リビジョン | 8ab3ea2c714565a16a5c74324176c068559622ca (tree) |
---|---|
日時 | 2018-02-02 19:48:50 |
作者 | Lorenzo Isella <lorenzo.isella@gmai...> |
コミッター | Lorenzo Isella |
A very good template for dark presentations with Beamer. Remember to compile with Lualatex.
@@ -0,0 +1,552 @@ | ||
1 | +\documentclass[12pt,t]{beamer} | |
2 | +\usepackage{graphicx} | |
3 | +\setbeameroption{hide notes} | |
4 | +\setbeamertemplate{note page}[plain] | |
5 | + | |
6 | +% get rid of junk | |
7 | +\usetheme{default} | |
8 | +\beamertemplatenavigationsymbolsempty | |
9 | +\hypersetup{pdfpagemode=UseNone} % don't show bookmarks on initial view | |
10 | + | |
11 | +% font | |
12 | +\usepackage{fontspec} | |
13 | +\setsansfont{TeX Gyre Heros} | |
14 | +\setbeamerfont{note page}{family*=pplx,size=\footnotesize} % Palatino for notes | |
15 | +% "TeX Gyre Heros can be used as a replacement for Helvetica" | |
16 | +% In Unix, unzip the following into ~/.fonts | |
17 | +% In Mac, unzip it, double-click the .otf files, and install using "FontBook" | |
18 | +% http://www.gust.org.pl/projects/e-foundry/tex-gyre/heros/qhv2.004otf.zip | |
19 | + | |
20 | +% named colors | |
21 | +\definecolor{offwhite}{RGB}{249,242,215} | |
22 | +\definecolor{foreground}{RGB}{255,255,255} | |
23 | +\definecolor{background}{RGB}{24,24,24} | |
24 | +\definecolor{title}{RGB}{107,174,214} | |
25 | +\definecolor{gray}{RGB}{155,155,155} | |
26 | +\definecolor{subtitle}{RGB}{102,255,204} | |
27 | +\definecolor{hilight}{RGB}{102,255,204} | |
28 | +\definecolor{vhilight}{RGB}{255,111,207} | |
29 | +\definecolor{lolight}{RGB}{155,155,155} | |
30 | +%\definecolor{green}{RGB}{125,250,125} | |
31 | + | |
32 | +% use those colors | |
33 | +\setbeamercolor{titlelike}{fg=title} | |
34 | +\setbeamercolor{subtitle}{fg=subtitle} | |
35 | +\setbeamercolor{institute}{fg=gray} | |
36 | +\setbeamercolor{normal text}{fg=foreground,bg=background} | |
37 | +\setbeamercolor{item}{fg=foreground} % color of bullets | |
38 | +\setbeamercolor{subitem}{fg=gray} | |
39 | +\setbeamercolor{itemize/enumerate subbody}{fg=gray} | |
40 | +\setbeamertemplate{itemize subitem}{{\textendash}} | |
41 | +\setbeamerfont{itemize/enumerate subbody}{size=\footnotesize} | |
42 | +\setbeamerfont{itemize/enumerate subitem}{size=\footnotesize} | |
43 | + | |
44 | +% page number | |
45 | +\setbeamertemplate{footline}{% | |
46 | + \raisebox{5pt}{\makebox[\paperwidth]{\hfill\makebox[20pt]{\color{gray} | |
47 | + \scriptsize\insertframenumber}}}\hspace*{5pt}} | |
48 | + | |
49 | +% add a bit of space at the top of the notes page | |
50 | +\addtobeamertemplate{note page}{\setlength{\parskip}{12pt}} | |
51 | + | |
52 | +% a few macros | |
53 | +\newcommand{\bi}{\begin{itemize}} | |
54 | +\newcommand{\ei}{\end{itemize}} | |
55 | +\newcommand{\ig}{\includegraphics} | |
56 | +\newcommand{\subt}[1]{{\footnotesize \color{subtitle} {#1}}} | |
57 | + | |
58 | +% title info | |
59 | +\title{Open access publishing} | |
60 | +\subtitle{A researcher's perspective} | |
61 | +\author{\href{http://kbroman.org}{Karl Broman}} | |
62 | +\institute{\href{https://www.biostat.wisc.edu}{Biostatistics \& Medical Informatics} \\[2pt] \href{http://www.wisc.edu}{University of Wisconsin{\textendash}Madison}} | |
63 | +\date{\href{http://kbroman.org}{\tt \scriptsize kbroman.org} | |
64 | +\\[-4pt] | |
65 | +\href{https://github.com/kbroman}{\tt \scriptsize github.com/kbroman} | |
66 | +\\[-4pt] | |
67 | +\href{https://twitter.com/kwbroman}{\tt \scriptsize @kwbroman} | |
68 | +} | |
