没有准备好的学生 (6) - 燃料电池 李革胜, 1-13-2013 D 同学是加拿大A大学材料系二年级博士生,在T教授的陶瓷实验室从事质子交换膜燃料电池研究。质子交换膜燃料电池高效、环保等突出优点,引起了一家处于世界领先地位的燃料电池公司,加拿大 Palled公司的高度重视,并投巨资发展这一技术,D同学的科研经费就是来源于Palled公司。公司虽然出了钱, 但并不过问研究的具体情况, 只是在年末才到材料系检查实验进展验收,平时由T教授掌握分寸。 D同学毕业于东欧的一个工业大学, 虽然是白种人, 但英语不是母语, 讲得不利索,开口就怕别人笑话, 又是女同学, 平时沉默寡言, 话讲的很少。她可不想让实验室的男同学笑话她的口音。D同学想保持自己研究的独立性, 尽量不让公司等外界因素干扰她的博士研究工作。她没有告诉任何人, 她的博士经费来源, 怕别人说闲话, 给人造成偏见和不好的印象。就象以前中国的工程硕士, 经费大都来自企业。公司的目的就是赚钱, 研究不能不跟着公司的需要转。如果公司有赚钱但不道德的行为时, 这可能会影响到D同学的学术声誉。 在北美有个“陶瓷发动机”丑闻, 曾经还在纳斯达克上了市。陶瓷发动机的工作温度高,可使燃料燃烧充分,所排废气中的有害成分大为降低, 大大提高效率。陶瓷发动机无需冷却,有较高的高温强度和热传导性,使用寿命长。所以当年通用、福特、诺尔顿、丰田、日产、奔驰都卷进了陶瓷发动机的研制。 但是陶瓷的脆性和低可靠性是陶瓷发动机实用化的主要障碍,汽车公司投入的巨资全部打了水飘, 所以学术界对于来自企业以盈利为目的的科研资助一直持怀疑态度。“祸莫大于欲利”出于赚钱为目的的科研往往把人往邪路上带。每个公司资助科研都有自己的赚钱动机,这个动机可能是快乐兴趣和道德的,也可能带来痛苦与酸楚。正所谓”果不正,因就不正”。 问题讨论
质子交换膜燃料电池(proton exchange membrane fuel cell,简称PEMFC)在原理上相当于水电解的“逆”装置。由阳极、阴极和质子交换膜组成,阳极是氢发生氧化场所,阴极为氧化剂还原场所,两极都含有加速电化学反应的催化剂,质子交换膜作为电解质。其实就是个直流电源,其阳极即电源负极,阴极为电源正极。 D同学的实验完全是自己设计的, 因为T教授对燃料电池一窍不通, 他又不是搞催化的, 他的博士论文是搞氧化锆的, 他常跟研究生们这么讲。D同学在欧洲华沙大学学的是冶金工程,炼钢炼铁还行,搞储氢电池却是外行。从未接触过碳吸附系统储备气态H2和PtRu/C这种催化剂, 她也搞不清楚阴极氧还原催化剂和阳极抗CO催化剂主要原理是什么。DD同学博士论文工作刚开始时, 她在Palled公司跟K工程师装过燃料电池, 就是在各单体间嵌入密封件,经前、后端板压紧后, 再用螺杆紧固拴牢,组装成电池电堆。这种体力劳动根本不适合她, D同学干了一天就决定放弃。D同学是个聪明的姑娘, 她知道如何避开杨长避短, XRD、SEM、TEM等微观表征手段是她的特长, 也是材料系的长项, 她决定将其博士工作搬回材料系, 闭门造车, 主攻单电池测试和微观表征。 D同学经过仔细研究发现K工程师的数据有猫腻。她的单电池是按照Palled公司的安装指南组装成的, 效果不好, 只有200mA/m2电流密度。这个结果, 英国人Mood和Langer1889年就得到了, 完全没有公司声称的600mA/cm2。肯定是自己搞错了, Palled公司在欧洲进行安装现场测试的250kW电厂用的也是这种电池。在一次陶瓷研究室与Palled公司的年度小组会议上, D同学把初步结果演示给大家看。 200mA/m2电流密度当然让K工程师不满意, K工程师不满意就代表Palled公司不满意, Palled公司不满意, 就会中断研究资金。这个T教授是门儿清, 他主动提出是D同学数据采集与分析方面出了问题, 年青人刚开始做研究难免出差错, 下次实验结果肯定会好得多。毕竟Palled公司在欧洲的实验早就做出了600mA/cm2。 D同学试了很多次, 还是得不到600mA/cm2电流强度, 她意识到K工程师用的技术和她的可能完全不同。她事后私下找了一下Palled公司的K工程师, 从K工程师晦莫难辨的神情, 她忽然明白了K工程师也做不出600mA/cm2电流密度。 D同学心里有些不安,她在电邮里担心地告诉T教授K工的技术和她的不完全一样。T教授不置可否, 她感觉到任何与K工程师的指示相违背的行为, 将伤害她与T教授的私人关系, 这对她的博士学位将是致命的。于是,她自作主张, 决定对K工程师与Palled公司的实际情况保持沉默。 在材料系实验室,K工程师暗示她不要把公司的问题泄露出去, 并给她了一个解决方案, 用四只二极管口连接成“桥”式结构, 即桥式整流电路来模拟单电池输出。K工程师回公司后, D同学的燃料电池博士论文数据,”空对空”, 全是模拟出来的。 D同学从模拟的电路上得到了博士论文数据, 她仔细研究了数据趋势并按K工的意思加以解释。她知道如果她把实验重做一遍, 她还可以通过调整桥式电路的电流大小得到完全不同的数据曲线。实际上, 她可以通过调整电流大小来获得她想要的任何结果。她为自己开脱罪责, 研究的本质就是今天的教训乃明天工作的起点,研究生的学习过程是允许犯错误的,她是这样安慰自己说服自己的。从她得到的数据上看, Palled公司的燃料电池装在汽车上提供50kW的能量没问题, 最高时速可以达到145m/h,行程可达800km。这个结果, 她还是非常满意的, 如果把桥式电路的电流调小一点, 效果就差很远。作为一个科研新手,她也不知道如何完美解释这组数据,也许通过发表文章能学到些新东西,毕竟只有把自己的真实想法写下来,才知道自己的思想是多么幼稚。D同学把这些数据按K工的思路仔细分析了一下,并写了一个文章草稿, 打算投稿到”美国燃料电池学会协会”期刊。 D同学没有告诉任何人, 数据全是模拟来的。除了幽灵般的G同学。潇洒的G同学经常在实验室晃来晃去, 让她心烦。每次见到G同学, 她总是把胸挺得很高, 很性感的样子。D同学通过金庸的” 倚天屠龙记”知道中国男人都喜欢波斯美女, 她是伊朗白种女人, 打扮一下, 还是很妩媚的。 G同学心中有数知道她怕心直口快的G把她的秘密实验泄漏出去,故意迷惑G同学,把博士论文先对付过去再说,绝对不能让G同学把她的问题暴露出去。有一天下午, 不肯善罢甘休的D同学浓装艳抹在材料系电梯里, 用胸部堵住G同学, 质问他是否在背后散布她的谣言。憨厚的G同学那见过这种阵仗, 吓得一溜烟跑了。后来G同学见了她, 就象老鼠见了猫一样, 一个字”躲”。这事儿G同学没有告诉任何人, 是念惜她的清誉。 D同学文章写完后,先交给她的导师T教授review, 但告诉T教授这些数据是模拟得来,如果T教授问起她可以推说忘记了。T教授不知就里, 以为数据是Palled的K工程师帮助做的。他对燃料电池和D一样没有经验全是凭感觉。T教授稍后在办公室给D解释他的意见, 结论 (Results and Conclusions) 部分有点弱 (weak), 主要是她没有具体实验强调她研究的重要性。”美国燃料电池”期刊的内幕, T教授还是知道的。T教授老生常谈地告诉D同学, 该期刊决定是否录用她的文章, 完全取决于她如何解释数据, 她必须在观察, 研究, 测量的基础上进行思考,合理地说明数据变化的原因,数据之间的联系,找出数据事物发展的规律等。T教授最后强调, 不是要她去删除, 修改数据, 而是她要明白, 如何解释诠译数据比数据本身更重要。这一套哲学家般的长篇大论, 看上去发人深省, 其实是T教授事先准备好的说辞, 完全可以用在任何学生身上。 数据是死的,如何解释数据却是活的,关键在于解读数据的意图与方法。因为同一组数据可以这样解释, 也可以那样解释。T教授给她讲了个形象的比喻, A大学生物系S教授训练青蛙, 只要S教授喊一声”跳!”, 青蛙就会跳起来, 这可以证明青蛙有听觉神经。如果, 把青蛙大腿弄折, 再喊”跳!”, 青蛙会一动不动。如果把这个现象解释成” 青蛙腿折导致听力下降” 就是一篇惊世咳俗的文章。沿这个命题继续延伸可以发表很多文章,如“大多数车祸都发生在下班以后,那么可以得出结论,下班导致车祸”、“多数盗窃案发生在商店打烊以后,商店打烊导致窃案发生”等等。 照这样写文章既博眼球,又提高了引用率, 这都是发表文章的窍门。很多在”美国燃料电池学会协会”期刊上的文章也是这么发表的。 T教授明确告诉D同学,”美国燃料电池”期刊的编辑并不是专业的科学家,这个期刊的编辑们一贯强调新奇更胜于扎实的工作。他们象记者一样一味追求发表所谓 “博眼球”的科学成果,对外声称他们一直专注于提供强大的编辑视角、拥有高效而严格的同行评审、以及精工细作的质量保证,以抬高期刊自身地位,只要是浮华,奢华,时髦领域的文章就可以得到发表,科技论文能够被高度引用应该取决于它的科学性实用性,而不是因为其多么抓眼球、生动有趣,至于是否正确,可以用不同学术观点来搪塞。所以在”美国燃料电池”期刊往往是最浮华的文章得以出版,而非最好或最有意义的论文。 T教授向D同学暗示,在燃料电池领域,许多材料学家不惜浪费大量时间,试图让其研究结果出现在”美国燃料电池”刊物上。因为,如果在博士后期间没有论文在该期刊发表,可能就很难踏进燃料电池这些精英机构的门槛,聪明的D同学当然心领神会。 D同学知道很少有无懈可击的博士论文 (air-tight), 她从没想过把博士论文做得完美无缺。她是想把博士学位敷衍过去, 早点嫁人。生活学习工作都齐头并进, 很好的想法。实际上, 陶瓷实验室经常把其它课题的文章拿出来开会讨论, 通过诠译数据以获得新的理念来发表文章, 这是个经济实惠的途径。方法上没有创新, 为了文章顺利发表, 她必须在数据解释上多花工夫。她清楚如果用诠译数据夸张一下她的实验, 可能从Palled 公司得到更多的基金, 从A大学得到博士学位, 而发表文章是证明自己得到资助和学位的最好方式。 博士学位是一个国家的最高学位, 是个国家形象问题, 没有好的导师与好的方向, 就不要做。G同学从中科院硕士毕业后, 没有继续读博士, 而是选择到高校当辅导员, 因为没有好的方向和导师。 问题讨论
