[Neurobureau-hubs] next large group call

[Oliver Lyttelton]

I hear your point, and it may be better that way.

Just to be clear, I wasn't suggesting membership of the bureau should be
just for students, but that the hubs should be drawn from the student body.

I totally agree that having junior faculty on board both as members and also
in a leadership role is vital.

sort of:
students elect hubs

hubs mature into leadership roles...


On 11 July 2011 13:18, MCLAREN, Donald <mclaren.donald at gmail.com> wrote:

> I think it should extend to junior faculty in addition to post-docs.
> There are a number of junior faculty who could also benefit from the
> resources and contribute to the education and mentoring of students.
>
> Best Regards, Donald McLaren
> =================
> D.G. McLaren, Ph.D.
> Postdoctoral Research Fellow, GRECC, Bedford VA
> Research Fellow, Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital
> and
> Harvard Medical School
> Office: (773) 406-2464
> =====================
> This e-mail contains CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION which may contain PROTECTED
> HEALTHCARE INFORMATION and may also be LEGALLY PRIVILEGED and which is
> intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the
> reader of the e-mail is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent
> responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby
> notified that you are in possession of confidential and privileged
> information. Any unauthorized use, disclosure, copying or the taking of any
> action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly
> prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail
> unintentionally, please immediately notify the sender via telephone at
> (773)
> 406-2464 or email.
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Oliver Lyttelton
> <oliver.c.lyttelton at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > I kind of like the guerilla/commune aspect of the bureau. As we all get
> on
> > in our careers, aspirations mature, and certainly encouraging "open
> > neuroscience" extends a lot further than a subversive PhD/Post-doc
> society
> > aimed at getting the big power-players to bring down their walls and
> allow
> > us to work together easily.
> >
> > But as we move beyond those ideas towards creating an "open neuroscience"
> > infrastructure we hit straight into other big projects aimed in the same
> > arena, and I think, risk losing our identity.
> >
> > Since I can't make wednesday, ( I have a 3 hour meeting with my
> > supervisor...) and it looks like that will probably be the day for the
> > meeting, based on everyone else's availability, here is my wish list:
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > 1) Whatever else the neurobureau becomes, I'd like to see it maintain its
> > role as an international student/(masters/phd/postdoc) support
> > group/watchdog championing the cause of people who are often severely
> > disenfranchised by the scientific establishment.
> >
> > 2) Open membership. I'd like to see that at every event the bureau hosts,
> > everyone is encouraged to become a member, as Mike pointed out, with
> simple
> > instructions as to how to join. Somewhere there should be a list of
> members,
> > and an infrastructure in place to help people reach their local hubs and
> set
> > up their own local, student initiatives. Why not use Facebook?
> >
> > 3) I would like to see hubs elected by the members. I'd like to see a
> date
> > set for the first elections (perhaps next year) and a roadmap as to how
> to
> > get there.
> >
> > 4) Anyone who is no longer a student (and in my mind not eligible to run
> for
> > election as hub) could become part of the of leadership structure, beyond
> > the hubs, which interact and interface between the hubs and the existing
> > power structures within the field, championing the cause of
> > open-neuroscience, and looking after the rights of the student body.
> >
> > Thanks for reading,
> >
> > with my best wishes to everyone,
> >
> > Oliver
> >
> >
> >
> > On 10 July 2011 12:40, Pierre Bellec <pierre.bellec at criugm.qc.ca> wrote:
> >>
> >> Dear Joshua et al,
> >> What you describe makes me think of one of the idea initiated by Mike
> >> Milham. Basically we would have a number of research centers which would
> >> provide some free space for datasets and some free resources for
> >> computation, with as many tools as possible. I think it's important to
> have
> >> multiple data repository centers to have "mirrors" and cut down access
> time
> >> in various part of the world. These mirrors can be linked to multiple
> >> places, such as NITRC. The key idea is that you can use the data and the