69 | + | |
70 | + | |
71 | +\begin{document} | |
72 | + | |
73 | +% title slide | |
74 | +{ | |
75 | +\setbeamertemplate{footline}{} % no page number here | |
76 | +\frame{ | |
77 | + \titlepage | |
78 | + \note{These are slides for a talk I will give on 30 Oct 2014, at a | |
79 | + symposium on scholarly publishing. | |
80 | + | |
81 | + I'm a statistician. My research focuses on genetics, and | |
82 | + most of my papers are in genetics journals. | |
83 | + | |
84 | + So in commenting on open access, I'm focusing on scientific | |
85 | + publications, and perhaps more narrowly, on the biological | |
86 | + sciences. | |
87 | +} } } | |
88 | + | |
89 | + | |
90 | + | |
91 | +\begin{frame}{Access in action} | |
92 | +\subt{Interesting reference} | |
93 | + | |
94 | +% \bigskip | |
95 | +% \centerline{ | |
96 | +% \ig[height=0.75\textheight]{Images/img01.jpg} | |
97 | +% } | |
98 | + | |
99 | +\note{I'll begin with an illustration of what I mean by | |
100 | + access. | |
101 | + | |
102 | + Some time back, I was reading a manuscript and saw an | |
103 | + article of interest.} | |
104 | +\end{frame} | |
105 | + | |
106 | + | |
107 | +\begin{frame}{Test Slide by Lorenzo} | |
108 | + \subt{An optional subtitle} \\ | |
109 | + Now some real content | |
110 | + | |
111 | + \bi | |
112 | +\item my first item | |
113 | + \item and my second one | |
114 | + \ei | |
115 | +Now I try to enumerate stuff | |
116 | + | |
117 | + \begin{enumerate} | |
118 | +\item my first item (enumerated!) | |
119 | + \item and my second one | |
120 | + \end{enumerate} | |
121 | +It looks like is OK as a template I may use. Remember to compile with Lualatex! | |
122 | + | |
123 | +% \bigskip | |
124 | +% \centerline{ | |
125 | +% \ig[height=0.75\textheight]{Images/img01.jpg} | |
126 | +% } | |
127 | + | |
128 | +\note{I'll begin with an illustration of what I mean by | |
129 | + access. | |
130 | + | |
131 | + Some time back, I was reading a manuscript and saw an | |
132 | + article of interest.} | |
133 | +\end{frame} | |
134 | + | |
135 | + | |
136 | + | |
137 | + | |
138 | +\begin{frame}{Access in action} | |
139 | +\subt{Google Scholar} | |
140 | + | |
141 | +\bigskip | |
142 | +% \begin{center} | |
143 | +% \ig[width=0.70\textwidth]{Images/img02.jpg} | |
144 | + | |
145 | +% \onslide<2> { | |
146 | +% \vspace*{-0.55\textheight} | |
147 | +% \hspace*{0.15\textwidth} | |
148 | +% \ig[width=0.70\textwidth]{Images/img03.jpg} | |
149 | +% } | |
150 | +% \end{center} | |
151 | + | |
152 | +\note{If I paste the article title into Google Scholar, I immediately | |
153 | + find the paper and can go directly to the journal. | |
154 | + | |
155 | + But I was sitting at home on my couch. | |
156 | + | |
157 | + And they charge \$40 for a 7 page paper! | |
158 | + | |
159 | + I could get the article through the UW Libraries web site, but it's | |
160 | + a bit of a hassle.} | |
161 | +\end{frame} | |
162 | + | |
163 | + | |
164 | + | |
165 | + | |
166 | +\begin{frame}{What's the deal with the prices?} | |
167 | + | |
168 | +\vspace{24pt} | |
169 | + | |
170 | +{\scriptsize \color{gray} | |
171 | +\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{3} | |
172 | +\begin{tabular}{p{3.2in}@{\hspace*{1cm}}l} | |
173 | +Broman K, Speed T, Tigges M ({\color{white} 1996}) Estimation of antigen-responsive T | |
174 | +cell frequencies in PBMC from human subjects. {\color{white} \mbox{J Immunol Meth}} 198:119{\textendash}132 | |
175 | +& {\color{vhilight} \footnotesize \$39.95} \\ | |
