Why This Contest Exists
Open science promised to make research faster, fairer, and more reliable, but big gaps remain, and TeraOpenScience wants you to name one and fix it.
Here is the contest at a glance:
- The Missing Piece is a STEM contest for current students and researchers worldwide.
- You identify a specific gap in open science and propose how to fill it using TeraOpenScience.
- Enter with a 500 to 1,000 word written proposal or a 2 to 3 minute video pitch.
- Submissions run July 1 to July 31, 2026, with a free TeraOpenScience account required.
- Three finalists are chosen, then the public votes across social media to crown the winner.
- The winner earns a social spotlight, a published interview, and a meeting with the founder.
Science works best when knowledge is shared, checked, and built upon by anyone with a good idea. This competition invites the people closest to the problems, students and early-career researchers, to use their critical thinking and point at what is broken and pitch the fix.
The State of Open Science: Real Problems Worth Solving
Open science has made progress, but the system still loses enormous value to gaps in trust, access, and incentives. These are not abstract complaints. They are measurable, real-world problems that slow discovery and shut capable people out. Understanding them is the first step to proposing an innovative solution, which is exactly what this contest asks you to do.
Most STEM competitions hand you a prompt and a panel of judges. This one is different: instead of solving a puzzle someone else wrote, you get to define the real-world issue worth solving. The most useful place to start is the cracks everyone in research has felt but few have fixed. Here is where open science still falls short.
Gap 1: The Reproducibility Crisis
Reproducibility is the foundation of trustworthy science, and it is shakier than most people realize. A landmark survey of 1,576 researchers found that more than 70% have tried and failed to reproduce another scientist's experiments, and more than half failed to reproduce their own. When results cannot be repeated, the knowledge built on top of them is on uncertain ground.
The scale of agreement is striking. In that same Nature survey, about 90% of respondents said science faces a reproducibility crisis, either significant or slight, and only 3% disagreed. The causes are well known: selective reporting, small sample sizes, and a chronic failure to share raw data and detailed methods. A real fix means making it normal to share the full record of a study, not just the polished conclusion. Open, transparent platforms where methods and data travel with the findings are part of the answer.
Gap 2: Access Locked Behind Paywalls
Access is the second gap, and it determines who gets to participate in science at all. By one estimate, paywalls restrict access to roughly 75% of scholarly documents across all disciplines, which hits researchers at less-funded institutions hardest. A brilliant idea is worth little if the person who has it cannot read the literature it depends on.
The barrier is not only about reading; it is about who gets read. An analysis of more than 250 million articles found that researchers in the Global South cite paywalled papers and data-on-request at lower rates, and those access gaps are tied to reduced knowledge breadth and scholarly impact. Worse, open-access publishing often just moves the cost: authors in low-income countries rarely publish free-to-read papers even when they qualify for fee waivers, partly because article processing charges average around $2,600. Closing this gap is about opening participation, not just opening PDFs.
Gap 3: Data That Never Gets Shared
Even when a paper is readable, the data behind it frequently is not. Many studies promise data "available upon request," yet those requests often go unanswered, which blocks the replication and reuse that science depends on. As research becomes more data-driven, locked or missing datasets become a bigger drag on progress every year.
This is a tooling and culture problem at once. Researchers lack easy, rewarded ways to publish datasets alongside their work, so the data quietly disappears into inboxes and old hard drives. Studies of access barriers note that informal "email the author" channels create uncertainty and can introduce new biases that formal open-data policies were meant to remove. Shared infrastructure that makes posting data the default, not a favor, is a gap waiting for a good proposal.
Gap 4: Incentives, Equity, and Recognition
The deepest gap is structural: the rewards in science still favor the already-powerful. Career advancement rewards publishing in high-profile journals over sharing data, replicating studies, or mentoring, so the open behaviors that help everyone go uncredited. Talented students and researchers far from elite institutions struggle to be seen at all. A young engineer with a brilliant fix can stay invisible simply for lacking the right affiliation.
A quick map of the gaps and the kinds of fixes they invite:
| Gap in open science | What it looks like | The kind of fix it needs |
| Reproducibility | 70%+ of researchers can't reproduce others' work | Sharing methods and raw data openly |
| Access | ~75% of scholarship behind paywalls | Free, open reading and participation |
| Data sharing | "Available on request" data that never arrives | Default, rewarded data publishing |
| Incentives and equity | Recognition concentrated at elite institutions | Visibility and credit for open work |
| Tooling | Collaboration scattered across closed silos | One connected, open ecosystem |
Each of these is a legitimate target for your entry. The contest does not want a tidy essay about how science is fine. It wants you to pick the gap that bothers you most and treat it as a new challenge worth taking on, the kind of problem solving that turns a complaint into an innovative idea.
