[Vp-integration-subgroup] [Vp-reproduce-subgroup] Shayn Peirce-Cottler via Frontiers: Manuscript
Jacob Barhak
jacob.barhak at gmail.com
Wed Jan 19 19:05:02 PST 2022
Thanks James, and all other paper contributors, please read this.
Your email clarifies things. We did agree long ago that funding sources are
at the discretion of the contributor although this was a volunteer effort.
A few insisted on adding their funding source and we did add those. Here is
some the discussion that we held:
https://lists.simtk.org/pipermail/vp-integration-subgroup/2021-April/000073.html
Sheriff's request came in late and should not have been submitted that late
in the process, yet I decided to include his funding source because it has
legal implications if it is not included - I assume that tax payer money
paid for the time he spend on this manuscript and this requires
traceability - I was surprised with his declaration that does not include a
traceable source of fund yet to avoid any wrongdoing I decided to include
it. I made the email public so that everyone knows and can reciprocate.
In the manuscript submission form there is a clause about declaration of
funding. When I signed it, I knew I was accurate in my statement about how
this work was funded. It is important that these declarations are correct
since many times taxpayer money funds this work and that money needs to be
traceable for accounting reasons and to avoid misuse of funds. There are
legal implications to incorrect declarations on this question. As far as I
knew, except from very few that declared funding early on when we discussed
it, this was a volunteer group. And for those who did declare I assumed
this was to trace public funds.
I am sending this email to the entire group to make sure that everyone that
approved, knew that they are approving the paper text, the funding sources,
the conflict of interest statements, the authorship / ethics statement.,
license and more elements as declared in this document:
https://www.frontiersin.org/about/policies-and-publication-ethics
If anything was lost through communications I am raising again now so
everyone will know what they are signed on. I want to make sure that when I
signed in your name I was not misrepresenting anything.
So if anyone who reads this, and after my explanation believes that they
need to correct a funding statement, a conflict of interest statement, or
any other detail regarding the manuscript that has legal implications,
please announce it NOW and quickly so changes will be made prior to
publication. After publication, such changes may be very complicated and
have other implications.
In simpler words, if your time spent on handling this paper was funded by
the taxpayer or by an entity that requires reporting the funding source,
you MUST declare it. If you volunteered your own time for this paper, you
just have to make sure you have no other conflict.
Hopefully I am clear enough now.
I will write to the editor about adding the middle initial in your name - I
can no longer do this though the submission system - it blocked me changing
the authors - this is why I wrote to the editor about the request from
William Waites to add his second affiliation.
I am not sure if there are any more proof stages where we can fix things -
the publication process is different from venue to venue and it's important
we will be accurate in declarations.
Hopefully this email will fix things and make sure our delerations are
accurate.
Jacob
On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 12:31 PM James Glazier <jaglazier at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Jacob:
>
> I sent the minor corrections I did because I saw your response to Rahuman.
> I had not thought initially that you were listing funding sources, but your
> response to Rahuman suggested you were. So if you don't want to list
> funding, it's ok with me. I would prefer to have the middle initial added
> if possible, simply because I otherwise get confused with a different James
> Glazier, but it isn't critical.
>
> JAG
>
> On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 1:22 PM Jacob Barhak <jacob.barhak at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Well James,
>>
>> You put me is a difficult position. You all approved the manuscript
>> multiple times.
>>
>> Sheriff caught it just before I sent it so I added his funding - out of
>> regular process - just to avoid conflict with journal legal requirements.
>>
>> As for name changes, I am locked outside the system and such a request
>> should be processed through the editor. Similar to what William asked for.
>>
>> As for funding. We discussed this a long time ago. And the paper was
>> approved multiple times. I can probably spend an hour later to add your
>> funding. Yet there are 18 of us and only a few claimed funding - this was
>> supposed to be a volunteer effort... If all 18 ask their funding to be
>> included, we will need to reopen this again.
>>
>> So I ask you on what should I do.
>>
>> If this funding declaration is necessary for this volunteer work to
>> fulfill the legal requirement of the publisher to disclose funding I must
>> process your request and will do it tonight. If not , I suggest we avoid
>> changes. Please advise on proper way to proceed.
>>
>> Hopefully this will settle the matter.
>>
>> Jacob
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 19, 2022, 11:15 James A Glazier <jaglazier at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Jacob:
>>>
>>> Thank you for your heroic efforts on bringing this paper together. I
>>> should probably change my name to James A. Glazier, which is my standard
>>> listing. I should also acknowledge my funding support:
>>>
>>> James A. Glazier acknowledges funding support from grants NSF 188553,
>>> NSF 186890, NSF 1720625, NIH U24 EB028887 and NIH R01 GM122424.
>>>
>>> JAG
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11/17/2021 10:04 PM, Jacob Barhak wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi James Faedar, Hi John Rice,
>>>
>>> Please check the manuscript and declare by REPLY ALL if you APPROVE,
>>> DISAPPROVE or ABSTAIN.
>>>
>>> James, if you responded and I did not get the email, I apologize - there
>>> are some communication hiccups occasionally. Yet I need your public
>>> approval to proceed and use your name.
>>>
>>> John, I know you allowed us to send the paper, yet you need to be
>>> specific and declare if you want to be included as an Author or just moved
>>> to acknowledgements. You did have a major contribution, so I hope you will
>>> APPROVE.
>>>
>>> Once I have your answer I can proceed. Hopefully you will both APPROVE
>>> quickly.