> >> resources, or even upload your own data to process it there, but then
> you
> >> have to commit to make it public, at least at some defined point. That's
> a
> >> viral model for open data (and tool) sharing. Of course, the sites would
> >> have common protocols, and share their databases to a large extent so
> they
> >> would be driving forces in that network. What's cool about that model is
> >> that there is no need to install a virtual machine to share tools or
> data,
> >> and no limit to the computational power you can access (if the centers
> are
> >> plugged into high-performance computing facilities).
> >> I am definitely working towards that at my level. As I mentioned to you,
> I
> >> am a "pipeliner" and I have developed software specifically targeted at
> >> pipeline development and deployment (PSOM and NIAK, which are the
> >> octave/matlab equivalent of NIPYPE and NIPY). There is also the project
> of
> >> Alan Evans, CBRAIN, which aims at providing a generic interface to
> >> download/upload databases, and send processing on a grid of
> supercomputers.
> >> Currently CBRAIN interfaces about 50000 cores, but this has not been
> >> negotiated for open access. I am pretty sure it could though, if rules
> were
> >> defined. Instead of writing this ridiculously long email, I should
> actually
> >> be writing a paper about a generic system to deploy any pipeline coded
> using
> >> PSOM into CBRAIN. That's how we (me, Sébastien Lavoie-Courchesne and
> >> François Chouinard-Decorte) have preprocessed the ADHD200 dataset. Alan
> also
> >> applied for a 5 Pb data storage (I am on that application) so, if that
> goes
> >> through, Montreal could be one of the mirroring site. We could try to
> >> implement this computational infrastructure at various sites of the
> >> neurobureau and make it happen. It's all possible in a short time. It
> could
> >> maybe even get funded, but as Mike pointed out that's not a necessity.
> >> BTW, because this project fits a number of large efforts in the field, I
> >> think it's important for us to be connected with the key senior players
> >> somehow. That's partly what motivated me to propose this "senior
> advisory
> >> board" (it could be beneficial beyond that particular point though). If
> we
> >> can be some sort of proof of concept for a larger effort, good.
> Conversely,
> >> if someone gets funded to do that, hopefully we'll be part of it.
> >> Finally, re the polymath project, one of the Alex of the neurobureau
> wrote
> >> something about that on the neurobureau blog. We don't actually need a
> big
> >> infrastucture for that. All we need is a "grand challenge" as well as a
> >> dataset where this grand challenge can be resolved. Actually, the grand
> >> challenge could be the target of the workshop Donald suggested. I have
> an
> >> idea for a grand challenge, will do a separate email about that.
> >> Please let me know what you think,
> >> Pierre Bellec, PhD
> >> Chercheur adjoint
> >> Département d'informatique et de recherche opérationnelle
> >> Centre de recherche de l'institut de Gériatrie de Montréal
> >> 4565, Chemin Queen-Mary
> >> Montréal (Québec)
> >> H3W 1W5
> >> Université de Montréal
> >> http://simexp-lab.org/brainwiki/doku.php?id=pierrebellec
> >> (001)(514) 340 3540 #3367
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2011/7/10 joshua vogelstein <joshuav at jhu.edu>
> >>>
> >>> ah, thank you for bringing up this point! i agree that this is a very
> >>> important discussion, and that there are gradations of openness.
> consider
> >>> wikipedia: it is not the case that anybody can just write anything they
> >>> want.  wikimedia established guidelines, users are expected to follow.
>   the
> >>> same is true of arxiv.  i expect that we will want to establish similar
> >>> guidelines establishing what we are open to, and what we are not.  and
> i
> >>> imagine that those guidelines will be organic and grow with us as we
> learn
> >>> more and get more capabilities.
> >>> cheers, j
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> If it makes you feel better, please remember to consider humanity
> before
> >>> doing stuff. Otherwise, please just have a nice day.
> >>> openconnectomeproject.org
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 10:03 AM, MCLAREN, Donald
> >>> <mclaren.donald at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Along the discussion of openess. I think one of the early decisions if
> >>>> if there will be a new central data repository (a number already
> >>>> exist) or if we will use an existing one or if we will use multiple
> >>>> systems that are distributed. The other decision related to this is
> >>>> whether it should be fully open -- anyone can add to it -- or OPEN
