mass stars that contribute little to the total luminosity. So we are, in effect, using the light of the few to represent the mass of the many. That would go badly wrong if we don’t know the relative mix, i.e., the shape of the IMF. This has been the subject of much research, and over many decades has been narrowed down pretty well. While I hope that this is almost settled, the specter of the IMF lurks as a menace to all stellar mass determinations.
\n\n\n\nThere is a lot else we need to know to build a stellar population model. This includes such essentials as the spectra of individual stars of each and every type and stellar evolution as a function of mass and composition including exotic phases like the asymptotic giant branch. There are a lot of places where this can go badly wrong, and sometimes^% does. So I wouldn’t say we know how to do this perfectly, but we have become pretty good at it.
\n\n\n\nConverting light to mass suffices to plot the stellar mass Tully-Fisher relation. That accounts for most of the baryonic mass of high mass spirals, but it ignores the mass of the interstellar gas. This can be appreciable in lower mass systems. Indeed, the standard issue dwarf galaxy in the field is more gas than stars:
\n\n\n\nWith measurements of mass and rotation speed, we can construct the Tully-Fisher relation:
\n\n\n\nThe stellar mass Tully-Fisher relation is a good correlation by the standards of extragalactic astronomy. The majority of studies in the literature are restricted to massive% galaxies, mostly those with M* > 1010 M\u2609 where stars dominate the baryonic mass budget so the omission of gas is not obvious. As we look to lower masses, the relation bends and the scatter increases. That this happens right where gas starts to become important to the mass budget suggests that we’re missing an important component, and voila – a nice, continuous relation that is linear in log space is restored when we plot the baryonic mass Mb = M*+Mg. Indeed, the data are consistent with a simple power law
\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nwith A = 50 M\u2609 km-4 s4. The intercept A has consistently been measured within 10% of this value over the past couple of decades. That this is an integer power law so that the intercept has real physical units is intriguing. That doesn’t happen in most astronomical scaling laws, which are usually more happenstance, like the mass-luminosity relation for main sequence stars.
\n\n\n\nWhy limit ourselves to rotationally supported galaxies? Let’s plots every known type of gravitationally bound extragalactic object, from the smallest ultrafaint dwarfs to the largest clusters of galaxies. Note that I’ve flipped the axes to accommodate the huge dynamic range in baryonic mass, roughly twelve (12) orders of magnitude. This is like having gnats at one end of the scale and blue whales at the other. On that scale, a person is a regular galaxy like the Milky Way.
\n\n\n\nOne improvement from twenty years ago, aside from the greater number of objects and the increase in dynamic range, is the accuracy of the mass measurements. I tried a number of prescriptions for the stellar mass-to-light ratio in McGaugh (2005), which resulted in a range of possible slopes. Now we just use the stellar mass from precise population models (Duey et al. 2025) and recover my best estimate from back then. The room to dodge the obvious conclusion about the slope of the relation by complaining about the choice of stellar mass estimator – a popular course of action back then – is gone. Another technical issue we’ve spent a lot of effort working on is how to put all these very different systems on the same scale of Vf. I won’t elaborate on this here: if you’re interested in that level of detail, you can go read the paper and references there in. If we got this wrong, it would add to the scatter in the relation, and/or create offsets between different types of data.
\n\n\n\nBoth of the extended Tully-Fisher relations, that in stellar mass (top panel) and that in baryonic mass (bottom panel, the extended BTFR) are good correlations. That in baryonic mass is clearly better in the sense that it is tighter over a larger dynamic range. From small dwarf galaxies (Mb ~ 5 x 105) to groups of galaxies (5 x 1012 M\u2609), the data are consistent with a single power law (Mb ~ Vf4) for all systems with remarkably little scatter. Outside this range, the data for both the lowest and the highest mass systems deviate from a straight line towards higher mass at a given flat velocity. I don’t put much credence in the smallest systems as I think there is little chance that their measured velocity dispersions are representative of their equilibrium gravitational potential. For all practical purposes, our knowledge runs out as we hit the regime of ultrafaint# dwarfs. The deviations of the most massive systems, clusters of galaxies, are more difficult to dismiss.
\n\n\n\nRestricting our attention for the moment to the range where a single power law suffices to describe the data, we note that there is not much scatter in the BTFR. Some of it is from random uncertainties; these dominate most studies and lead to a lot more scatter than seen here: these data are very good. We can account for the known observational errors and subtract off their contribution to estimate the intrinsic scatter in the relation. This is the variance of the data from a perfect line. The intrinsic scatter for the best data (the WISE-SPARC sample of Duey et al. 2026) is about 0.11 dex in mass – about what we expect$ for stellar populations. That doesn’t leave much room for other sources of scatter, so the underlying physical relation has to be very tight indeed: essentially perfect over the range 5 x 105 < Mb < 5 x 1012 M\u2609.