176 | +Broman KW, Weber JL ({\color{white} 1999}) Method for constructing confidently ordered | |
177 | +linkage maps. {\color{white} Genet Epidemiol} 16:337{\textendash}343 & {\color{vhilight} | |
178 | + \footnotesize \$35.00} \\ | |
179 | +Broman KW, Feingold E ({\color{white} 2004}) SNPs made routine. {\color{white} Nat Methods} 1:104{\textendash}105 | |
180 | +& {\color{vhilight} \footnotesize \$18.00} \\ | |
181 | +Broman KW ({\color{white} 2005}) Mapping expression in randomized rodent | |
182 | +genomes. {\color{white} Nat Genet} 37:209{\textendash}210 & {\color{vhilight} \footnotesize \$18.00} | |
183 | +\end{tabular} | |
184 | +} | |
185 | + | |
186 | +\note{I went back to some of my early papers, and found these | |
187 | + outrageous prices. | |
188 | + | |
189 | + \$18 for a 2-page paper? | |
190 | + | |
191 | + I understand that the publishing industry has a long history of | |
192 | + screwy pricing, but you'd have to be either \textbf{desperate} or | |
193 | + \textbf{stupid} to pay this. | |
194 | + | |
195 | + And for that 1999 Genetic Epidemiology article, published by Wiley, | |
196 | + you have to register in order to find out that it's \$35 for just 24 | |
197 | + hours of access. | |
198 | +} | |
199 | +\end{frame} | |
200 | + | |
201 | + | |
202 | + | |
203 | +\begin{frame}{Access in action} | |
204 | +\subt{There's also PubMed} | |
205 | + | |
206 | +\bigskip | |
207 | +% \begin{center} | |
208 | +% \ig[width=0.7\textwidth]{Images/img13.png} | |
209 | + | |
210 | + | |
211 | +% \onslide<2>{ | |
212 | +% \vspace*{-0.45\textheight} | |
213 | +% \hspace*{0.55\textwidth} | |
214 | +% \ig[width=2in]{Images/free_in_pmc.png} | |
215 | +% } | |
216 | + | |
217 | +% \end{center} | |
218 | + | |
219 | +\note{If I'd used PubMed rather than Google Scholar, I could have | |
220 | + gotten to the published paper in just a few clicks, because the | |
221 | + manuscript is in PubMed Central. | |
222 | + | |
223 | + PubMed Central is only for federally-funded research, has a one year | |
224 | + embargo, and (as here) might not include the published version of the | |
225 | + paper. | |
226 | + | |
227 | + PubMed Central is a good thing, but one generally can't wait a year, | |
228 | + it's unfortunate that the published versions aren't always included, | |
229 | + and from an author's point of view it can be a real hassle. | |
230 | +} | |
231 | +\end{frame} | |
232 | + | |
233 | + | |
234 | +\begin{frame}{Another example} | |
235 | + | |
236 | +\bigskip | |
237 | + | |
238 | +\begin{center} | |
239 | + | |
240 | +% \hspace{-0.15\textwidth} | |
241 | +% \ig[height=0.7\textheight]{Images/feingold_pubmed.png} | |
242 | + | |
243 | +% \onslide<2->{ | |
244 | +% \vspace*{-0.65\textheight} | |
245 | +% \hspace*{-0.10\textwidth} | |
246 | +% \ig[height=0.75\textheight]{Images/feingold_paywall.png} | |
247 | +% } | |
248 | + | |
249 | +% \onslide<3->{ | |
250 | +% \vspace*{-0.87\textheight} | |
251 | +% \hspace*{0.38\textwidth} | |
252 | +% \ig[height=0.92\textheight]{Images/feingold_paper.png} | |
253 | +% } | |
254 | + | |
255 | +% \onslide<4->{ | |
256 | +% \vspace*{-0.35\textheight} | |
257 | +% \hspace*{0.29\textwidth} | |
258 | +% \ig[height=0.35\textheight]{Images/feingold_appendix_url.png} | |
259 | +% } | |
260 | + | |
261 | +% \onslide<5>{ | |
262 | +% \vspace*{-0.90\textheight} | |
263 | +% \hspace*{0.48\textwidth} | |
264 | +% \ig[height=0.85\textheight]{Images/feingold_paywall2.png} | |
265 | +% } | |
266 | + | |
