Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Appendix F Working Draft of Policies and Procedures for a Crystalline Materials Network The concept of a discovery and growth of crystalline materials (DGCM) net- work, described in Chapter 4 of this report, is new. It seeks to take the best operating procedures used by existing DGCM groups and imbue the entire DGCM com- munity with greater freedom and commensurate resources. In order to protect the researchers who would participate in such a network from improper, dangerous, or even illegal use of crystalline samples, a set of clearly defined policies and proce- dures would be essential. Below, the Committee for an Assessment of and Outlook for New Materials Synthesis and Crystal Growth provides a âworking draftâ of such policies and procedures by describing the areas that they should cover. The policies and procedures designed for a DGCM network should address the following: 1. Transparency: open communication and full disclosure between growers and users. The grower will provide to the measurer all information (e.g., stoichiometry) necessary to interpret measurement results. Conversely, the measurer will provide to the grower all data that result from the measurement. 2. Roles and responsibilities of growers and users (e.g., âjoint collaborationâ relationship versus âsupplier/userâ relationship): â¢ Roles and responsibilities of the measurement scientist. The receipt of a sample from the network would include the acknowledgment of the specific roles of the measurement scientist, as well as responsibili- ties such as protecting the sample from undue damage and respecting 171
172 Frontiers in C rys ta l l i n e M at t e r embargoes on the distribution of sample preparation knowledge not publicly reported. It is usual for the measurement scientist to perform only the measurements proposed formally to the network grower, and only within the measurement range formally specified or reasonably extended. Specifically, it will not be the role of the measurement scientist to ship network-grown samples to another measurer, that is, to act as a broker, without consent of the grower. â¢ Roles and responsibilities of the grower. The grower will not distribute samples of the same compound to different measurers for the same measurement without notifying the measurers. The grower will keep the measurement collaborator informed of all information obtained regarding materials of common, present interest that significantly impact the conduct or interpretation of measurements. 3. Custodianship of samples (including physical protection and storage of sam- ples). Scientists responsible for the synthesis of new materials and the growth of crystals in the network would ultimately be responsible for the custodianship of the samples they create. Recognizing that samples are rarely sent back to the grower after a measurement is completed, it is expected that the measurer exercises reasonable care in storing samples. 4. Intellectual ownership. Whether research is motivated by the grower or the user, the grower creates the value of the crystal. For grower-motivated research, it is understood that all rights of priority normally accorded to federally funded synthesis research would be held by network-supported growers. These rights might include the selection of collaborators who would perform some of the first sample measurements, or it might require collaboration for the initial measurements. The goal is to ensure that the grower retains full intellectual ownership of materials discovery and initial properties. Simultaneously, the network would strive to increase access to network-grown samples. Achieving these two goals might require providing a dormancy periodâperhaps 6 to 12 months after the first publication on a particular sample growth experimentâwhen the grower would possess right of first refusal for a sample measurement proposal. After this period, samples would become subject to the normal network proposal procedures. 5. Intellectual property rights. Details of intellectual property ownership and intellectual property rights would be developed by the networkâs external scientific advisory board in collaboration with the federal funding agencies and the network administrator. 6. Attribution. The guiding principle regarding the attribution of credit for research accomplishments would be that of collaboration. Specifically, sam- ple provisioning by the network would be viewed as a collaborative Âactivity, and the network scientists would be afforded credit and coauthorship
A pp e n d i x F 173 n Â ormally accorded to collaborators. Rules on collaboration are addressed in Section 02.2 of the âAmerican Physical Society Guidelines for Professional Conduct,â which includes the following statement: âAuthorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the concept, design, execution or interpretation of the research study. All those who have made significant contributions should be offered the opportunity to be listed as authors.â 7. Reporting requirements. The network would provide quarterly updates of its activities to the external scientific advisory board and issue an annual report of all published research conducted under its auspices. The research reported would involve internal as well as collaborative activities.