[HN Gopher] Laboratory Notebook Skills [pdf]
___________________________________________________________________
Laboratory Notebook Skills [pdf]
Author : Tomte
Score : 50 points
Date : 2021-09-27 18:12 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.dur.ac.uk)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.dur.ac.uk)
| was_a_dev wrote:
| I did my Physics undergraduate at Durham, and was given this
| checklist as a first year. It is so surreal seeing it again on
| HN.
|
| I really enjoyed having a lab-book to organise all my notes
| through my degree. It took time to write notes our properly, but
| it quickly paid off when having to check calculations,
| assumptions and writing up experiements.
| lifekaizen wrote:
| That's awesome, love HN has relevant people around.
|
| Could you shed some light on what the 'script' is in 'The lab
| book is NOT a copy of the experimental script'? Seems to
| reference homework like tasks 'Task 1: 100 +- 1 kO' but in a
| more undefined experimental context what would that be...?
| detaro wrote:
| Maybe "worksheet" is a reasonable equivalent. Describes the
| the needed context (e.g. what's the goal, what are the
| principles involved), the experiment itself (setup, steps to
| do, what to measure, ...), ... for a predefined experiment,
| especially in a classroom setting.
|
| In the lab notebook you need the details what you did and
| what you calculated, but don't need to copy all the context
| for the theory etc.
| lexicality wrote:
| Every so often I'll see something like this on HN that suggests
| that software engineers should be keeping similar records of
| everything they do, if for no other reason than to have a record
| of problems they've solved that can be grepped when a similar
| problem shows up. This seems like a good idea.
|
| I wish I could be bothered to actually do it though
| physicsgraph wrote:
| Enabling reproducibility is a costly investment, but the cost of
| doing unreproducible work is even higher. This is a calculation I
| rarely see organization make.
|
| More frequently everything is a one-off, with failure recurring
| randomly until a working (though not reproducible) approach is
| found. I'm not sure how to spin this evolutionary approach
| positively, as it can result in fragile outcomes.
|
| There is software infrastructure that enables reproducibility
| (virtual machines, and more recently containerization), but this
| concept rarely makes it to written documentation.
| beckman466 wrote:
| > Enabling reproducibility is a costly investment, but the cost
| of doing unreproducible work is even higher. This is a
| calculation I rarely see organization make.
|
| Hopefully things like Alex Freeman's http://science-octopus.org
| (or something like it) will take off very soon, which addresses
| this well (and will make science more accountable).
|
| _Meet Octopus, a new vision for scientific publishing_ :
| https://www.science.org/careers/2018/11/meet-octopus-new-vis...
|
| _Dr. Alexandra Freeman | Octopus: a radical new approach to
| scientific publishing - 29 October 2018_ :
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Af6aITLEoD8
| lifekaizen wrote:
| Wondering what a modern, digital version would be? Imagine a repo
| could work for the time-stamping and not deleting mistakes
| (immutable record). Images, annotations (i.e. 'Circle rogue
| points') seem much harder.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-09-27 23:00 UTC)