\n\n\n\nScatter will also occur if our mass budget is incomplete. We can see this in the transition from the stars-only relation to the BTFR. There is a lot of scatter in the stellar mass Tully-Fisher relation around 107 < Mb < 109 M\u2609. Galaxies in this mass range are sometimes star-dominated and sometimes gas-dominated. The gas fraction is all over the place. This shows up as scatter in the stellar mass Tully-Fisher relation. That’s not real; it is a sign that we’ve missed an important mass reservoir. This is cured when we add in the gas mass, which is dominated by atomic gas (HI to spectroscopists and astronomers). That this addition removes the scatter and restores a single power law relation strongly suggests that there are no further substantial reservoirs** of baryonic material that we’re missing.
\n\n\n\nThis logic applies to other systems as well. Bright spirals do not need much correction because their baryonic mass is dominated by stars. Their stellar mass Tully-Fisher relation is pretty much already their BTFR.
\n\n\n\nPerhaps this applies to clusters of galaxies as well? There was a huge correction from stars-only to stars plus gas. The gas in this case is the hot, ionized plasma of the intracluster medium (ICM) that belongs to the cluster itself and not any individual galaxy within it. That goes most of the way to close the gap between the stars-only cluster data and the extrapolation of the BTFR fit to individual galaxies, but not all the way. So perhaps we are still missing an important baryonic mass component? It happened before – we didn’t know about the ICM for decades after Zwicky first identified the missing mass problem in clusters – so perhaps there are still more baryons to discover there.
\n\n\n\nIt could also be that the apparent offset occurs because we’ve failed to put clusters on the same Vf scale as galaxies. This is not easy to do, and we’ve spent a lot of time worrying about it. I don’t think this is what’s going on, though it would make my life a lot simpler if it were. Different indicators – dynamics vs. ICM hydrostatics vs. gravitational lensing – can give somewhat different answers, but not in a way that “fixes” the problem: I see no viable path in which the offset turns out to be a simple difference in the way the depth of the gravitational potential is measured. I would love to be wrong here, but I’m not dismissing the offset for clusters as I am for ultrafaint dwarfs (which don’t do lightly).
\n\n\n\nPerhaps the extrapolation of the BTFR from individual galaxies to clusters is simply not appropriate. They’re very different kinds of systems, after all. To dig into that, we need some theoretical perspective – why does the observed power law happen? Should we expect different systems to share the same BTFR?
\n\n\n\nTheory is something I’ve studiously avoided in this post: the possibility that there are baryons that remain to be discovered in clusters can be inferred empirically. All the other data line up, so why not clusters? But unless and until these hypothetical additional baryons are discovered, that’s just one possibility. How likely this possibility seems to be diverges rapidly once we overlay a theoretical preference, which I will leave to future posts. (I did warn it would take more than one.)
\n\n\n\n&This paper appears in ApJ volume 1001. The literature has grown quite a bit since I started contributing to it in volume 342. The Astrophysical Journal was founded in 1895. So I’ve been contributing to it for a little over a quarter of its temporal existence, but nearly twice the number of volumes have been published in that shorter time. It’s no wonder none of us can keep up.
\n\n\n\n*Indeed, Tully & Fisher’s “preliminary estimate of the Hubble constant is H0 = 80 km/s/Mpc” remains correct to this day, within the uncertainties (hard to estimate at the time, but roughly \u00b110 km/s/Mpc).
\n\n\n\n*^There appears to be an irreducible intrinsic scatter in the linewidth: it is not a perfect proxy for rotation speed. Linewidths are observationally easier to obtain than resolved, extended rotation curves, so the numbers of galaxies in samples using linewidths can be very large without ever approaching the quality provided by resolved interferometric observations. Bigger samples are not necessarily better.
\n\n\n\n^I emphasize might here because the community seems to have moved towards reporting stellar masses as if we observe these rather than the luminosities and colors/SEDs that the mass estimates are based upon. The latter are data – observed quantities – while stellar masses are a derived quantity that is inevitably model dependent. This doesn’t stop being true just because we decide to invest a lot of faith in our models.
\n\n\n\n*^The Sloan Digital Sky Survey provides stellar masses based on models that are known to be wrong in the near infrared. Since SDSS itself is entirely optical, one might not notice. If one mixes SDSS data with near-IR data, one will get the wrong answer.
\n\n\n\n%This is a classic selection effect. Brighter objects can be seen at a much greater distance than dim ones, so probe a much larger volume. Consequently, their raw numbers always dominate surveys even if their number density is low. Stars are a great example: most of the stars you can see at night are intrinsically luminous: bright stars that are rather far away. Mundane, low mass stars do not stand out even when nearby.
\n\n\n\n#This isn’t for lack of observations of ultrafaint dwarfs, it’s the underlying assumptions.