D同学认真考虑了一下T教授的意见, 她的数据已经非常漂亮, 足够在”美国燃料电池学会协会”期刊上发表了。她按照T教授的建议又写了一篇文章, 把数据反向强调了一遍, 完全用的是”青蛙腿折导致听力下降”的方式。只不过, PtRu/C催化剂, 听说的人很少, 业内人士比较陌生, 没有人一下子能看出来。 因为Palled公司已经做出了600mA/cm2, 她的结果理所当然被认为是合理的。 Palled公司也高兴看到, 她的工作从侧面证明了他们公司的正确性, 正所谓英雄所见略同,这是皆大欢喜的事。她把第二篇草稿电邮给T教授, T教授非常高兴, 回复她可以投稿到”美国燃料电池学会协会”期刊上发表了。她的时机掌握得非常好, 当时, 通用, 福特等汽车商高调给Palled 公司资助, 只要列上Palled 公司为合作伙伴的文章, 很容易在该期刊得到发表。 因为有Palled公司数据做参考, 没有人会去猜疑是互相抄袭的数据, 报纸电视抄得那么凶的科研成果, 谁会吃饱了没事干去怀疑热炒的科技成果? 结果文章很快得到发表, D同学在材料系被刮目相看, 很快取得A大学博士候选人资格。有多同行给她邀请信, 甚至出钱要求合作, 因为他们都不知道到数据是模拟出来的, 也没有人提出质疑。她知道, 这些学术交流活动对她的职业发展很有帮助。但不太习惯与人打交道, 就请T教授代劳, T教授也乐意帮助她强调其工作的重要性。她总是说,“我不善交际,我只喜欢搞科研,我只是个害羞的丫头片子。” 从一开始她就清楚地意识到女性博士的优势,这种罕见的身份让她获得了其他女性在实验室永远无法得到的通行证。她只是个害羞的的博士生吗?这当然是胡说八 道。她实在是太聪明了,她知道这么做可以让她摆脱很多非议。 问题讨论
D同学的良心在谴责自己没有事前提醒她。 D同学的数据最后还是受到G同学的质疑。其实很简单, 如果单电池电流能达到600mA/cm2, 性能完全可以与内燃机相媲美, 这个世界就不需要内燃机了。电池从发明的那一天起, 人类就幻想用电池来驱动汽车, D同学理论上没有突破, 没有新的实验设备, 观念没有更新, 实验方法没有提高, 做出了别人做不出的完美无缺的结果, 本身就值得怀疑, 没有人是傻子。正因这个原因, Palled公司的燃料电池发电十年来一直处于示范阶段, 前景不妙。G同学怀疑又是个”陶瓷发动机” ,果然Palled 公司十年后成了一家纯房地产公司。 说实话, 燃料电池汽车十年前很时髦, 现在不太听到了, 其实就是关键技术不过关, 前景蒙阴影。HYBRID汽车也是这个问题, 吹得有点过头了。燃料电池, 混合动力, 电动汽车研究现在有点思维的误区,研究思路固化, 走了一条走不通的路。再加上未能找到一种易于操作并且各方都能接受的商业模式,要惠及千家万户, 难于上青天。[2] 伦理观点一 伦理学案例本身就是讨论科研中不道德的现象, 即如何用道德的方式去解决问题, 这些问题在生活中都不常见, 否则不会形成案例, 所以本书中的人和事决不能与现实生活对号入座, 如有雷同, 纯属巧合。我们要学会理性看问题。 “不是要她去删除, 修改数据, 而是她要明白, 如何解释诠译数据比数据本身更重要。”T教授这样要求是对的。即必须明白为何收集数据,对数据的解释必须小心。用简单直观的方式来解释数据背后的意义,决不盲从数据。但是” 青蛙腿折导致听力下降”这种荒谬的结论竟然可以出现在科学杂志上, 并且利用商业因素和审稿者对新的研究不熟悉, 或期刊利用读者猎奇的心理得到发表, 是一种投机行为,科研行为不端。 在科学史上,即使很多看上去“铁证如山”的实验证据也可能误导科学家做出错误的结论。人类胚胎的早期阶段脖子上会出现看起来像鳃的裂缝,德国人Johann F.Meckel据此得出结论,人类是从鱼类、两栖类、爬行动物、灵长动物等“非完美生物线性发育成完美生物”而来的,即鱼是人类的祖先。现在我们知道,Meckel的“线性生物完美”理论是错误的。 企业出资金肯定是想要企业想要的结果,如果这个结果根本不能实现,还非要做下去,那是有点免为其难。看在钱的份上,研究者是不好办呢。唯一的办法是给企业说明真实的情况,重新考虑。这样可以避免一错再错。避免浪费时间和金钱。也会给人高看一 眼。人品比钱财更加重要。也许企业还会有更好的方向呢,那也说不定。企业的难题在哪?双方沟通,建立良好的关系,不是更有前途? 问题在于公司已经上市并撒了谎, 公司本身就是因为燃料电池才存在的。在这么多的研究中,研究者只是顺应企业的要求,从来没有研究者把真实的结果给企业,说不定企业也才是因为这个一错再错下去的。从来没有好好反思。只是觉得没有找到方法、好的材料…如果改正纠错, Palled公司就没有必要存在下去。D同学的博士论文也就失去意义。只是怎么弄也只有这个样子了。因为燃料电池本身可能和”陶瓷发动机”, “永动机”等思想一样, 是个天方夜潭。从二次世界大战到现在, 人们在燃料电池上花费天文数字金钱, 现在还处于示范阶段, 该反思了。 伦理观点二 每次见到G同学, D总是把胸挺得很高, 很性感的样子。怕心直口快的G把她的秘密实验泄漏出去, 这是典型的性贿赂。一天下午, 浓装艳抹, 在材料系电梯里, 用胸脯堵住G同学。其中,”一天下午”是时间, “材料系电梯”是地点, “不肯善罢甘休”是不解怨, “浓装艳抹”是迷惑手段, “用胸脯堵住G同学” 是性贿赂引诱, “质问他是否在背后散布她的谣言”是目的, 让G同学封口。G同学对此事保持沉默, 是正确的, 给人姑娘家一个机会改正错误, 谁不做错事, 谁不说错话呢? 凡事宽容嘛。 D同学肯定是在微妙的和形形色色的压力下, 做出这种模拟数据。来自公司的压力, 转行的压力, 婚嫁的压力, 实验室的压力, 说谎的压力, 博士论文的压力等。这是一个非常好的案例, 让后来人学会谨慎, 小心 (wary) 。这里 有行业压力, 偏见, 对批评的挑战和如何诠译数据。这些压力, 每个研究人员多多少少都有感受。在本案例中, G同学的表现是最好的部分, 良心的谴责(qualm), G同学的良心在谴责自己没有事前提醒她。D同学的冒险让她滑向一个不舒服的境况, 她最后能做的只是敞开思想, 接受批评, 或许以后能避免同样的错误。 对于如何写博士论文,首先要写清楚实验步骤的严密性及表征手段手段之间的必然联系,表征的预期效果将会是什么?对于关键技术问题,可以通过哪些实验或方法来实质性推进,如何将工程问题归纳为基础科研问题?如何把现实问题具体抽象分为哪几个科学问题?他们之间的关联性是什么?只有涉及到这些问题的博士论文才能算好论文。 伦理观点三 本案例论述了两个议题, 1)导师与学生之间的利益冲突; 2) 学术界和工业界的利益冲突议题。 T教授为了公司的资助, 不顾自己专业知识积累不够, 能力不够, 硬上马, 连累学生。与公司的年度小组会议, 本来给学生多点帮助(leg-up), 多学点燃料电池经验。没想到D同学, 一个姑娘家跟K工程师学会了数据作弊。 T教授在这里扮演一个什么角色? 他真的是在捍卫学生的最大利益吗? 他默许D同学作弊, 甚至暗示数据造假, 实际上是在伤害她的前途。她毕业后的博士论文见得人吗? 学校用实验室大小, 基金多少来评价教授。而不问来源与方式, 和教授的科研道德品质, 这本身就是错误的。 T教授承担了教书育人的责任吗? 发表文章可以代替师生间的责任和与企业间的责任吗? D同学隐瞒数据模拟的事实, 使事情变得复杂化。T教授对她博士学位的获得影响很大, 所以对实验室-公司间的黑幕, 多一事, 不如少一事。通常情况下, 材料系认为, 一个学生职业生涯的成功基于发表文章的多少, 这里有个前提, 就是文章本身对人类科技进步有促进作用, 而不是伪造数据, 误导他人, 让别人走弯路。 Paled 公司的燃料电池汽车天天在大街上跑,这本身就是证据。可惜燃料电池就是没法大规模生产,Palled公司现在变成了一家纯粹房地产公司。换个角度,Palled公司用这种方式骗得的科研经费去做房地产为投资者挣了钱,好像问题也不大,毕竟你一个科技公司要做房地产没有人会投资给你。 伦理观点四 在目前环境下, 研究基金短缺, 竞争激烈。很多教授都没有3-5年, 甚至长期规划, 谁出钱, 就给谁干, 谁出钱, 就给谁出文章, 出数据。这对科技进步伤害很大, 燃料电池就是个例子。讲起来, 头头是道, 理论上也站得住, 做起来就难了。世界上的大汽车公司, 事先也没有长期规划, 听风就是雨, 质子交换膜可以形成电流压差, 其实与传统电池原理一样, 单电池串联可以提高电压, 但单电池抗击穿能力弱, 不能无限制串联。质子交换膜的研发成功, 并不意味着质子交换膜燃料电池能象内燃机那样实用。 对T教授来讲, 他的实验室, 研究基金重要, 还是整个科学研究社区重要? T教授如果认为他没有做错任何事情, 只是做了在艰苦得要命的 (cutthroat) 科研环境中, 为了生存必须做的事情, 他只是在宣扬阻碍科技发展的不健康的科研实践。 研究生不要随便发表未得到明确结论的研究结果,特别是不要轻易做出未由实验充分证明的解释。安全的方法是忠实记录所得的数据,用朴实无华的遣词用句谨慎地解释结果,并严格区分事实与解释,一句话,实事求是。 注: 执笔者先写”没有准备好的学生(7)”, 再写的(6), 重庆地铁也是先修3号线, 再修2号线, 看上去写得很快。不过, 重庆先修3号线是看到3号线成效快, 花费少。 问题讨论 1.经费来源会引起别人说闲话, 给人造成偏见和不好的印象吗? 如何避免? 2.企业资金会怎样影响她的研究成果? 3.即使D同学相信企业资金不会影响她的研究独立性, 如果公司有赚钱但不道德的行为不端时, 可能会影响到D同学的学术声誉吗? 4.“人正不怕影子斜”, D同学和材料系如何保持学术完整? 5.D同学在诠译她的数据上有何责任? 诠译数据时夸张一下她的实验, 或调节电流来获得她想要的数据, 这样做对吗? 6.D同学忘了告诉T教授这些数据是模拟得来, 这样合适吗? 她应该如何补救? 7.T教授和D同学对外合作时的责任是什么? 