> >>>> access -- where an 'elected' committe would review and vote on the
> >>>> submission or processing request -- or OPEN access -- where the
> >>>> storage owners would decide what is valuable enough to put on the
> >>>> system.
> >>>>
> >>>> These two questions will go hand in hand.
> >>>>
> >>>> On Saturday, July 9, 2011, Michael Milham <milham01 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> > Folks,
> >>>> > Sitting in back of car stuck in traffic...so figured I'd give my
> >>>> > standard 2 cents sideline view commentary. When thinking through
> what to do
> >>>> > with an organization to make it meaningful, it is important to
> identify what
> >>>> > are the unaddressed needs of the community and what are the services
> you can
> >>>> > provide. I think it is important that folks think through how you
> want to
> >>>> > position the neurobureau in the community that will make it both
> unique and
> >>>> > effective (I.e., capable of taking ideas and making them reality)
> for the
> >>>> > community.
> >>>> > With respect to grants, do not underestimate the environment we are
> >>>> > heading into at the NIH...Tom Insel has been very open about the
> reality of
> >>>> > the times for NIMH and the challenges ahead for funding...same true
> for the
> >>>> > other institutes. Review will be harder than ever and more
> competitive.
> >>>> > Foundations and philanthropy will be very important. And so will
> tempering
> >>>> > expectations, and increasing distribution of work...when you see
> efforts
> >>>> > like the 1000 functional connectomes project, INDI and
> ADHD-200...those were
> >>>> > all done without dedicated funding...they are worth it, but do take
> a toll
> >>>> > on those executing them (Maarten will readily testify to this, as I
> am sure
> >>>> > Cameron will in his more recent efforts). One hopes their efforts
> can obtain
> >>>> > funding over time as they become established enough...but that is
> over time.
> >>>> > So, my point is efforts up front will likely be the product of folks
> working
> >>>> > overtime or gaining philanthropic support. Would set goals for
> neurobureau
> >>>> > to ensure feasibility.
> >>>> > Hope that makes sense.
> >>>> > With respect to openness...my limited view of the situation is that
> it
> >>>> > may feel closed in that folks see pins and branding all over the
> place...but
> >>>> > not much saying "email us here to become a member"...keeps people
> who do not
> >>>> > know the inner circle looking from the outside...don't think that is
> >>>> > intentional...and my view can be off.
> >>>> > Traffic has lightened...so, I will sign off on that note.
> >>>> > Sent from my iPhone
> >>>> > On Jul 9, 2011, at 11:32 PM, Pierre Bellec
> >>>> > <pierre.bellec at criugm.qc.ca> wrote:
> >>>> >
> >>>> > @Donald
> >>>> > Yes, yes, yes !!! I love the idea of a workshop where people would
> try
> >>>> > to create something, rather than listen to talks. We had actually
> started
> >>>> > discussing something along those lines. One other idea was to have
> half
> >>>> > participants "senior" (should know what they're doing) and the other
> half
> >>>> > wanting to learn on a technique/set of techniques. We would pair
> seniors and
> >>>> > juniors based on interests. So it would also be an educational
> workshop.
> >>>> > Another idea would be to have a number of artists joining to work on
> one or
> >>>> > several pieces around the theme of the workshop, in interaction with
> the
> >>>> > scientists. In the case of Nathalie for example, there could even be
> some
> >>>> > imaging experiments going on as part of the workshop. Finally, I
> believe
> >>>> > there should be pre-workshop meetings on the web to discuss the work
> before
> >>>> > the event. 3, 4 or even 5 days are too short to achieve something if
> it's
> >>>> > not carefuly planned.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Cheers,
> >>>> > Pierre Bellec, PhD
> >>>> > Chercheur adjointDépartement d'informatique et de recherche
> >>>> > opérationnelle
> >>>> > Centre de recherche de l'institut de Gériatrie de Montréal
> >>>> > 4565, Chemin Queen-Mary
> >>>> > Montréal (Québec)
> >>>> > H3W 1W5Université de Montréal
> >>>> > http://simexp-lab.org/brainwiki/doku.php?id=pierrebellec
> >>>> > (001)(514) 340 3540 #3367
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>> > 2011/7/9 MCLAREN, Donald <mclaren.donald at gmail.com>
> >>>> >
> >>>> > I'm stealing this idea from the Advanced Psychometrics Workshop (its
> >>>> > partially funded by the NIH).
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Each year, we should pick a place -- somewhere unique -- and hold a
> >>>> > small workshop. I'm thinking 30 people maximum where they would
