“Every block of stone has a statue inside it and it is the task of the sculptor to discover it.”
― Michelangelo

As an idealistic student writing my Ph.D, I recall philosophising (though romanticising may be a more appropriate word) that the above quote by Michelangelo is what scientific discovery is all about and that the role of the scientist is that of a sculptor, releasing the beauty and the complex engineering involved in living organisms (at least in my subject) with every experiment. The reality though can be very different and research results don’t often fit into the neat little plan of what you want, hope or expect.

Research scientists try to move their field forward; creating both tedious and innovative experiments to test their theories. Often, those theories are obliterated with one experiment, but often the result of an experiment surfaces more avenues than a single researcher can pursue. Frequently, the scientist cannot repeat established experiments in the literature, despite repetition or iteration. Results can also be confusing, inconclusive, negative, or null and subsequently the researcher can choose to pursue a different path.

Does this mean that that such valid research should remain hidden in lab books and remain unpublished? How do other scientists working in the same field know not to waste their time and energy pursuing the same set of experiments? Could raw data that has been created be of value and interrogated differently by someone with a different set of skills? Should important experiments be left out of research papers because of space or because of journal scope? Maybe that odd result, not pursued, could be of critical significance, but it wasn’t pursued because there wasn’t the right equipment and it was safer/easier to get a paper out on X, Y or Z. These are all scenarios I recognise from my time in the lab. They compel me ask: How can science move forward when all the research is not available?

Surely pursuit of knowledge should be based on all knowledge, not just knowledge that fits into a 20^th century composed narrative? Surely the reason the OA movement was created in its purest form was to advance access and interrogation of research output, not just those with access? Now we have to ask why our carefully constructed scholarly narrative only reveals some output, convenient output, explainable output. Isn’t it time for scholarly communications to reflect actual research, not just research that forms a well-ordered narrative?

It is with this in mind that Experimental Results was conceived. Experimental Results is an open access journal providing a forum for experimental findings that disclose the small incremental steps vitally important to experimental research; experiments and findings which have so far remained hidden. All articles are subject to open peer review via an innovative scorecard, where publication is based on whether an experiment has been correctly conducted and addresses a valid research question.

We are not launching this journal to pander to what has gone before; we are launching it because we believe in the pursuit of solving major research questions, questions that could be solved faster by opening up all of research for the benefit of all active researchers. We want to ensure that the relevant knowledge is out there, for it to be open access, for it to link to open data where possible, for researchers and reviewers to get credit, for the reviewers to be incentivised to partake in community-driven open peer review. We want to expose all that stuff in your lab books or computers that is important to your subject area, or which could be important to moving the field forward, in ways that you don’t even realise.

Surely with the onset of machine-learning, research and data interrogation will become easier and discovery can accelerate at a faster pace, enabling funders to get an accelerated return on their investment. But that interrogation will currently only interrogate the published output that fits the narrative. The time has come to shake things up, to be bold, be innovative, and to do something that feels right. Welcome to Experimental Results.