\n\n\n\n$No amount of information suffices to perfectly specify the stellar mass that produces an observed luminosity and SED (spectral energy distribution/set of colors), so one always expects at least some intrinsic scatter in the stellar mass-to-light ratio. I’ve seen estimates that range from 0.1 – 0.2 dex for near-IR colors. That’s as good as it can get as there is always some transient population (e.g., AGB stars) that produce an amount of light that depends on the star formation rate some time ago, not what we measure now. Optical colors are worse in the sense of having more intrinsic scatter, as they are more susceptible to the comings and goings of bright but short-lived stars whose numbers fluctuate with the stochastic star formation rate. Finding 0.11 dex intrinstic scatter is pretty much as good as it can get. (By dex we mean the scatter in log space.)
\n\n\n\n**We noted this effect in the original BTFR paper to argue that it was unlikely that we were missing substantial amounts of molecular gas (H2), which was a concern at the time. Flash forward, and we were right: the molecular gas mass is almost always a distant third behind stars and atomic gas in the baryonic mass budgets of individual galaxies. Nowadays, the concern is about the mass of baryons in the circumgalactic medium (CGM). That’s getting ahead of the story, which I’ll save for a future post. For now, it suffices to note that any baryonic mass in the CGM is far beyond the radius where the flat velocity is measured, so is not relevant to the sums here.
\n","doi":"https://doi.org/10.59350/kjhq3-pw883","funding_references":null,"guid":"https://tritonstation.com/?p=12429","id":"16210475-cf4e-4ba9-acdd-90353e66a052","image":"https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Fig_VfMstMb.png?fit=2205%2C1917&ssl=1","images":[{"height":"618","sizes":"auto, (max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px","src":"https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/MgMst.png?resize=700%2C618&ssl=1","srcset":"https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/MgMst.png?w=1638&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/MgMst.png?resize=300%2C265&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/MgMst.png?resize=1024%2C904&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/MgMst.png?resize=768%2C678&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/MgMst.png?resize=1536%2C1356&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/MgMst.png?resize=1200%2C1059&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/MgMst.png?w=1400&ssl=1","width":"700"},{"height":"467","sizes":"auto, (max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px","src":"https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/BTFR.png?resize=700%2C467&ssl=1","srcset":"https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/BTFR.png?w=2091&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/BTFR.png?resize=300%2C200&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/BTFR.png?resize=1024%2C683&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/BTFR.png?resize=768%2C512&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/BTFR.png?resize=1536%2C1025&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/BTFR.png?resize=2048%2C1366&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/BTFR.png?resize=1200%2C801&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/BTFR.png?w=1400&ssl=1","width":"700"},{"height":"608","sizes":"auto, (max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px","src":"https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Fig_VfMstMb.png?resize=700%2C608&ssl=1","srcset":"https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Fig_VfMstMb.png?resize=1024%2C890&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Fig_VfMstMb.png?resize=300%2C261&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Fig_VfMstMb.png?resize=768%2C668&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Fig_VfMstMb.png?resize=1536%2C1335&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Fig_VfMstMb.png?resize=2048%2C1781&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Fig_VfMstMb.png?resize=1200%2C1043&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Fig_VfMstMb.png?w=1400&ssl=1, https://i0.wp.com/tritonstation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Fig_VfMstMb.png?w=2100&ssl=1","width":"700"}],"indexed":true,"indexed_at":1778506445,"language":"en","parent_doi":null,"published_at":1778504580,"reference":[],"registered_at":0,"relationships":[],"rid":"czvte-0ra03","status":"active","summary":"Previously I had alluded to some of the major projects I\u2019ve been working on. One has come to fruition and can be found on the arXiv and in the Astrophysical Journal\n\n &\n\n. It has taken many years to assemble the data in this paper, during which time the models purporting to explain some of it have evolved considerably while consistently failing to address the real problems they raise.","tags":["Data Interpretation","Galaxy Evolution","Galaxy Formation","Laws Of Nature","Personal Experience"],"title":"Extended Tully-Fisher relations","updated_at":1778462947,"url":"https://tritonstation.com/2026/05/11/extended-tully-fisher-relations/","version":"v1"}],"out_of":50135,"page":1,"per_page":10,"total-results":50135}![John’s first photo](\"https://svpow.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/bjqaynpcqaixaed.jpg\"){kind=link}
![replace that sauropod with (admittedly very impressive) forelimb material of Patagotitan](\"https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:F%C3%B3siles_del_titanosauria_del_Chubut_en_el_Museo_Egidio_Feruglio_de_Trelew_14.JPG\"){kind=link}
![later photos](\"https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MEF_Invita_2015_15.JPG\"){kind=link}
![a newer photo of a Neuquensaurus mount at the museum](\"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/44/Neuquensaurus_australis%2C_Museo_paleontol%C3%B3gico_Egidio_Feruglio.jpg\"){kind=link}
![from Wikimedia](\"https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jobaria_in_the_Australian_Museum.jpg\"){kind=link}