Archive for the ‘design research tools’ Category

6 April 2010 by Ricardo

As a PhD student I find myself roaming the Internet quite a bit in search of literature for my research project which can be really time consuming. Looking for the right keywords, opening each relevant result into a new tab, downloading each paper of interest, finding the cryptically named PDF file and then adding it to your library in an organized fashion (phew). So anything that can cut back this strain of accessing and organizing research papers is most welcome.

In previous posts I’ve mentioned Mendeley’s web importer, which helps retrieve papers directly to your Mendeley Web account. That’s all good, but what about papers that you already have on your computer spread about in different folders or hard drives?

There are multiple ways to import files from your hard drive directly into Mendeley Desktop. You can add one file at a time, a full folder in one go or even make a specific “Watched” folder.

A “Watched” folder is basically a folder that Mendeley keeps an eye on for any new files and automatically imports new documents with minimal interaction on your behalf. Just drop or download your PDF documents into your watched folder and Mendeley will do it’s thing (I mean auto-extract it’s metadata and add it to your library!).

So we now have a web importer for online retrieval and an automated watch folder. Looks like we are set!

My references and documents are all nice and organized within Mendeley Desktop and accessible online but when I look at the files on my computer, I notice something. In fact, I notice the lack of something: meaningful file names.

hard research life design research tools  An organized folder is a sign of a… file organizer

As you can see in the image above, the file names are not very explanatory and whenever I have to pick a file to send to a colleague or open it directly for some reason, it becomes a guess-the-mystery-file name game. Not to mention that every time I add a file to that folder with a similar name, I get this fantastic message:

The file you are trying to copy “sdarticle.pdf” already exists. Cancel or overwrite?

Good question, do I want to overwrite sdarticle.pdf? Do I have any idea what is in that file? The most probable answer to both these questions is no. Once again, Mendeley has considered this situation and provides an effortless way to organize your files with a built-in feature called: ‘File Organizer’.

As the name suggests, this feature can organize your files for you in a few different ways. You can store your files in a centralized folder with all the files renamed to a specific format. The format is easy to customize by simply dragging the naming categories from one input box to the other.

hard research life design research tools  An organized folder is a sign of a… file organizer

As you can see in the image above, I chose to rename my files and keep them in one folder with the file name following the format Author – Year – Title. I did not add the journal to the file name, but could have easily done so by just dragging it down into the file name.

There’s an option to organize the files into sub-folders, however I chose not to do so. That’s just my personal choice even though I know colleagues of mine prefer to separate things into sub-folders by year.

Once I’ve picked how I want my files to be sorted and renamed, I go ahead and click apply. Folders get created, files get renamed and I’m done:

hard research life design research tools  An organized folder is a sign of a… file organizer

These file names are much easier to understand and are categorised how I want them. This feature has not only organized my files into a folder with proper file names, but it will keep any new documents I add in the same orderly fashion. Neat huh?

28 January 2010 by Victor

Having seen a lot of ‘top 10 lists of 2009’ around, we thought we’d throw in our two cents and give you the top 10 most read articles on Mendeley, published in 2009!

The top paper for 2009 was written by Uri Alon, entitled: ‘How to choose a good scientific problem’, published in the journal “Molecular Cell.” Our stats tell us that there are currently 74 Mendeley users who have read this paper, even though it was only published in late 2009.

The full list of the top ten articles published in 2009 on Mendeley (as of 28th January 2010) is:

1. Uri Alon, ‘How to choose a good scientific problem’, Molecular Cell (2009), Volume: 35, Issue: 6
highlighting research design research tools academic features  The top 10 journal articles published in 2009 by readership on Mendeley

2. Castro Neto et al, ‘The electronic properties of graphene’, Reviews of Modern Physics (2009), Volume: 81, Issue: 1
highlighting research design research tools academic features  The top 10 journal articles published in 2009 by readership on Mendeley

3. Erez Lieberman-Aiden et al, ‘Comprehensive mapping of long-range interactions reveals folding principles of the human genome’, Science (2009), Volume: 326, Issue: 5950
highlighting research design research tools academic features  The top 10 journal articles published in 2009 by readership on Mendeley

4. Ed Bullmore & Olaf Sporns, ‘Complex brain networks: graph theoretical analysis of structural and functional systems’, Nature Reviews Neuroscience (2009), Volume: 10, Issue: 3
highlighting research design research tools academic features  The top 10 journal articles published in 2009 by readership on Mendeley

