研究发现：科学数据一直在消逝

新华网12月24日电 据科技博客网站Gizmodo报道，研究显示科学研究数据一直在消失，过去发表的诸多研究当中的原始数据先进难觅踪迹，研究人员称一些废弃的电子邮件和丢失的软盘是导致研究的原始数据无法寻回的主要原因。

当一个学术研究发表之后，其研究结果融入浩瀚的科学知识海洋的时候，我们总感觉这些研究永远都会在那里等着我们。但事实是，如果没有支持整个研究的原始数据，要再次查看研究并将其思想运用到下一阶段是非常困难的。旧的研究数据总是会丢失，这是一个亘古不变的问题。

一项发表在《当代生物学》期刊上的研究表明，1991年至2011年间的516项生物研究的原始数据目前还能找到的只剩下23%。20年前写的学术研究，有90%的可能它们已经永远的找不到了。

科学研究本就是建立在对原有研究的不断创造和创新基础之上的，因此学者们研究过去的研究十分有必要。加拿大卑诗大学动物学家蒂莫西·瓦因斯发现了研究数据不断消失的现象，他说：“如果你向一个研究者要求他过去研究的数据，他会支支吾吾不知所云，大家都会猜到他肯定找不到他的研究数据了。但是对于过去的旧数据以什么样的速度消失这一问题，从来没有人进行过系统性的研究。”

瓦因斯领导的研究小组发现，废弃的电子邮件和丢失的软盘是导致研究的原始数据无法寻回的主要原因。

译者：张艺

百度新闻与新华网国际频道合作稿件，转载请注明出处。

Scientific Data Is Disappearing All the Time

When a study gets published and its results enter our collective body of scientific knowledge it feels like it's there to stay. But without the raw data behind the study, it's hard to revisit the research and use it to take new ideas to the next level. Which is why it's such a problem that old data is disappearing.

A new study in Current Biology shows that the raw data underlying 516 biological studies from between 1991 and 2011 was only available for 23 percent. And for the papers that were written more than 20 years ago, there was a 90 percent chance that no data was available.

It may sound meta to do a study studying studies, but it's important since the scientific method is supposed to revolve around reproducibility. Timothy Vines, a zoologist at the University of British Columbia, who oversaw the research, told Smithsonian that:

Everybody kind of knows that if you ask a researcher for data from old studies, they'll hem and haw, because they don't know where it is. But there really hadn't ever been systematic estimates of how quickly the data held by authors actually disappears.

The group tracked anatomical plant and animal measurements recorded in 25-40 papers for every other year between 1991 and 2011. And when they went searching for the data driving each paper, they often found that abandoned email addresses and unresponsive researchers got in their way for 25 percent and 38 percent of the investigated papers respectively.

Vines points out that data stored on outmoded technology like floppy disks is also an issue. And in addition to wanting the data for the scientific process, it also should be more available in many cases if it was paid for with public funding that stipulated general availability.

Smithsonian adds that some journals, like Molecular Ecology where Vines is managing editor, are now requiring that authors submit raw data with their papers. But journal archives, while perhaps more stable than those of individuals, can still disappear over time. Time for a digital pit where everyone can dump their data for long-term storage. [Smithsonian]

(原标题：研究发现：科学数据一直在消逝)