Does nanoscience need a standarized protocol?

11 March 2025, Version 1
This content is a preprint and has not undergone peer review at the time of posting.

Abstract

Nanoscience is a relatively young research field built on the shoulders of consolidated areas ranging from solid state physics to biology. Its interdisciplinary nature imposes the flow of heterogeneous data from various domains of predefined conventions that ultimately prevents the standardization of workflow, raising the possibility of its further fragmentation and compromising reproducibility. This is probably the time to make an effort to establish good enough practices for experimental nanoscientists. This article proposes a set of simple rules that can facilitate data management and improve their reusability. The initial cognitive costs of implementing the proposed protocol can be high, but they can save energy and time in the long term. By adopting these practices, researchers can ensure the reusability of their data early in a project and accelerate their writing process.

Keywords

Nanoscience
FAIR principle
pipelilne
open science
data management

Comments

Comments are not moderated before they are posted, but they can be removed by the site moderators if they are found to be in contravention of our Commenting Policy [opens in a new tab] - please read this policy before you post. Comments should be used for scholarly discussion of the content in question. You can find more information about how to use the commenting feature here [opens in a new tab] .
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy [opens in a new tab] and Terms of Service [opens in a new tab] apply.