267 | +\note{As another example, I was interested a paper from the Journal of | |
268 | + Dental Research. | |
269 | + | |
270 | + It's less than a year old, so it's not available in PubMed | |
271 | + Central. | |
272 | + | |
273 | + I ordered a copy by inter-library loan, but it didn't include the | |
274 | + supplemental methods, and those are behind a paywall at the journal! | |
275 | +} | |
276 | +\end{center} | |
277 | + | |
278 | +\end{frame} | |
279 | + | |
280 | +\begin{frame}{Twitter is useful} | |
281 | +\subt{(for venting\only<2>{ and more})} | |
282 | + | |
283 | +\bigskip | |
284 | + | |
285 | +% \begin{center} | |
286 | + | |
287 | +% \ig[height=0.5\textheight]{Images/feingold_tweet.jpg} | |
288 | + | |
289 | +% \onslide<2->{ | |
290 | +% \vspace*{-0.70\textheight} | |
291 | +% \hspace*{0.40\textwidth} | |
292 | +% \ig[height=0.95\textheight]{Images/feingold_appendix.png} | |
293 | +% } | |
294 | +% \end{center} | |
295 | + | |
296 | +\note{I was reduced to venting on twitter. | |
297 | + | |
298 | + But then I got the appendix I wanted by email (twice!), within an | |
299 | + hour of my tweet. (Thanks, MM and KW!) | |
300 | +} | |
301 | + | |
302 | +\end{frame} | |
303 | + | |
304 | +\begin{frame}[c]{Twitter is useful} | |
305 | + | |
306 | +\centerline{\Huge {\#}icanhazpdf} | |
307 | + | |
308 | +\note{If you search twitter for {\#}icanhazpdf, you'll find lots of | |
309 | + people asking for copies of articles. Quite effective.} | |
310 | +\end{frame} | |
311 | + | |
312 | +\begin{frame}{It's all about money} | |
313 | +\subt{(Costs in scientific publishing)} | |
314 | + | |
315 | +\vspace{24pt} | |
316 | + | |
317 | +\bi | |
318 | +\item {\color<3| handout 0>{hilight} Research} | |
319 | +\item {\color<3| handout 0>{hilight} Writing} | |
320 | +\item {\color<3| handout 0>{hilight} Peer review, editorial oversight} | |
321 | +\item {\color<4| handout 0>{hilight} Journal administration} | |
322 | +\item {\color<4| handout 0>{hilight} Copy editing, typesetting} | |
323 | +\item {\color<4| handout 0>{hilight} Distribution} | |
324 | +\item<2-> {\color<2| handout 0>{vhilight} \color<4| handout 0>{hilight} Profit} | |
325 | +\ei | |
326 | + | |
327 | +\note{Open access is all about money. | |
328 | + | |
329 | +Most of the costs behind a research paper are paid by grants or | |
330 | +institutional funds. For most journals, peer review and editorial | |
331 | +oversight are unpaid. | |
332 | + | |
333 | +There are real costs associated with journals, but in the end they are | |
334 | +all paid from the same sources (grants and institutional funds). | |
335 | + | |
336 | +Do we really want to give away the product of our research and then | |
337 | +buy it back repeatedly, at great profit to the publishers? | |
338 | + | |
339 | +And shouldn't the literature be available generally and not just to | |
340 | +those with access to well-funded research libraries? | |
341 | +} | |
342 | +\end{frame} | |
343 | + | |
344 | +\begin{frame}{It's not about} | |
345 | + | |
346 | +\vspace{36pt} | |
347 | + | |
348 | +\bi | |
349 | +\itemsep6pt | |
350 | +\item {Peer review} | |
351 | +\item {Predatory publishing} | |
352 | +\item {\color<2->{vhilight} Impact factors} | |
353 | +\item {\color<2->{vhilight} Evaluating researchers} \\ | |
354 | +{\footnotesize \color{gray} (for grants \& promotions)} | |
355 | +\ei | |
356 | + | |
357 | +\vspace{36pt} | |
358 | + | |
359 | +\onslide<2->{ \color{hilight} Well, it sort of is\dots } | |
360 | + | |