8.D同学发现T教授用她早准备好的 (cut-and-dry) 数据对外宣传, 做广告, 她的责任是什么? (3小时5分钟写完) The Under-prepared Student (6) Gesheng Li, 1-23-2013 This case is purely fictional. Any resemblances to actual individuals or events are coincidental. Diana was a graduate student in Professor Taylor’s ceramic lab of Ace University. Shestarted a project examining the effects of certain catalytic agent in proton exchange membrane fuel cell (PEMFC) during her second year of Ph.D study. PEMFC had a prominent feature of normal temperature technology, energy conservation and environmental protection to the advantages of efficient services to the automobile industry. It brought to high attention of the Palled Corp. of Canada and the related functional sectors, which had spent a huge sum of money in researching and developing PEMFC. Palled Corp. led the world in the research of PEMFC. Diana knew from very beginning that the funding for her project came from Palled Corp., but the money did not permit the company control over how the research was conducted, and she thought she had been so careful not to let the company influence her project data collection and analysis. In fact, the Palled Corp, rarely got involved in the actual situation of her research, normally, Prof. Taylor knew the nicety of her thesis progress. Diana graduated from a technical college of east Europe, she spoke English, but her native tongue was Farsi. She was a shy, quiet, reserved woman, being afraid that others would laugh at her when she spoke English. She tried to maintain the independence of her research, not to let the company influence her thesis work. She did not tell anyone the source of her funding; the gossips might scare off her potential employers. The funding was granted by Palled corp. commonly, the purpose of running a company is to make money. The research had to follow the needs of the company. Making money was to buy cheap and sell dear. Diana’s career would be damaged if there were misconducts of the company. There was a scandal of ceramic engine in the academia of North America; the idea of ceramic engine got into the stock market due to its higher working temperature, burning more completely, producing less air-borne emissions. The academia lost all credibility because all the investment was poured down the drain. The brittleness and low reliability of ceramic was the main obstacle factor for the thoroughly practical proposition. The research community was adopting a prudent policy towards an invest for profit purpose, which often misled the researcher along an errant route. Where there's reed, there's heat. In principle, the proton exchange membrane fuel cell (PEMFC) was an inverter of water electrolysis. It consisted of anode, cathode, and proton exchange membrane, the anode and cathode included the catalysts which speeded up the chemical reactions. The proton exchange membrane worked as the electrolyte of the direct current supply. Diana designed her experiment completely on her own. Prof. Taylor was incompetent of the PEMFC, his expertise was focused on zirconia rather than catalysts of fuel cell. Diana graduated from Washa University with a major of metallurgy. It was her first time to research the carbon adsorption reserve gas hydrogen and PtRu/C catalyst. In the beginning, she could not figure out the basic principles of oxygen reduction catalyst and carbon monoxide tolerant catalyst. She spent a single day to learn to install a fuel cell from Dr. Kim, an engineer of Palled Corp. The procedure was to implant the seals between the cell units, squeezed the end-plate connections of both sides, tightly locked them by screws, to produce fuel cell stack. She was not interested in the heavy labor work, knowing how to adopt her good points and avoid her shortcomings. Her personal strength was to employ XRD, SEM, TEM to characterize the microstructure of the cell units. She decided to move back to the materials department and specialized in the test of cell units and microstructure characterization. Diana had set out to examine a result posed by Dr. Kim. In vitro experiments of fuel cell membrane of Dr. Kim had suggested that current density was able to reach 600-800mA/cm2. It had been suggested that this current density occurs in vivo and was essential for automobile fuel cell. Diana had generated preliminary data that suggest that she had succeeded in 200mA/cm2 current density which had been reported by Mood and Langer in 1889. Soon after Diana conducted these preliminary experiments of 200mA/m2 at a yearly meeting that was held at Ace University. Prior to the meeting, Dr. Kim for sure was not happy of it, Prof. Taylor realized the funding could