OeAWI Annual Conference 2025
19.05.2024
As is now tradition the OeAWI was honoured to host our annual conference at the FWF on the 9th of May 2025. Now in its third iteration we are pleased to see a robust community developing around research integrity in Austria and are thankful to all 80+ participants for joining us to share their experiences and for their enthusiastic participation across the day.
Opening with welcoming remarks from our host, President of the FWF, Christof Gattringer and OeAWI Managing Director, Sabine Chai, we then heard from Andreas Janko, Vice-Rector for Teaching and Learning at Johannes Kepler University Linz and Chief of uniko’s Teaching Forum. Vice-Rector Janko discussed the challenges and potential of better integrating the two themes of the conference, Artificial Intelligence and Research Security, into university structures and the importance of Austria taking a leading role in both. Heribert Wulz, representing the Federal Ministry of Women, Science and Research in Austria (BMFWF), noted his enthusiasm for the conference as a space of exchange and learning, and hoped participants would use the time to collaborate on the use of AI and upholding standards of Good Scientific and Artistic Practice.
Building from this, our first keynote speaker, Dr Isabell Piantschisch (Uni Graz) asked the question, “Given the rapid development and obvious advantages of using AI in research, how do we as scientists proceed using a method we are not 100% sure about? Can we? Should we?” The answer, Dr Piantschisch argued, was yes. As a result of the issues around AI and the obscurity of its decision making process however, scientists should be even more sensitive to some of the key tenants of research integrity, mainly transparency, care and accountability. Transparency and care because an AI model is only as good as the data that trains it and accountability because ultimately, the researcher themself is responsible for the results AI produces.
Whilst she highlighted promising research on ‘explainable AI,’ attempting to clarify the decision making process of AI from start to end, this research is still a long way from fully understanding what the AI produces.
In the meantime, Dr Piantschisch argued, it is important to remember that whilst the method is good, it is entirely untransparent. Ever more care should therefore be taken to ensure that the negative potentials of AI are outweighed by positive applications of good research practice.
Opening with welcoming remarks from our host, President of the FWF, Christof Gattringer and OeAWI Managing Director, Sabine Chai, we then heard from Andreas Janko, Vice-Rector for Teaching and Learning at Johannes Kepler University Linz and Chief of uniko’s Teaching Forum. Vice-Rector Janko discussed the challenges and potential of better integrating the two themes of the conference, Artificial Intelligence and Research Security, into university structures and the importance of Austria taking a leading role in both. Heribert Wulz, representing the Federal Ministry of Women, Science and Research in Austria (BMFWF), noted his enthusiasm for the conference as a space of exchange and learning, and hoped participants would use the time to collaborate on the use of AI and upholding standards of Good Scientific and Artistic Practice.
Building from this, our first keynote speaker, Dr Isabell Piantschisch (Uni Graz) asked the question, “Given the rapid development and obvious advantages of using AI in research, how do we as scientists proceed using a method we are not 100% sure about? Can we? Should we?” The answer, Dr Piantschisch argued, was yes. As a result of the issues around AI and the obscurity of its decision making process however, scientists should be even more sensitive to some of the key tenants of research integrity, mainly transparency, care and accountability. Transparency and care because an AI model is only as good as the data that trains it and accountability because ultimately, the researcher themself is responsible for the results AI produces.
Whilst she highlighted promising research on ‘explainable AI,’ attempting to clarify the decision making process of AI from start to end, this research is still a long way from fully understanding what the AI produces.
In the meantime, Dr Piantschisch argued, it is important to remember that whilst the method is good, it is entirely untransparent. Ever more care should therefore be taken to ensure that the negative potentials of AI are outweighed by positive applications of good research practice.
The final part of the morning was dedicated to a brainwalk asking whether research integrity and research ethics really are two peas in a pod. Participants broke up into subject specialisms to discuss what research integrity and ethics means to them, what structures their institutions have in place to address them and also what is missing. The brainwalk provided a wonderful space of mutual learning and reflection and we are very grateful to each of our section leaders for guiding such stimulating discussions.
Our afternoon programme opened with a talk from Elmar Pichl (BMFWF) who spoke about the ministry’s wish to collaborate with higher education institutions to form more coherent policies on research integrity and AI usage. He stressed the importance of maintaining academic freedom whilst also working towards a more harmonious regulatory environment, speaking of the potential to develop core principles around which institutions might build their own codes. These opening thoughts were followed by another interactive activity for participants, asking them to share what activities they already had in place at an institutional level, what they would like to have and likewise what they might like to see on national and governmental levels. Participants were then asked to read everyone’s suggestions and rank their top three. The activity resulted in a very promising collection of ideas of what our members might want to see and what role the ÖAWI itself might play in this.
The final part of the day was dedicated to the development of research security principles in Austria. Katharina-Irene Bointner and Adrian Korhummel from the BMFWF presented both the national and European perspectives on how to balance between internationality and security. Mr Korhummel stressed the EU’s policy of being as open as possible and as closed as necessary to ensure the best of both worlds. While Ms Bointner highlighted the country agnostic approach that the BMFWF encourages, asking institutions to consider each case individually, rather than relying on a set of inflexible rules from the ministry itself. As the Q&A demonstrated, this is still an emerging aspect of the research (integrity) landscape, with much more still to discuss.
We are grateful to all participants for their time and enthusiasm in taking part. We at the ÖAWI learnt a lot and look forward to seeing everyone next year for the 2026 Jahrestagung.
Our afternoon programme opened with a talk from Elmar Pichl (BMFWF) who spoke about the ministry’s wish to collaborate with higher education institutions to form more coherent policies on research integrity and AI usage. He stressed the importance of maintaining academic freedom whilst also working towards a more harmonious regulatory environment, speaking of the potential to develop core principles around which institutions might build their own codes. These opening thoughts were followed by another interactive activity for participants, asking them to share what activities they already had in place at an institutional level, what they would like to have and likewise what they might like to see on national and governmental levels. Participants were then asked to read everyone’s suggestions and rank their top three. The activity resulted in a very promising collection of ideas of what our members might want to see and what role the ÖAWI itself might play in this.
The final part of the day was dedicated to the development of research security principles in Austria. Katharina-Irene Bointner and Adrian Korhummel from the BMFWF presented both the national and European perspectives on how to balance between internationality and security. Mr Korhummel stressed the EU’s policy of being as open as possible and as closed as necessary to ensure the best of both worlds. While Ms Bointner highlighted the country agnostic approach that the BMFWF encourages, asking institutions to consider each case individually, rather than relying on a set of inflexible rules from the ministry itself. As the Q&A demonstrated, this is still an emerging aspect of the research (integrity) landscape, with much more still to discuss.
We are grateful to all participants for their time and enthusiasm in taking part. We at the ÖAWI learnt a lot and look forward to seeing everyone next year for the 2026 Jahrestagung.
