To launch our new section ‘AI in Research’ Sascha Schönig spoke to Theresa Züger, head of the Public Interest AI research group, about the influence of AI on her personal day-to-day work in research, as well as on the science system as a whole. She gave some exciting insights about the risks and opportunities AI bears for research work and talked about tools her team is developing at the Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society.

Im gemeinsamen Interview geben Prof. Dr. Barbara Höhle , Vizepräsidentin für Forschung, wissenschaftliche Qualifizierungsphase und Chancengleichheit, Dr. Peter Kostädt , Chief Information Officer, und Dr. Matthias Kühling , Referent der Vizepräsidentin, Auskunft über Stand und Chance von Open Science an der Universität Potsdam.

What actually happens to science when it opens up? From your perspective as a science researcher, can you describe why this perspective is important? I believe that science takes place in a social environment and certain images of science emerge or have emerged, which are questioned in many respects in a digital and now increasingly open context or are subject to tensions.

Science communication is often considered equal with public relations or media coverage. However, the phenomenon is significantly more complex, and its most important aspects are not given enough attention. For instance, science includes how science can not only communicate but also interact with societal groups, and the potential impacts this can have on the perception of research in the public eye.

**So, Niels Mede, tell us: who are you? And what do you do? ** I am a post-doctoral communication researcher in the Department of Communication and Media Research at the University of Zurich, and until recently, I was a visiting research fellow at the Oxford Internet Institute. My research centers around science communication, with a focus on public attitudes toward science and communication about science on social media and beyond.

Academic research enjoys a high level of trust among the society in Germany, not least because of its autonomy that is granted by the constitution. At the same time, the public expects research to leave its “ivory tower” and take on a more active role in addressing complex societal challenges such as the Covid-19 pandemic or climate change.

The question of how researchers engage in public communication or political decision-making processes has gained unprecedented attention during the COVID-19 pandemic. Many scientists experienced hostile attitudes when going public. Threats and science hostility are no new phenomena, but gain more importance as science is increasingly embedded in public debates.

On Friday, March 17, The German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) published a reform proposal that promises to improve working conditions in research. This was followed by a massive wave of criticism and protest from scientists across status groups and disciplines.

Several universities in the country have been either completely destroyed or damaged. Most recently, the central building of the Taras Shevchenko National University standing in the center of the Ukrainian capital Kyiv suffered from an explosion nearby. At the same time, the interview itself illustrated the dramatic circumstances of this process: the online-talk was disrupted by air raid siren alerts.

In October Jen Gibson started as the new Executive Director for the Dryad Data Repository. I used the opportunity to ask Jen a few questions about Dryad, challenges with data sharing, and ideas about moving Dryad forward. I was particularly interested in the interview as I served on the Dryad Board of Directors from 2013 to 2016.