be jeopardized by the preliminary data, and indicated her that the lab had many competitors who would be attending the yearly meeting of Palled Corp. and instructed her to say nothing about results collected by the lab-made fuel cell. After the meeting, Diana ran into Dr. Kim. She became nervous when she discovered the way of Dr.Kim’s experiments were different from her own. And she also realized that he was implementing a completely different technique and utilizing a bridge rectifier circuit. So far, she had figured out that all Kim’s attempts of 600mA/cm2 had failed. Diana apprehensively approached Prof. Taylor and informed him that Kim’s techniques were not identical to hers and asked whether she should mention it with further notice on her doctoral thesis. Taylor emphatically answered her, No. Diana was badly feeling that any action contradictory to Dr. Kim’s instruction would jeopardize her relationship with her supervisor, decided not to mention her experiments to Taylor. Dr. Kim gave her a mild hint about the data of Palled Corp. and she got it. He instructed her to use four semiconductor diodes as a bridge array, a bridge rectifier circuit to simulate the output of fuel cell . After the yearly meeting, Dr. Kim left, and all the data collected by Diana were from the simulations on the bridge rectifier circuit. Diana has collected all of the data for her thesis, and she had carefully examined the trends of the current density data. Looking back, she might have changed some of her data-collection methods if she could do it over again; because the smart-way of bridge rectifier circuit allowed her to get any data she wanted to write in her paper. She knew the nature of research was that lessons learned now generated the new questions to ask in the future. However, she was excited to see a clear trend in her data that indicated a positive effect of the current density, but she was unsure how to interpret it. She created a rough draft of a paper that carefully outlined and highlighted all of her analyses and results, and gave it to Prof. Taylor for review to publish in the Journal of American Fuel Cell Research Association. Later in his office, Prof. Taylor explained to her that the “Results and Conclusions” section of the paper was very weak. He thought that she did not make a strong analysis for the importance of her technique, and that the quality of the journal where her paper will be published depends largely on her ability to interpret the data and the results. Prof. Taylor emphasized that he was not saying to leave out data or change the data or make the data, but the paper she illustrating about the data was at least more important than the real data themselves. Prof. Taylor explained the interpretation of data to her by an experiment of frog by Prof. Sean at Ace University. When Prof. Sean spoke “Jump!”, the frog would jump, this was the proof that the frog had auditory nerve. If Prof. Sean broke the leg of the frog, then he spoke “Jump!”, the frog would sit immobile. If the conclusion was “breaking the frog’s leg leads to the disappearance of its hearing”, the paper would be able to publish on the Journal of American Fuel Cell Research Association. The citation frequency would be greater than the normal one; many papers had been published in this paper, because the citation frequency of academic articles has a greater significance than the extract frequency. Diana was sure that her papers were rarely air-tight, it was impossible as well because she was under-prepared of the fuel cell research and her time was very limited.. In fact, ceramic laboratory often spent group meetings ripping apart a paper from others in order to stimulate discussion about the author’s conclusions and generate ideas for future research. She had a strong feeling that she had to choose a black or white stance in her interpretation of the data of the simulation to create an acceptable paper. She also believed that if she emphasized the positive results of her research, she could easily write another proposal to Palled Corp. with a high probability of funding. The Ph D degree is the highest academic degree of the country, an issue of national image. George did not apply for a Ph.D position after he got a master degree in China, because he could not find a suitable supervisor and a suitable research field. After thinking