Last week I attended the Open Science Retreat (#osr24nl) in a quite and relaxing region in North-Holland. The meeting was how I like all meetings to be (and I count myself lucky many of my meetings are like this): open, welcoming, constructive, diverse, and intellectually challenging. Not all scientific meetings are like this and it is easy to end up going to obligatory meetings where the discussions are of a different level.

Apologies for the long hiatus: we've had some health issues in the family, and startup life has been particularly overwhelming. With any luck, I'll be able to return to a more regular posting frequency soon. What’s the right relationship between theory, computation, and experiment? Much has been written on this.

In the mid to late 1990s as the Web developed, it was becoming more obvious that one area it would revolutionise was of scholarly journal publishing. Since the days of the very first scientific journals in the 1650s, the medium had been firmly rooted in paper. Even printed colour only became common (and affordable) from the 1980s. An opportunity to move away from these restrictions was provided by the Web.

I have written a few times about the so-called “anomeric effect”, which relates to stereoelectronic interactions in molecules such as sugars bearing a tetrahedral carbon atom with at least two oxygen substituents. The effect can be detected when the two C-O bond lengths in such molecules are inspected, most obviously when one of these bonds has a very different length from the other.

My research is about the interaction of (machine) representation and the impact on the success of data analysis (matchine learning, chemometrics, AI, etc). See the posts about molecular chemometrics. This got me into FAIR: making data interoperable and being able to (really) reuse data is the starting point of doing research.

The recent release of the DataCite Data Citation corpus, which has the stated aim of providing “a trusted central aggregate of all data citations to further our understanding of data usage and advance meaningful data metrics” made me want to investigate what the current state of citing data in the area of chemistry might be. Chemistry is known to be a “data rich” science (as most of the physical sciences are) and  here on this very blog I

Following on from my template exploration of the Wilkinson hydrogenation catalyst, I now repeat this for the Grubbs variant of the Alkene metathesis reaction. As with the Wilkinson, here I focus on the stereochemistry of the mechanism as first suggested by Chauvin[cite]https://doi.org/10.1002/macp.1971.021410112[/cite], an aspect lacking in eg the Wikipedia entry.

Just before the end of the year, the Wikidata subsetting: approaches, tools, and evaluation paper by Seyed Amir Hosseini Beghaeiraveri et al. got published (doi:10.3233/SW-233491). I am really excited our group (i.e. Ammar and Denise) has been able to contribute to this. I think it also is a great example of the power of hackathons to bring together people.

In the late 1980s, as I recollected here[cite]10.59350/g4j62-4xk50[/cite] the equipment needed for real time molecular visualisation as it became known as was still expensive, requiring custom systems such as Evans and Sutherland PS390 workstations.

On 24th January 1984, the Macintosh computer was released, as all the media are informing us. Apparently, some are still working. I thought I would give my own personal recollections of that period. In fact, the Mac reached UK stores via a dealership only in 1985.