AbstractFindable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (FAIR) guiding principles tailored for research software have been proposed by the FAIR for Research Software (FAIR4RS) Working Group. They provide a foundation for optimizing the reuse of research software. The FAIR4RS principles are, however, aspirational and do not provide practical instructions to the researchers. To fill this gap, we propose in this work the first actionable step-by-step guidelines for biomedical researchers to make their research software compliant with the FAIR4RS principles. We designate them as the FAIR Biomedical Research Software (FAIR-BioRS) guidelines. Our process for developing these guidelines, presented here, is based on an in-depth study of the FAIR4RS principles and a thorough review of current practices in the field. To support researchers, we have also developed a workflow that streamlines the process of implementing these guidelines. This workflow is incorporated in FAIRshare, a free and open-source software application aimed at simplifying the curation and sharing of FAIR biomedical data and software through user-friendly interfaces and automation. Details about this tool are also presented.

Research software is a fundamental and vital part of research worldwide, yet there remain significant challenges to software productivity, quality, reproducibility, and sustainability. Improving the practice of scholarship is a common goal of the open science, open source software and FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable) communities, but improving the sharing of research software has not yet been a strong focus of the latter. To improve the FAIRness of research software, the FAIR for Research Software (FAIR4RS) Working Group has sought to understand how to apply the FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship to research software, bringing together existing and new community efforts. Many of the FAIR Guiding Principles can be directly applied to research software by treating software and data as similar digital research objects. However, specific characteristics of software — such as its executability, composite nature, and continuous evolution and versioning — make it necessary to revise and extend the principles. This document presents the first version of the FAIR Principles for Research Software (FAIR4RS Principles). It is an outcome of the FAIR for Research Software Working Group (FAIR4RS WG). The FAIR for Research Software Working Group is jointly convened as an RDA Working Group, FORCE11 Working Group, and Research Software Alliance (ReSA) Task Force.

Abstract: The Journal of Open Source Software was created in 2016 as a diamond open-access journal to would enable open source software developers to submit short papers and their software to an open, interactive peer-review process that would improve their work and enable them to publish it, gaining scholarly credit for their software. Eight years of experience has shown us that the choice to run the journal as we would an open-source software project has led to successful publications (~2500 papers), a growing community (~80 editors and ~3500 reviewers), and an organization that can publish papers at about $2.00/per paper because of the generous volunteer community, and the fact that our processes naturally align with the POSI principles. This talk will discuss the journal and its history, how it aligns with open-source software methods, how it has grown community and in turn influenced the practices of the larger scholarly software community, and how its sustainability is aligned with POSI, along with challenges in all of these areas.

This is the archive of the slides and information associated with Bhavesh Patel's presentation at the FORCE11 Annual Conference (FORCE2024), called "Making FAIR Fair to the Researchers".  Abstract: The FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) Principles provide a framework for sharing research outcomes like data and software such that they are optimally reusable by both humans and machines. This is critical for allowing reproducibility of research results, promoting transparency of research processes, enabling reuse of research outcomes, and ultimately increasing the pace of discoveries in science. These Principles have been widely promoted and supported by all stakeholders in research since their publication in 2016 including researchers, funders, and scientific publishers. Yet, their implementation continues to be a challenge as sharing research results, i.e. manuscript publication, continues to be the main focus of researchers. Stakeholders have tested many approaches combining reward and punishment to overcome this challenge. Here, we present our approach that focuses more on supporting researchers. Specifically, we develop computer tools and software, such as SODA and codefair, that make it easier for researchers to prepare and share FAIR biomedical data and software. They are based on our own experience as biomedical researchers where we observed that most are in support of sharing their data and software in line with the FAIR Principles but often view it as an added burden as they lack time and knowledge to comply. We believe that such researcher-oriented tools can therefore play a significant role in making FAIR fair to the researchers and ultimately achieve the sharing of FAIR data, software, and other research outcomes at scale.

Jennifer Lin, Cameron Neylon, and I proposed The Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI) almost a decade ago. We drafted these principles because we were frustrated that the research community always seemed surprised when commercial organizations enclosed critical research tools that were once considered “open.”  We wanted to provide the community with a set of guidelines to help them avoid such enclosures in the future.  In short, we wanted to provide the community with heuristics to help them distinguish “open” from “fauxpen.” Since then, 19 organizations have publicly adopted POSI and have committed to periodically auditing themselves against the principles. This so-called “POSI posse” comprises organizations representing a critical part of the hidden infrastructure that scholarly research depends on daily. So we’re safe, right?  You can probably guess the answer. In this presentation, I discussed POSI’s limitations and the risks associated with the self-auditing culture that has developed around them. I also discussed recent developments in the community that threaten to slow or even roll back the adoption of open scholarly infrastructure. 

The Journal of Open Source Software (JOSS) is committed to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure, and here we summarize our status in doing so, followed by a more detailed discussion of how we do so, as well as explaining some when we do not, and some work in progress.