DODA: A Database of Datasets for Aesthetics Research

With rapid growth in the fields of empirical and computational aesthetics we have seen a vast increase in large image datasets annotated for aesthetics. As the image databases differ widely in many respects (e.g., different standards for annotation), it can be tedious to find the dataset that fits one's research needs best. The absence of a centralized open-science search system causes additional problems. Currently, researchers typically share dataset links in papers or on diverse platforms like OSF, GitHub or Dropbox. Manually searching for details like image quality and content often requires downloading all datasets. Therefore, we present the Database Of Datasets for Aesthetics (DODA), an intuitive Web application in which researchers can browse all important datasets for aesthetics research. DODA provides general information about these datasets (size, resolution, type of annotation, number of annotators, etc.) and for many of them also precomputed quantitative image properties. We discuss relevant criteria for selecting a suitable dataset with DODA and illustrate the benefits of reusing datasets. Our approach facilitates collaboration across the fields of empirical and computational aesthetics. Keywords: empirical aesthetics, computational aesthetics, machine learning, image annotation, quantitative image properties, Open Science

The embrace of open science: An analysis of a decade of AI research and 56 800 conference papers

The reproducibility crisis has directed the AI research community toward improving documentation practices. Several studies have identified methodological issues, and in response, the most impactful venues in the field have introduced reproducibility checklists. We seek to understand whether documentation practices have changed over time by assessing all published papers at five leading AI conferences over the past decade. Seven reproducibility variables were identified, quality-assured and used to analyse 56 800 publications. Our analysis reveals that in the period 2014 to 2024, documentation practices have improved; papers sharing both code and data increased nearly sixfold, from 11% to 64% Building on empirical reproducibility rates from a prior study, we estimate - inferred from documentation practices, not direct testing - that reproducibility increased from 28% in 2014 to 64% in 2024. Improvements in documentation practices predate the introduction of reproducibility checklists, suggesting these changes reflect a broader movement toward open science rather than a direct response to formal requirements.

Measuring research data reuse in scholarly publications using generative artificial intelligence: Open Science Indicator development and preliminary results

Numerous metascience studies and other initiatives have begun to monitor the prevalence of open science practices when it is more important to understand the 'downstream' effects or impacts of open science. PLOS and DataSeer have developed a new LLM-based indicator to measure an important effect of open science: the reuse of research data. Our results show a data reuse rate of 43%, which is higher than established bibliometric techniques. We show that data reuse can be measured at scale using LLMs and generative artificial intelligence. The positive effects of research data sharing and reuse may currently be underestimated.