about it for a few days, Diana decided that the initial trend in her data was excited enough that it should be emphasized in her paper of the Journal of American Fuel Cell Research Association. She wrote another draft that emphasized this trend and only briefly mentioned the current density also proofed the results of the Palled Corp. as a subject for further research. When she gave the draft to Prof. Tayloe he is very happy to see the result coincided with that of Dr. Kim. He agreed that the results were very compelling and suggested they submit to the Journal of American Fuel Cell Research Association, a world-recognized journal in his e-mail. The paper was soon published, and Diana received a great deal of recognition within the materials department. She also received a number of requests from other research institutes to discuss her findings. The catalyst was very new, and many fuel cell specialists were unfamiliar with it, nobody could notice that the data was simulated by bridge circuit and nobody questioned about it. Diana knew that the publication was good for her career, but she was also tired of contacting others for info and was happy to have Prof. Taylor to speak for her. Prof. Taylor was delighted to help her to emphasize the value of her findings. Her timing was so perfect, when Ford, GM in the sharp pos was investing in Palled Corp. that it was very easy to publish a paper as long as it mentioned the name of “Palled Corp.” George’s conscience was stinging himself, he should have reminded her, since he was under-prepared as well. Eventually Diana’s result was challenged by George. The truth speaks for itself. If her unit cell could reach 600-800mA/cm2 of current density, her fuel cell could equal combustion as a power source. There was no need for people to produce gas and combustion. Human being was dreaming to drive a car by a powerful since the day when the battery was invented. There were no fundamental changes of theories, no new instruments, no innovation idea, it was impossible for her to find a practical way. George was suspecting another kind of “ceramic engine”. Point of View 1 “Prof. Taylor emphasized that he was not saying to leave out data or change the data or make the data, but the paper she illustrating about the data was at least more important than the real data themselves.” It was OK for Taylor to require his student to behave in this manner. But the conclusion of “breaking the frog’s leg leads to the disappearance of its hearing” could be published on a scientific journal, which was really ridiculous. It was a kind of cheating and misconduct to utilize commercial considerations, reviewer’s unfamiliarity with the subjects, the curiosity of the journal to mislead the research community. The trouble was that the Palled Corp. had got into the stockmarket, and lied to its investors. Essentially the lie produced the company. The fuel cell automobile could be a dream forever, like the ceramic engine, perpetual machine, etc. People had spent a huge amount of money on fuel cell vehicles; it has played an exemplary role for over 20 years. Point of View 2 It was an excellent case because it illustrated the subtle and diverse pressures that may influence researcher behavior, such as, bias, career pressures, challenges of dealing with the industry partner, and challenges of dealing with criticism. It incorporated all of the things that most researchers had encountered. The best part of the case is that George was basically a moral person, who had his own underline, and he had qualms from the very beginning. To summarize, the important questions are not whether George had "knowledge of" or "desire to"--neither knowledge nor desire constitute a conflict of interest per se, who had to act on that knowledge or desire in order to trigger a conflict. [1] Let’s bless him, “Good luck”. Point of View 3 The case study had invoked discourse on two issues: 1) an interest conflict between mentor and student and 2) a possible conflict of interest between the academia and industry. The normal reasons for students to attend a research meeting were to learn what the industry was focusing on and to assess the progress of their research. This valuable chance was for avoid being "scooped' and to gain technical experience that could provide a "leg-up" on the progress. Prof Taylor was very unfamiliar with fuel