>>>
>>> Jacob
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 at 3:02 PM sheriff <sheriff at ebi.ac.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Jacob and all,
>>>>
>>>> I approve the submission of the manuscript.
>>>>
>>>> Please update the citation Tiwari et 2020 Preprint to
>>>>
>>>> Tiwari K, Kananathan S, Roberts MG, Meyer JP, Sharif Shohan MU, Xavier
>>>> A, Maire M, Zyoud A, Men J, Ng S, Nguyen TVN, Glont M, Hermjakob H,
>>>> Malik-Sheriff RS. Reproducibility in systems biology modelling. Mol Syst
>>>> Biol. 2021 Feb;17(2):e9982. doi: 10.15252/msb.20209982. PMID: 33620773;
>>>> PMCID: PMC7901289.
>>>>
>>>> Also my name and affiliation below
>>>>
>>>> Rahuman S. Malik Sheriff
>>>>
>>>> European Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics
>>>> Institute (EMBL-EBI), Wellcome Genome Campus, Hinxton, Cambridge, UK
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for pushing this work forward
>>>>
>>>> Best regards
>>>>
>>>> Sheriff
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2021-11-17 18:58, Jonathan Karr wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Jacob,
>>>>
>>>> Thank you again for spearheading this effort.
>>>>
>>>> I approve the submission. I think the paper organizes a variety of
>>>> important issues toward more credible models, and the content is sound.
>>>>
>>>> My affiliation is Department of Genetics and Genomic Sciences, Icahn
>>>> School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.
>>>>
>>>> As others have mentioned, I think the paper would be more impactful
>>>> with further editing to make the paper easier to read:
>>>>
>>>> - More clearly articulate the goals/motivation for more credible
>>>> models
>>>> - Be more concise and focused
>>>> - Remove redundancies by grouping related text
>>>> - Fill in the gaps in logic in the introduction with more
>>>> transitions, less extraneous information, and/or a brief outline.
>>>> - Change the title of the "Utility of models" section to something
>>>> like "Challenges with using multiscale models" (James' suggestion)
>>>> - Order the "Utility of models" subsections to be easier to follow,
>>>> perhaps from model construction through to reuse
>>>> - Rephrase the titles of the "Utility of models" subsections to
>>>> focus on opportunities for improvement rather than current problems
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Jonathan
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 11:25 PM Jacob Barhak <jacob.barhak at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thanks to all contributors who answered,
>>>>
>>>> Most contributors approved by now.
>>>>
>>>> James and Wiliam, I am not sure how many more revisions there will be
>>>> for this publication. I did not add several important references of my own
>>>> in this revision. Frankly I wanted to keep reference changes to a minimum
>>>> and kept it as close as possible to the origin . However, we are
>>>> transferring the paper to the publisher under CC license, so it will not be
>>>> hard to create another derived version with all sorts of additions and
>>>> modifications in the future where people can edit it as they see fit and
>>>> add whatever references they want - so after it gets published you can
>>>> continue working on other versions as you see fit. For now I ask we focus
>>>> on publishing this version alone and I really hope the editors will not put
>>>> us through another revision round since it makes no sense at this point -
>>>> any change is not substantial compared to what we have already and any
>>>> delay is more damaging than productive.
>>>>
>>>> To be productive I ask that the following people who did not answer so
>>>> far take the time to APPROVE, DISAPPROVE, or ABSTAIN.:
>>>> Robin Thompson
>>>> James R. Faeder
>>>> Jonathan Karr
>>>> Rahuman Sheriff
>>>> John Rice
>>>>
>>>> John Rice - thanks for your support, yet you will have to be specific:
>>>> You can either choose APPROVE or ABSTAIN - both of these options will move
>>>> the paper forwards. APPROVE will add your name to the list of authors with
>>>> all responsibilities and privileges listed or implied , ABSTAIN will put
>>>> you in acknowledgements without any obligation. So John, please choose if
>>>> you want your name on the paper or not in this specific version - any
>>>> decision you make will be ok.
>>>>
>>>> I hope we can father all support quickly so I can move forward and
>>>> submit the paper.
>>>>
>>>> Jacob
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 5:46 AM William Waites <wwaites at ieee.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I'm just chasing down references for use in another context and I
>>>> notice that the Ke et al paper is still a pre-print after more than a year.
>>>> There is no problem in my opinion citing preprints but it is suspect in
>>>> this case: there's been a ton of work on SARS-CoV-2 infectiousness, why
>>>> didn't this get published? Probably not best to rely on it as an example of
>>>> practice. Perhaps to fix on revision.
>>>>
>>>> -w
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Vp-integration-subgroup mailing list
>>>> Vp-integration-subgroup at lists.simtk.org
>>>> https://lists.simtk.org/mailman/listinfo/vp-integration-subgroup
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>> James A. Glazier, PhD
>>> Professor of Intelligent Systems Engineering, Adjunct Professor of Physics
>>> Director, Biocomplexity Institute
>>> Indiana University, Bloomington
>>> (812) 391-2159 (cell)
>>>
>>>
>
> --
> James A. Glazier, PhD
> Professor of Intelligent Systems Engineering, Adjunct Professor of Physics
> Director Biocomplexity Institute
> Indiana University, Bloomington
> (812) 391-2159
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.simtk.org/pipermail/vp-integration-subgroup/attachments/20220119/dfa4ba29/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Vp-integration-subgroup
mailing list