> apply
> >>>> > and we'd choose the people. At the workshop, there would be some
> talks
> >>>> > and then we'd divide into 3-4 workgroups and analyze a dataset. From
> >>>> > this one or more papers could be produced from each group.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > I should also point out, that all the papers could form a special
> >>>> > issue (e.g. Brain and Behavior is having a special issue just on the
> >>>> > papers from the Advanced Psychometrics Workshop this year).
> >>>> >
> >>>> > After a year or two, we could probably get some NIH funding. This
> >>>> > would be a good starting point for building a research focused
> >>>> > organization. I also think that once we get going, then it would be
> >>>> > easiest to be driven by corporate money. I think there will be a lot
> >>>> > of resistance from institutions in the US from letting faculty apply
> >>>> > for grants through the NB. To much lost revenue from the indirect
> >>>> > costs.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Now, if its truly a research institution, with its own facility,
> >>>> > that's another story. However, I think that is probably a number of
> >>>> > years away.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > At least that is how it seems.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Best Regards, Donald McLaren
> >>>> > =================
> >>>> > D.G. McLaren, Ph.D.
> >>>> > Postdoctoral Research Fellow, GRECC, Bedford VA
> >>>> > Research Fellow, Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General
> >>>> > Hospital and
> >>>> > Harvard Medical School
> >>>> > Office: (773) 406-2464
> >>>> > =====================
> >>>> > This e-mail contains CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION which may contain
> >>>> > PROTECTED
> >>>> > HEALTHCARE INFORMATION and may also be LEGALLY PRIVILEGED and which
> is
> >>>> > intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above.
> If
> >>>> > the
> >>>> > reader of the e-mail is not the intended recipient or the employee
> or
> >>>> > agent
> >>>> > responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are
> >>>> > hereby
> >>>> > notified that you are in possession of confidential and privileged
> >>>> > information. Any unauthorized use, disclosure, copying or the taking
> >>>> > of any
> >>>> > action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly
> >>>> > prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail
> >>>> > unintentionally, please immediately notify the sender via telephone
> at
> >>>> > (773)
> >>>> > 406-2464 or email.
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>> > On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 10:56 PM, Pierre Bellec
> >>>> > <
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Best Regards, Donald McLaren
> >>>> =================
> >>>> D.G. McLaren, Ph.D.
> >>>> Postdoctoral Research Fellow, GRECC, Bedford VA
> >>>> Research Fellow, Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General
> Hospital
> >>>> and
> >>>>
> >>>> Harvard Medical School
> >>>> Office: (773) 406-2464
> >>>> =====================
> >>>> This e-mail contains CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION which may contain
> >>>> PROTECTED
> >>>> HEALTHCARE INFORMATION and may also be LEGALLY PRIVILEGED and which is
> >>>> intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If
> >>>> the
> >>>> reader of the e-mail is not the intended recipient or the employee or
> >>>> agent
> >>>> responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are
> hereby
> >>>> notified that you are in possession of confidential and privileged
> >>>> information. Any unauthorized use, disclosure, copying or the taking
> of
> >>>> any
> >>>> action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly
> >>>> prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail
> >>>> unintentionally, please immediately notify the sender via telephone at
> >>>> (773)
> >>>>
> >>>> 406-2464 or email.
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Neurobureau-hubs mailing list
> >>>> Neurobureau-hubs at www.nitrc.org
> >>>> http://www.nitrc.org/mailman/listinfo/neurobureau-hubs
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Neurobureau-hubs mailing list
> >> Neurobureau-hubs at www.nitrc.org
> >> http://www.nitrc.org/mailman/listinfo/neurobureau-hubs
> >>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Neurobureau-hubs mailing list
> > Neurobureau-hubs at www.nitrc.org
> > http://www.nitrc.org/mailman/listinfo/neurobureau-hubs
> >
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.nitrc.org/pipermail/neurobureau-hubs/attachments/20110711/a7bb1927/attachment-0001.html