cell and unfortunately a young female student learnt how to fabricate her data from her industrial partner, Dr. Kim. But by what role did Dr. Taylor play? Normally, such roles are taken under the pretense that they were in the student's best interest. It was very easy for a professor to become increasingly occupied with the success of the lab, as judged by size and amount of funding in the department. Essentially it was wrong judgment. Didn’t the position of a supervisor, in other words, a mentor, entail fostering personal growth and the teaching of students? Would a person's doctoral thesis be based on published data? How much influence would a mentor have on when and if a student should graduate? The collaborations were often based on previous relationships. Was it possible that Diana disclosed the false data of Dr, Kim and they could continue to work together? Diana was just jeopardizing her future potential to set up fruitful collaborations? Diana concealed and unreported the fact of data simulation. Prof. Taylor’s attitude had a influence on her doctoral thesis, regarding to the inside story of a plot between the lab and the company, it's better to save trouble. The direct current provided by a bridge circuit had somewhat credit, but it had got to give clear indication of the simulation in the papers and thesis, because there were difference between the stimulation data and the measured data. In 80s, a doctoral student in the Jiaotong University of China was using ice-water mixture to stimulate the solidification for molten steel, it was a big success of classroom teaching of academy students, since the mentor could not move the steelmaking converter into the classroom. Similarly, The fuel cell direct current stimulated by a bridge circuit was useful for the classroom teaching of academy students as well. But it was really insignificant for a Ph.D student to research it, a sledgehammer to crack a nut. Point of View 4 “The quest for research funding has created a highly competitive environment where advantages are sought and adamantly held. In addition, because of the duration of most grants, many scientists plan no further than three to five years ahead, thus masking the long-term consequences for the scientific community of withholding information. These actions serve to impede the overall advancement of science. In addition to generating data, the ability to conceal possible advantages is now a determinants of success, and this situation jeopardizes the advancement of knowledge as a whole. Taken together, these issues are possible conflicts of interest.”[1] Is Prof. Taylor’s responsibility to his student and the research community more important than that to his lab and his grant? Taylor assumed that he had offered no ill effects but what he had done were simply are a part of today's cutthroat lab environment. In fact, he was propagating unhealthy practices that only hinder scientific progress. The doctoral student published a paper in the name of the University, but the false data would lead the public to criticize the university and industry was cheating together. The reliability of scientific research achievements depend not only on reviewing opinions, but also on the relationship between the reviewers and researchers. The independence of the reviewers should be cast doubt on when there was a conflict of interest between the reviewers and researchers. Discussion: 1. Would an enterprise source of funding create the perception of bias? How would Diana deal with potential bias? In what ways could the enterprise funding influence Diana and affect her research? 2. Even if Diana believed the source of funding will not influence her research, would she be concerned with how the presence of enterprise funding could affect her credibility with the public? 3. What would Diana and materials department do to help preserve her scientific integrity in this case? 4. What is Diana’s responsibility in presenting her research findings and interpreting her data? Is Prof. Taylor correct in stating that his interpretation of data is as important as the data themselves? Is Diana correct in assuming she must choose to cheat the data? 5. Was it appropriate that she forgot to tell her supervisor the data was fabricated? What should she do to minimize the undue influence of funding on the way she interpreted her findings? 