361 | +\note{The Open Access discussion often gets tied up with discussion | |
362 | + about peer review, predatory publishing, and journal impact | |
363 | + factors. | |
364 | + | |
365 | + But to me, it is a completely separate issue, whether we want | |
366 | + stringent peer review before publication or instead leave the | |
367 | + evaluation entirely to post-publication review. | |
368 | + | |
369 | + On the other hand, the current culture is to evaluate researchers | |
370 | + based on the perceived quality of the journals in which they've | |
371 | + published. This makes it difficult to change to open access. | |
372 | + | |
373 | + If everyone's still going to send their best work to Science, | |
374 | + Nature, \& Cell, then that work will continue to be locked up behind | |
375 | + pay walls. | |
376 | +} | |
377 | +\end{frame} | |
378 | + | |
379 | +\begin{frame}{Paying for it} | |
380 | + | |
381 | +\vspace{36pt} | |
382 | + | |
383 | +\bi | |
384 | +\itemsep12pt | |
385 | +\item Traditional approach | |
386 | +\bi | |
387 | +\item subscriptions | |
388 | +\item page charges | |
389 | +\ei | |
390 | +\item Open access | |
391 | +\bi | |
392 | +\item bigger page charges | |
393 | +\item submission charges? | |
394 | +\ei | |
395 | +\onslide<2->{ | |
396 | +\item Endowments | |
397 | +\item Direct grants to journals | |
398 | +} | |
399 | +\ei | |
400 | + | |
401 | +\note{The usual way in which publishing costs are paid are through a | |
402 | + combination of subscriptions (both institutional and individual) and | |
403 | + direct charges to the author. | |
404 | + | |
405 | + In the new open access model, the page charges are increased in | |
406 | + order to eliminate the subscription fees. One might have a fee for | |
407 | + all submitted manuscripts and not just those accepted for | |
408 | + publication. | |
409 | + | |
410 | + I've not seen much discussion of other alternatives, but I would | |
411 | + prefer to see endowments established, particularly for | |
412 | + society journals. Alternatively, journals might be | |
413 | + funded directly through grants. | |
414 | +} | |
415 | +\end{frame} | |
416 | + | |
417 | + | |
418 | +\begin{frame}{Invoice} | |
419 | + | |
420 | +\bigskip | |
421 | +% \begin{center} | |
422 | +% \ig[height=0.75\textheight]{Images/invoice3.jpg} | |
423 | + | |
424 | + | |
425 | +% \onslide<2>{ | |
426 | +% \vspace*{-0.35\textheight} | |
427 | +% \ig[width=\textwidth]{Images/invoice3_clip.jpg} | |
428 | +% } | |
429 | +% \end{center} | |
430 | + | |
431 | +\note{Here's an invoice for a paper I published in 2012. | |
432 | + | |
433 | + The charges would have been ``just'' \$1700, but I paid an | |
434 | + additional \$1200 to have it freely available (otherwise it would | |
435 | + have been behind a pay wall for one year). | |
436 | +} | |
437 | +\end{frame} | |
438 | + | |
439 | + | |
440 | + | |
441 | + | |
442 | + | |
443 | + | |
444 | +\begin{frame}{Choices for young investigators} | |
445 | + | |
446 | +\vspace{36pt} | |
447 | + | |
448 | +\bi | |
449 | +\item Pay for open access | |
450 | +\item Support young open access journals | |
451 | + | |
452 | +\vspace*{12pt} | |
453 | + | |
454 | +\hspace{2cm} {\color{vhilight} \sc or} | |
455 | + | |
456 | +\vspace*{12pt} | |
457 | + | |
458 | +\item Let subscribers pay \& do more experiments | |
459 | +\item Continue to go after Science, Nature, \& Cell | |
460 | +\ei | |
461 | + | |
462 | +\note{The page charges, and the continued reliance on impact factors, | |