5. Zhong Wang, Mark Gerstein, Michael Snyder, ‘RNA-Seq: a revolutionary tool for transcriptomics’, Nature Reviews Genetics (2009), Volume: 10, Issue: 1
highlighting research design research tools academic features  The top 10 journal articles published in 2009 by readership on Mendeley

6. Development Core Team, ‘R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing’, R Foundation for Statistical Computing (2009) Volume: 2, Issue: 09/18/2009
highlighting research design research tools academic features  The top 10 journal articles published in 2009 by readership on Mendeley

7. Fatih Ozsolak et al, ‘Direct RNA sequencing’, Nature, Volume: 461, Issue: 7265
highlighting research design research tools academic features  The top 10 journal articles published in 2009 by readership on Mendeley

8. Benjamin M Bolker et al, ‘Generalized linear mixed models: a practical guide for ecology and evolution’, Trends in Ecology & Evolution (2009), Volume: 24, Issue: 3
highlighting research design research tools academic features  The top 10 journal articles published in 2009 by readership on Mendeley

9. Michael Schmidt & Hod Lipson, ‘Distilling free-form natural laws from experimental data’, Science (2009), Volume: 324, Issue: 592
highlighting research design research tools academic features  The top 10 journal articles published in 2009 by readership on Mendeley

10. Stephen J Eglen, ‘A quick guide to teaching R programming to computational biology students’, PLoS Computational Biology (2009), Volume: 5, Issue: 8
highlighting research design research tools academic features  The top 10 journal articles published in 2009 by readership on Mendeley

We’d like to point out that this isn’t an authoritative list of all the ‘most read articles for 2009’. Instead, these are the ones that appear in Mendeley user libraries and show some early indications of the popularity of a journal article. We will also track the evolution of these stats over the course of 2010.

Readership complementing the impact factor

With Mendeley’s growing user base, the readership count can complement other measures, such as citation metrics, adding an extra dimension to assessing a journal article’s impact.

For example, the article “How to choose a good scientific problem” is a general interest article, rather than being specific to biology which suggests it is not likely to have a high citation count in future primary research literature.

Nonetheless, it is already the most read paper on Mendeley published in 2009, a factor that would otherwise be missed. This indicates that the readership count can allude to other ways in which articles are used within a community, and therefore increase awareness of what should be read. The next step will be to anonymously track reading time and quality rating metrics to gather the most accurate data possible for our upcoming personalized recommendation engine.

Predicting research trends?

Understanding and predicting research trends is an important part of research. The citation count, used for decades as the gold standard in article-level metrics, can verify broad trends occurring within academic disciplines such as biology. While quite accurate, official citation metrics take two years to calculate. In contrast, readership statistics may be able to predict similar trends in real-time.

For example, look at The Scientist’s list of the hottest biology papers in 2009 (all published in 2007). The readership count for these papers on Mendeley correlates with ISI’s citation count at r=.76 (two-tailed, p=.13 due to the low sample size) – a near perfect correlation, even if only based on five papers and our userbase of just over 100,000 users:

Comparison of Mendeley’s most read papers with the ISI Citations

Publication ISI Citations Readers on Mendeley
A M. Werning, et al., “In vitro reprogramming of fibroblasts into a pluripotent ES-cell-like state,” Nature 448: 318-24, 2007. 512 26
E. Birney, et al., “Identification and analysis of functional elements in 1% of the human genome by the ENCODE pilot project,” Nature 447: 799-816, 2007. 618 63
A. Barski, et al., “High-resolution profiling of histone methylations in the human genome,” Cell 129: 823-37, 2007. 560 33
K.A. Frazer, et al., “A second generation human haplotype map of over 3.1 million SNPs,” Nature 449: 854-61, 2007. 588 46
K. Takahashi, et al., “Induction of pluripotent stem cells from adult human fibroblasts by defined factors,” Cell 131: 861-72, 2007. 886 64
_______________________

Pearson Correlation r = .76

We look forward to comparing the top 10 list shown above to the official ISI citation metrics for 2009 publications when they are calculated and released later in 2010 or 2011.

In summary, using Mendeley’s readership figures alongside the citation metrics should make it possible in the future to evaluate the scope of a journal article within the community more effectively. Finally, further refinements and understanding of readership metrics might make it possible to identify the next big trend in the academic world.

Methodology

The top 10 list was made by noting how many times a paper appears in the libraries of individual Mendeley users (readership count) and how many distinct user tags were attributed to that paper (tag count), then we filtered the results to include only papers from 2009 – done!

25 January 2010 by Mendeley

We are very happy to announce that CAT.INIST, one of Europe’s largest scientific research catalogs, has added Mendeley’s ‘easy import button’ to its article pages. CAT INIST joins the Public Library of Science (PLoS) and ArXiv.org who have also added Mendeley’s import button to their article pages.

CNRS, “Centre National del la Recherche Scientifique” (the French National Research Institute), provides research articles and information for scientists and academics Europe-wide. The cooperation now allows users to quickly import articles to their Mendeley online library.

“CAT.INIST (established in 1973) hosts a collection of 15 million bibliographic records, held in the CNRS in Paris. The catalog provides research articles in the fields of Science, Technology, Medicine, Humanities and the Social Sciences.”

Additionally, by installing Mendeley’s Web Importer into your browser, you can easily import articles from many other databases as well, such as Google Scholar, PubMed, IEEE, ISI Web of Knowledge, etc. For a complete list of supported websites, have a look at http://www.mendeley.com/import.

For more information on CNRS’ catalog visit http://cat.inist.fr.

design research tools connecting research disciplines community relations academic features  France’s largest science catalog adds Mendeley import button

7 October 2009 by Jason Hoyt

design research tools  What’s relevant to me….right now?
Above is an image from a talk that I gave earlier this year. As you can see, if I lived decades ago, I could somewhat keep up with all new research that pertained to me. Today though? Forget about it. There is just way too much going on. Even if I consider myself to be in a niche research field, I should still be keeping up with cross-disciplinary material that is relevant to my research. There is just no way to keep up with all of that information. It is information overload.

Ask yourself how you find out what is relevant to you in your research field. Got it? OK, we’ll get back to that, but before we do, ask yourself what percentage of all relevant information are you actually consuming? Let’s look at that figure above in the form of a pie chart to help us answer that question. (more…)

14 September 2009 by Paul

This is just a quick reminder of our ‘Open Office’ event this coming Friday 18 Sept from 5pm onwards – in case you haven’t seen our previous blog post from last week: we’d like to invite London users to come in to our office and chat to us directly in order to share their general feedback and their suggestions as to what they’d like to see improved in Mendeley. Drinks and snacks will be provided.

If you’re interested in coming along, please email anne@mendeley.com.

We’re looking forward to seeing you!

21 July 2009 by Victor

I just got an invitation from Jen Dodd, whom I met last fall at the Science in the 21st Century Conference at the Perimeter Institute in Waterloo (what a great conference that was!). Jen is organizing a fabulous event:

Science 2.0:
What Every Scientist Needs to Know About
How the Web is Changing the Way They Work

The MaRS Centre, 101 College St., Toronto
Wednesday, July 29, 1:00-6:00 pm, with wine and cheese to follow

Wine, cheese and a speaker list like this – who could resist:

  • Choosing Infrastructure and Testing Tools for Scientific Software Projects
    Titus Brown
  • A Web Native Research Record: Applying the Best of the Web to the Lab Notebook
    Cameron Neylon
  • Doing Science in the Open: How Online Tools are Changing Scientific Discovery
    Michael Nielsen
  • Using ”Desktop” Languages for Big Problems
    David Rich
  • How Computational Science is Changing the Scientific Method
    Victoria Stodden
  • Collaborative Curation of Public Events
    Jon Udell

Here is more information about the event on the organizers’ blog.

Ironically and sadly, even though I’ll be on the right side of the pond when this event takes place, I won’t be able to attend – Jan and I will be hosting a session at this year’s Campus Technology Conference in Boston at the same time.

However, if you’re interested in these topics, here’s a little reminder about our own Science Online London Conference taking place on August 22.

21 May 2009 by Victor

If you knew the old site, you’ll certainly have noticed already! The main color used to be dark blue with some red-brownish hues. Our goal with the redesign was to make it brighter, airier and less cramped, with the main colors being silver-grey and deep red. We also added better explanations and illustrations of what Mendeley actually is and does!

Here’s the new homepage (the screenshot is actually matched to each visitor’s OS – e.g. if you’re using Linux, the screenshot will show Mendeley Desktop on Ubuntu):

progress update design research tools  Mendeley Web redesign goes live

And here’s the new “How it works” page, which replaces our old “Tour” page.

progress update design research tools  Mendeley Web redesign goes live

The redesign isn’t completely finished yet – we’ll be updating many more parts of the site soon, while also adding new features. Please let us know if you catch bugs or design niggles we’ve missed!

What do you think of the new look? Is it pretty enough to want to make you kiss your screen?

4 November 2008 by Mike Arthur

progress update design research tools academic features  Mendeley Desktop: The About Dialogue (and the Refactor)
New About Dialogue and it’s even closable on Mac! How on earth did we get to this point?

Let me tell you a story…

Since my last post the Mendeley Desktop team has been very busy indeed!

Our “rewrite of some of the internal Mendeley code” has turned into a rewrite of almost all the code.

Why are we rewriting our code you may ask? Like many other small companies, Mendeley started with their software being written by external contractors. By the time I started in May 2008 a significant amount of code had been written which was then ported to Linux and Mac. What started life as a prototype had turned into a product which was then released to the world when we hit open beta. This means we lacked a solid architecture, any real documentation, coding standards or unit testing.

In the past few months the team has rewritten basically everything except the metadata extraction and the Citation Style Language parser (although these two have both been improved also and will probably be incrementally rewritten for further releases). As a result, we now have a much smaller, easier to read, unit-tested, documented, faster and just plain better codebase by any software engineering metric you would care to throw at it. My slightly obsessive insistence that the team meets the coding standards document and our continuous integration tool has resulted in a far higher quality product.

You might be asking why on earth you should care about everything I said above. Well the answers are in the features/bugfixes that you’ll see in the new release:

  • Better performance and lower memory usage
  • Adding sub-groups
  • Folder monitoring
  • Encrypted data transfer
  • Only uses standard HTTP ports (i.e. 80 and 443) and uses your system proxy settings
  • Less interface slowdown on network/import operations
  • A closable “About” window on Mac, as featured at the top of this post (No, I’m not joking. To close it in 0.5.9 or below, press Escape)
  • More native and more usable user interface
  • More traditional Mac packaging

Anyway, I hope that is enough to get you excited about the next release. We will be retaining feature parity with 0.5.9 (i.e. no features currently existing in 0.5.9. will be dropped in 0.6.0) and 0.6.0 will fix a lot of outstanding bugs with 0.5.9.

Mendeley Desktop 0.6.0: Coming soon!

15 September 2008 by Mike Arthur

Firstly, thanks to all of you who have filed feature requests or flagged up bugs on our bug tracker, your feedback has been really useful.

After thinking about how to best accommodate your needs we’ve deciding to do a rewrite of some of the internal Mendeley code in order to get it running snappier and work better with larger libraries.

As a result of some work Fred has done on his music player we’ve decided that using Qt’s MVC framework maps extremely well to our needs and should bring us far greater performance when dealing with large libraries as well as keeping the code cleaner, better separated and making it much easier to write unit tests with decent coverage levels.

So where are we with this at the moment? Currently we have implemented most of the new non-GUI code with just our local/remote database code to finish. For those interested in this sort of thing, we are 100% documented with Doxygen (both private and public members) and have every class’s method unit-tested with around 85% test coverage.

Without revealing too much you should be excited about this and some of the new features that will see the light of day around the same time as the new, better-performing internal code. This will hopefully mean we can feasible support much larger collections than currently with a slimmer/faster application and quicker bug turnaround with less regressions than our previous releases.

Get excited, I am! progress update design research tools academic features  Mendeley Desktop: The MVC strikes back

12 June 2008 by Victor

By chance, I stumbled across One Big Lab yesterday, a very interesting blog on Open Science maintained by (as far as I can tell) four Stanford bioinformatics Ph.D. students. One of the many gems to be discovered there is a series of t-shirt designs called “Worst. Result. Ever.”:

You’ve been there, done that. Spent hours, days, weeks… months?… just to discover that your hypothesis (or “hope-othesis”) is completely wrong. Finished a data analysis only to see that what you’ve just produced can only be described as the Worst. Result. Ever. [...]

Each one is named after the hapless student who had the pleasure of seeing something very much like it in their own research.

research miscellanea open access hard research life design research tools academic life  Worst. Result. Ever. Brilliant!

I’ve had nightmares of the Magda, and once pulled a Bernie, too. Once the shirts become available, buying them will support the PSB workshop on Open Science in… what? Hawaii?! I need to go there!