6. How might Diana approach the situation if she felt that the results are not as cut-and-dry as Prof. Taylor’s response to Palled Corp.? (Total 3 hours and 5 five minutes) L'étudiant Sous-Préparé (6) Gesheng Li, 1-23-2013 Ce cas est fictif. Les ressemblances aux individus réels ou aux événements sont coïncidentes. Diana était une étudiante graduée en le laboratoire céramique de professeur Taylor de l'université d'Ace. Elle a lancé un projet de examiner les effets de certain agent catalytique en proton exchange membrane fuel cell (PEMFC) pendant sa deuxième année d'étude de Ph.D. PEMFC a eu un feature de technologie de la température normale, de conservation d'énergie et de protection de l'environnement aux avantages des services efficaces à l'industrie automobile. Palled Corp. du Canada avait dépensé une somme énorme d'argent en recherchant et en développant en PEMFC. C’était un chef du monde dans la recherche sur PEMFC. Diana a su qu'elle funding était de Palled Corp., mais l'argent n'a pas permis à la compagnie de contrôler comment elle a conduit la recherche, et elle a pensé qu'elle avait fait attention que la compagnie n'a pas influencé sa collecte des données et analyse des données. Palled Corp, n'a pas impliqué dans sa recherche, normalement, prof. Taylor a contrôlé le progrès de sa thèse. Diana a reçu un diplôme d'une université technique de l'Europe est, mais sa langue maternelle était Farsi. Elle était une femme timide, tranquille, réservée, elle avait peur que d'autres riraient de elle quand elle a parlé anglais. Elle a voulu maintenir l'indépendance de sa recherche. Personne ne pourrait savoir la source de son funding ; les bavardages ont pu effrayer ses employeurs potentiels. Palled Corp.a accordé l'à l'étude. Le but de une compagnie est de faire l'argent. La recherche doit suivre les besoins de la compagnie. Il blesserait la carrière de Diana s'il y avait des mauvaises conduites de la compagnie. Il y avait un scandale de moteur de céramique en Amérique Nord ; l'idée du moteur de céramique était au marché boursier parce que c’a eu la température haute de marche, il avait brûlé complètement, il avait produit la petite pollution. Le academia a perdu la crédibilité parce que l'investissement a été gaspillé. La fragilité et la basse fiabilité d'en céramique étaient le facteur principal d'obstacle à utiliser. La communauté de recherches adoptait une politique prudente envers un investissement pour le but de bénéfice, qui souvent a trompé le chercheur le long d'un itinéraire faux. En principe, le proton exchange membrane fuel cell (PEMFC) était un inverseur d'électrolyse d’eau. Il s'est composé de l'anode, cathode, et la membrane d'échange de proton, l'anode et la cathode a inclus les catalyseurs qui ont augmenté les réactions chimiques. La membrane d'échange de proton a fonctionné comme électrolyte de l'approvisionnement de courant continu. Diana a conçu son expérience sans n'importe quelle aide de d'autres. Prof. Taylor était incompétent du PEMFC, son expertise était zirconia, pas catalyseurs de cellule de carburant. Diana a reçu un diplôme du commandant d'université de Washa en métallurgie. Il était sa première fois qu'elle a recherché l'hydrogène de gaz de réservation d'adsorption de carbone et le catalyseur de PtRu/C. elle ne pourrait pas comprendre les principes de base du catalyseur de réduction de l'oxygène et du catalyseur tolérant d'oxyde de carbone. Elle a passé un jour qu'elle pourrait apprendre à installer une cellule de carburant de Dr. Kim, un ingénieur de Palled Corp. Le procédé était d'implanter les joints entre les unités de cellules, pour serrer les raccordements de plaque d'extrémité des deux côtés, pour fermer à clef étroitement par des vis, à la pile de cellules de carburant de produit. Elle n'a pas intéressé dans le travail de travail, elle a su elle pourrait adopter ses points positifs et éviter ses imperfections. Sa force personnelle était d'employer XRD, SEM, TEM pour caractériser la microstructure des unités de cellules. Elle a décidé de se déplacer au département de matériaux et elle pourrait se spécialiser dans l'essai des unités de cellules et de la caractérisation de microstructure. Diana a commencé à examiner un résultat de Dr. Kim. Dr. Kim ont suggéré que la densité de courant pourrait atteindre 600-800mA/cm2. Cette densité de courant était essentielle pour la cellule de fuel