Where TeraOpenScience Fits In
TeraOpenScience is an AI-powered open science platform built to close exactly these gaps. It connects students, researchers, and professionals in one ecosystem where knowledge and collaboration cross the usual institutional barriers, with the motto "Be open. Be seen." Free to join under a Creative Commons license, it is open to anyone with an idea.
In practice, the platform bundles the tools these gaps call for: open discussion boards, a knowledge center, research tools, grant funding, and a manuscript review tool moving toward a preprint server, with awards that give members credit for their contributions. It is built for interdisciplinary collaboration across STEM, healthcare, and business, so a medical researcher, an economist, and an engineer can work the same problem from different angles. Members can be seen by potential co-authors, funders, and recruiters, which makes the platform as useful for building a STEM career as it is for entering this contest. That visibility is the thread running through the whole contest, and it is the prize.
How to Enter The Missing Piece
Entering is simple and open to any current student or researcher, anywhere in the world. You identify one specific gap in open science and propose how you would fill it using TeraOpenScience. The strongest entries are concrete, name a real problem, and pitch a realistic solution rather than a wish list. Treat it like a mini research project: a clear problem, a credible fix, and the reasoning that connects them.
Here is everything you need to know:
- Who can enter: Current students and researchers, international entries welcome.
- Account: A free TeraOpenScience account is required to enter.
- Format: A written proposal of 500 to 1,000 words, or a video pitch of 2 to 3 minutes.
- The task: Identify a specific open-science gap and propose how to fill it using TeraOpenScience.
- How to submit: Post your entry on the Posts page and select the pre-created "TheMissingPiece" tag from the tag list so it lands in the contest feed.
- One entry per person, and the tag must be applied before submissions close to count.
You can enter solo, though the ideas often get sharper when you talk them through with a lab mate or fellow participant first.
The Timeline
The contest runs six weeks, from launch to winner announcement. Submissions are open for the full month of July, judging takes the first week of August, and public voting decides the winner in the final week. Mark these dates so your entry counts.
| Phase | Dates | What happens |
| Launch | July 1 | Submission window opens |
| Submissions | July 1 to 31 | Post and tag your entry "TheMissingPiece" |
| Judging | Aug 1 to 6 | Team selects top 3 finalists, notified by Aug 6 |
| Public voting | Aug 7 to 13 | Vote on LinkedIn, Instagram, Facebook, and X |
| Winner announced | Aug 14 | The Missing Piece winner revealed |
In the judging week, an internal panel of judges selects the top three finalists from all participants. During voting, each person can vote once per platform, up to four votes across all four channels, and the finalist with the highest combined total wins.
The Real Prize: Being Seen
For a student or early-career researcher, visibility is worth more than a cash prize, and that is what the winner gets. The Missing Piece spotlights the winner across all of TeraOpenScience's social channels, publishes a featured interview with them on the site, and sets up a meeting with the founder. Your idea, your name, and your thinking reach the whole community.
There are also real rewards for moving early:
- Winner: Social media spotlight, a published interview and feature on the site, and a meeting with the founder.
- First 50 to participate: Lifetime membership, plus a surprise gift.
- Next 50 to participate: One year free after graduation, plus a surprise gift.
That early-entry structure rewards the people who act first, so the case for entering now rather than in late July is straightforward.
Your Idea Could Be The Missing Piece
Open science has gaps that need fixing, and the best ideas often come from the people still close enough to the work to see what everyone else has stopped noticing. This is your chance to name the problem you keep running into and pitch the fix to a global audience, with the founder and the whole community watching. No other STEM competition turns your sharpest critique into your entry, or your innovation into a credit on your name.
Here is how to start today:
- Create your free TeraOpenScience account, the first step to entering.
- Pick the open-science gap that frustrates you most.
- Draft a 500 to 1,000 word proposal or film a 2 to 3 minute pitch.
- Post it on the Posts page and tag it "TheMissingPiece" before July 31.
Be among the first 50 to lock in lifetime membership, get your idea in front of the community, and you might just be the one who supplies the missing piece.