SIPS 2026 DC

The movement toward open science is driven by the idea of radical transparency. Frameworks such as the OSF enable researchers to share data, materials, and ideas openly, fostering collaboration, efficiency, and reproducibility. At the same time, the rapid rise of AI presents both opportunities and challenges for this vision. Open datasets can accelerate discovery, support new forms of analysis, and power AI-driven tools for scientific progress. However, these same resources may be used to train models without researchers’ knowledge or consent, while preprint repositories may increasingly host rapidly generated and unevenly vetted work.

These developments prompt an important conversation about the future of open science. How can we preserve openness while addressing emerging risks? What norms, infrastructures, or safeguards can ensure transparency supports responsible research? Should we rethink openness or adapt it to a changing technological landscape? This raises a key question: what is the future of open science in an AI-enabled world?

In 2025, PsyArXiv instituted a pre-moderation system where uploads have to be accepted before they become visible to the public. This process ensures more consistency, but also places the responsibility of shaping the archive into the hands of a small number of volunteers. Moderators have to define what counts as scientific psychology to decide which submissions are within scope. Because some more generalist archives have closed due to an overwhelming amount of AI-generated submissions, authors whose work does not neatly fall into a specific discipline are shopping around and some are testing the waters to see if PsyArXiv fits. In this hackathon, we will explore how to best define scientific psychology for the purposes of PsyArXiv, balancing preserving integrity while not closing it to alternative voices. What are the minimal standards we should expect a preprint to have in order that it can contribute to scientific discourse?