de automobile. Diana a produit des données préliminaires qu'elle a tendre à la densité du courant 200mA/cm2 que Mood et Langer a rapportée en 1889. Après que Diana ait entrepris ces expériences préliminaires de 200mA/m2 lors d'une réunion annuelle qu’ils ont tenue à l'université d'Ace. Dr. Kim n’était pas heureux du résultat, prof. Taylor s'est rendu compte que le résultat pourrait compromettre le placement, et il a indiquée que le laboratoire a eu beaucoup de concurrents qui assisteraient à la réunion annuelle de Palled Corp. et il a instruite lui ne dire rien au sujet des résultats qu'elle a rassemblés sur la cellule de fuel laboratoire-faite. Après la réunion, Diana a rencontré le Dr. Kim. Elle était nerveuse quand elle a découvert que les expériences de Dr.Kim étaient différentes de elle. Et elle également s'est rendue compte qu'il mettait en application une technique complètement différente et il utilisait un circuit de pont de rectifier. Elle a su dehors que toutes les tentatives de Kim de 600mA/cm2 ont échoué. Diana a dit le prof. Taylor que les techniques de Kim n'étaient pas identiques au elle. Taylor lui a emphatiquement répondu, non. Diana estimait que n'importe quelle action contradictoire au Dr. L'instruction de Kim compromettrait son rapport avec Taylor, elle a décidé de ne pas la mentionner des expériences à Taylor. Dr. Kim l'a instruite d’utiliser quatre diodes de semi-conducteur comme un circuit de pont redresseur de simuler le rendement de la cellule de carburant. Après la réunion annuelle, Dr. Kim laissé, et toutes données rassemblées par Diana étaient des simulations sur le circuit de pont redresseur. Sa chance était parfaite, quand Ford, GM investissait dans Palled Corp. C’était très facile qu'elle ait édité un papier s'il a mentionné le nom de « Palled Corp. » Punto de Vista 1 “Profesor. Taylor ha hincapié que no decía que ella ha cambiado los datos o ella ha hecho los datos, pero el papel que ella ha ilustrado sobre los datos era más importante que los datos verdaderos.” Era una práctica normal que Taylor ha requerido que su estudiante se ha comportado de buena manera. Pero han publicado la conclusión de “breaking the frog’s leg leads to the disappearance of its hearing” en un diario científico, que era realmente ridículo. Era una mala conducta que han utilizado las consideraciones comerciales, el unfamiliarity del revisor con los temas, y la curiosidad del diario para confundir a la comunidad de la investigación. El problema era que Palled Corp. había obtenido el dinero de la bolsa, y la compañía ha mentido a sus inversionistas. El automóvil de la fuel cell podía ser un sueño por siempre, como el motor de cerámica, máquina perpetua, etc. El mundo ha pasado una cantidad enorme de dinero en los vehículos de fuel cell; ha desempeñado un papel ejemplar por más de 20 años. Punto di Vista 2 Era un caso eccellente perché ha illustrato le pressioni sottili e varie che potrebbero influenzare il comportamento del ricercatore, della polarizzazione, delle pressioni di carriera, ecc. Ha compreso tutti i conflitti di interesse che la maggior parte dei ricercatori hanno incontrato. La parte migliore del caso è che George era basicamente una persona morale, che ha suo morale. Il normale ha ragionato per gli allievi che hanno presenziato ad una riunione di ricerca erano, quello hanno imparato che cosa l'industria l’interessano dentro e l'industria ha valutato il progresso della loro ricerca. Prof. Taylor era non pratico con la cellula di combustibile e purtroppo un allievo femminile giovane imparato come potrebbe fabbricare i suoi dati dal suo socio industriale, Dott. Kim. O ponto da vista 3 o estudo de caso invocou o discurso em duas edições: 1) um conflito do interesse do mentor e do estudante e 2) um conflito de interesse possível do academia e da indústria. Que papel fêz o Dr. Jogo do alfaiate? Normalmente, fêz exame do papel sob o pretense que estavam no mais melhor interesse do estudante. Era muito fácil que um professor estêve ocupado com o sucesso do laboratório, quando a universidade o julgou pelo tamanho e pela quantidade de financiar no departamento. Essencialmente era um julgamento errado. Reference: [1] http://www.onlineethics.org [2] “探访BC HydroSurrey Campus记”, 小河沟, 10-12-2012, http://www.vanforum.org/3/post/2 ... -surrey-campus.html
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |