ScienceUpFirst (@scienceupfirst.bsky.social)

Sensemaking Networks: Project Introduction - Cosmik Labs

Incorporating science social media into the scientific process

Sensemaking Networks: Transforming Social Media into a Sensemaking Layer for Science | Ronen Tamari

Sensemaking Networks is a project aiming to address three interrelated limitations of the current science publishing and communication infrastructure: (1) poor reach and feedback, (2) knowledge fragmentation, and (3) rigid formats. To address these issues, Sensemaking Networks combine two promising trends in science publishing and communication: science social media and semantic nanopublishing. While science social media significantly impacts scientific processes and public engagement, it lacks formal recognition and accessibility. On the other hand, nanopublications offer the benefits of formal scientific publishing and machine-readable knowledge representation. Their integration represents a promising direction that could serve as a transformative sensemaking layer for science, enhancing the collective synthesis, dissemination, and evaluation of research.

Scientists no Longer Find Twitter Professionally Useful, and have Switched to Bluesky

Synopsis Social media has become widely used by the scientific community for a variety of professional uses, including networking and public outreach. For the past decade, Twitter has been a primary home of scientists on social media. In recent years, new leadership at Twitter has made substantive changes that have resulted in increases in the prevalence of pseudoscience, conspiracy theory, and harassment on the platform, causing many scientists to seek alternatives. Bluesky has been suggested as a good alternative to Twitter, but the phenomenon of academics switching social media platforms has not previously been studied. Here we report on the results of a survey distributed to scientists on Twitter and Bluesky (n = 813). Results overwhelmingly confirm that changes to Twitter have made the social media platform no longer professionally useful or pleasant, and that many scientists have abandoned it in favor of Bluesky. Results show that for every reported professional benefit that scientists once gained from Twitter, scientists can now gain that benefit more effectively on Bluesky than on Twitter.

The Astrosky Ecosystem: An independent online platform for science communication and social networking

While almost everything that astronomers study occurs in the vacuum of space, astronomy itself does not `happen in a vacuum'. Interactions between scientists, as well as outreach to members of the public, improve extensively from access to good communication tools. Social media has become a key tool for communication in astronomy, being widely used by individuals and organizations alike for networking, outreach, and more. However, traditional social media is reliant on benevolent corporations providing a free service without compromising on quality, and the recent takeover and decline of Twitter has shown how vulnerable these platforms can be. In this proceeding, we present The Astrosky Ecosystem, which is an initiative to develop open-source tools and integrations for social media, principally the Bluesky social network. We explain how our project enables the astronomy community to operate its own social media infrastructure, independent of for-profit corporations. We also discuss some of the project's technical aspects, including its use of the AT Protocol for social networking, before concluding with ideas for the future.

The Astrosky Ecosystem

We're building social media tools for the astronomy & space science communities. From feeds to hosting, we're billionaire-proofing scientific discussion for good.

Breaking the silence

Research on science communication has largely focused on teaching scientists how to describe their studies in ways that interest the public while deepening their understanding of scientific exploration. However, there is another, often overlooked side to science communication—how scientists respond when questions arise about the integrity of their research. Often, the tendency has been to stay silent and wait for any controversy to pass or be resolved in professional forums. But in an age of growing, intense attacks on science, silence can be detrimental to both public trust and the careers of scientists who are under scrutiny. For better or worse, journalists, social media professionals, and the public may take a response of “no comment” as a concession that the critics are correct, so forthright communication about research questions is more urgent than ever.

Science as Collective Sensemaking

What is Science?

Science as Collective Sensemaking

What is Science?

Sensemaking Networks Part 3: building partnerships and prototypes - Cosmik Labs

Semantic cross-posters for re-integrating science social media

Science Communication as a Collective Intelligence Endeavor: A Manifesto and Examples for Implementation

Effective science communication is challenging when scientific messages are informed by a continually updating evidence base and must often compete against misinformation. We argue that we need a new program of science communication as collective intelligence—a collaborative approach, supported by technology. This would have four key advantages over the typical model where scientists communicate as individuals: scientific messages would be informed by (a) a wider base of aggregated knowledge, (b) contributions from a diverse scientific community, (c) participatory input from stakeholders, and (d) better responsiveness to ongoing changes in the state of knowledge.

Scientific Web Claims: A survey of definitions, tasks, datasets and methods

Scientific web claims are seen as scientific claims as observed on the Web, across social media, online news, and other platforms. The growing prevalence of scientific discussions on the Web has intensified the need to process and assess this specific type of claims. Unlike claims from scientific publications, scientific web claims are expressed in lay terms, are often decontextualized, and typically lack proper citations, which poses unique challenges for their identification, verification, and communication. Nevertheless, the correct processing of scientific web claims is crucial to keeping online science discussions accurate and informed, for instance through fact-checking. This survey provides the first systematic overview dedicated specifically to scientific web claims. We review and compare existing definitions, task formulations, datasets, and methodological approaches across three major perspectives: (1) Scientific fact-checking on the Web, (2) Scientific citations on the Web, and (3) Science communication on the Web. Our interdisciplinary analysis integrates insights from natural language processing, information retrieval, artificial intelligence, social sciences, and science communication. We identify major methodological challenges, including the lack of unified definitions, domain-agnostic corpora, and foundational models tailored to science-related online discourse. We also discuss challenges related to the existing interplay between emotions and distortions of science online. By mapping current research efforts and highlighting open problems, this survey lays the groundwork for developing robust datasets, methods, and evaluation frameworks to advance the automated processing of scientific web claims, a necessary capability for strengthening the reliability of science-related online discourse at scale.

science-live-platform/zotero at main · ScienceLiveHub/science-live-platform

Science Live Platform - Transform research into connected knowledge - ScienceLiveHub/science-live-platform

Science Works on Twitter / X

London AI × Science Hackathon 👾Science Works × @inherent_labs • Oct 16-18Lots of scientific software is outdated, hard to use, and isn't interoperable – let alone making use of (or ready to interface with) AI.Or it's expensive. Join us to build better for the community pic.twitter.com/42Qq528DDw— Science Works (@sci_works) September 30, 2026