463 | + lead to difficult choices, particularly for young investigators. | |
464 | + | |
465 | + Should I pay for open access, or should I let the subscribers pay | |
466 | + and use the savings to do more experiments? | |
467 | + | |
468 | + Should I support open access journals, or should I continue to | |
469 | + go after Science, Nature, \& Cell? | |
470 | + | |
471 | + The best scientists may confidently maintain their pure publication | |
472 | + record. | |
473 | + | |
474 | + But more mediocre scientists, who may be just scraping by, | |
475 | + probably don't feel they have that luxury. A Nature paper can | |
476 | + ``make you.'' | |
477 | +} | |
478 | +\end{frame} | |
479 | + | |
480 | + | |
481 | +\begin{frame}{What can we do?} | |
482 | + | |
483 | +\vspace{36pt} | |
484 | + | |
485 | +\bi | |
486 | +\itemsep12pt | |
487 | +\item Send our best work to open access journals | |
488 | +\item Support junior faculty to keep their papers open | |
489 | +\item Pay attention to the quality of the work | |
490 | +\bi | |
491 | +\item[] (not the impact factor of the journal) | |
492 | +\ei | |
493 | +\item Raise endowments for trusted journals | |
494 | +\item {\color<2>{vhilight} Reform copyright law} | |
495 | +\ei | |
496 | + | |
497 | +\note{We need to send our best work to open access journals. | |
498 | + | |
499 | +We need to find ways to support our junior colleagues, so that they | |
500 | +may do so as well. | |
501 | + | |
502 | +We need to evaluate people based on their work and not by the name of | |
503 | +the journal in which it appeared. We all may say, ``Science and | |
504 | +Nature are often crap and there are lots of fantastic papers that | |
505 | +appear elsewhere.'' But somehow when we see Nature or Cell on | |
506 | +someone's CV, we still have an immediate, positive reaction. | |
507 | + | |
508 | +I would like to see endowed journals, open forever. | |
509 | + | |
510 | +The quickest way to free the product of federally funded research | |
511 | +would be to reform copyright law. If the product of our research were | |
512 | +forced open by law, the publishing industry would figure out how to | |
513 | +pay for it in short order. | |
514 | + | |
515 | +But given the state of politics in the US, I'm not too optimistic | |
516 | +about that. | |
517 | +} | |
518 | +\end{frame} | |
519 | + | |
520 | +{\setbeamertemplate{footline}{} | |
521 | + | |
522 | +\begin{frame} | |
523 | +\end{frame} | |
524 | + | |
525 | +\begin{frame}{Discussion questions} | |
526 | + | |
527 | +\vspace{12pt} | |
528 | + | |
529 | +{\small | |
530 | +\bi | |
531 | +\itemsep12pt | |
532 | + \item {\color{lolight} \footnotesize There is an emerging consensus to allow (or | |
533 | + even require) self-archiving for the final version of the | |
534 | + author's peer-reviewed manuscript, and to give the publisher | |
535 | + exclusivity for the published edition.} \\ | |
536 | + Is this a problem for the researchers that use the content? | |
537 | + \item How to encourage researchers to publish in open access | |
538 | + journals? How to help with publication charges? | |
539 | + \item Should we change how we evaluate scholars, for hiring and | |
540 | + promotion? | |
541 | + \item Should we give campus authors a chance to "opt-out" of any | |
542 | + institutional mandate for open access? | |
543 | + \ei | |
544 | +} | |
545 | + | |
546 | +\end{frame} | |
547 | + | |
548 | +} | |
549 | +\end{document} | |
550 | + | |
551 | + | |
552 | + |