scholarly journals Addressing search in scientific open data repositories: A semantic metasearch platform

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gustavo Caetano Borges ◽  
Julio César dos Reis ◽  
Claudia Bauzer Medeiros

Scientific research in all fields has advanced in complexity and in the amount of data generated. The heterogeneity of data repositories, data meaning and their metadata standards makes this problem even more significant. In spite of several proposals to find and retrieve research data from public repositories, there is still need for more comprehensive retrieval solutions. In this article, we specify and develop a mechanism to search for scientific data that takes advantage of metadata records and semantic methods. We present the conception of our architecture and how we have implemented it in a use case in agriculture.

2022 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-101
Author(s):  
Gustavo Caetano Borges ◽  
Julio Cesar Dos Reis ◽  
Claudia Bauzer Medeiros

Scientific research in all fields has advanced in complexity and in the amount of data generated. The heterogeneity of data repositories, data meaning and their metadata standards makes this problem even more significant. In spite of several proposals to find and retrieve research data from public repositories, there is still need for more comprehensive retrieval solutions. In this article, we specify and develop a mechanism to search for scientific data that takes advantage of metadata records and semantic methods. We present the conception of our architecture and how we have implemented it in a use case in the agriculture domain.


Somatechnics ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 284-304
Author(s):  
Patricia Adams

Contemporary scientific discoveries are rapidly modifying established concepts of embodiment and corporeality. For example, developing techniques in adult stem cell research can actively remodel the human body; whilst neuroscientists are shedding increasing light on the functioning of our brains. My research at the art/science nexus draws upon recent media theories to investigate the ways twenty-first century constructs of ‘humanness’ and the ‘self’ are affected by both historical and contemporary scientific research and developments in digital imaging technologies. In this article, examples from my artworks: “machina carnis” and “HOST” illustrate how my use of innovative digital technologies and collaborative methodologies has enabled me to immerse myself in the scientific experience at first hand. I demonstrate how my reinterpretations of what is commonly termed ‘hard’ scientific research data does not seek to emulate ‘objective’ readings of the experimental digital image data but rather recontextualises it in the context of my artworks. These artworks acknowledge the personal and visceral content in the scientific data and enable viewer/participants to reflect upon the issues raised from an emotive and individual perspective.


2019 ◽  
Vol 39 (06) ◽  
pp. 280-289 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raj Kumar Bhardwaj

The study aims to trace the development of Indian research data repositories (RDRs) and explore their content with the view of identifying prospects and possibilities. Further, it analyses the distribution of data repositories on the basis of content coverage, types of content, author identification system followed, software and the application programming interface used, subject wise number of repositories etc. The study is based on data repositories listed on the registry of data repositories accessible at http://www.re3data.org.The dataset was exported in Microsoft Excel format for analysis. A simple percentage method was followed in data analyses and results are presented through Tables and Figures. The study found a total of 2829 data repositories in existence worldwide. Further, it was seen that 1526 (53.9 %) are open and 924 (32.4 %) are restricted data repositories. Also, there are embargoed data repositories numbering 225 (8.0 %) and closed ones numbering 154 (5.4 %). There are 2829 RDRs covering 72 countries in the world. The study found that out of total 45 Indian RDRs, only 30 (67 %) are open, followed by restricted 12 (27 %) and 3 (6 %) that are closed. Majority of Indian RDRs (20) were developed in the year 2014. The study found that the majority of Indian RDRs (17) are‘disciplinary’. Further, the study also revealed that statistical data formats are available in a maximum of 31 (68.9 %) Indian RDRs. It was also seen that the majority of Indian RDRs (28) has datasets relating to ‘Life Sciences’. It was identified that only 20% of data repositories have been using metadata standards in metadata; the remaining 80% do not use any standards in metadata entry. This study covered only the research data repositories in India registered on the registry of data repositories. RDRs not listed in the registry of data repositories are left out.


2020 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christoph Steinbeck ◽  
Oliver Koepler ◽  
Felix Bach ◽  
Sonja Herres-Pawlis ◽  
Nicole Jung ◽  
...  

The vision of NFDI4Chem is the digitalisation of all key steps in chemical research to support scientists in their efforts to collect, store, process, analyse, disclose and re-use research data. Measures to promote Open Science and Research Data Management (RDM) in agreement with the FAIR data principles are fundamental aims of NFDI4Chem to serve the chemistry community with a holistic concept for access to research data. To this end, the overarching objective is the development and maintenance of a national research data infrastructure for the research domain of chemistry in Germany, and to enable innovative and easy to use services and novel scientific approaches based on re-use of research data. NFDI4Chem intends to represent all disciplines of chemistry in academia. We aim to collaborate closely with thematically related consortia. In the initial phase, NFDI4Chem focuses on data related to molecules and reactions including data for their experimental and theoretical characterisation. This overarching goal is achieved by working towards a number of key objectives: Key Objective 1: Establish a virtual environment of federated repositories for storing, disclosing, searching and re-using research data across distributed data sources. Connect existing data repositories and, based on a requirements analysis, establish domain-specific research data repositories for the national research community, and link them to international repositories. Key Objective 2: Initiate international community processes to establish minimum information (MI) standards for data and machine-readable metadata as well as open data standards in key areas of chemistry. Identify and recommend open data standards in key areas of chemistry, in order to support the FAIR principles for research data. Finally, develop standards, if there is a lack. Key Objective 3: Foster cultural and digital change towards Smart Laboratory Environments by promoting the use of digital tools in all stages of research and promote subsequent Research Data Management (RDM) at all levels of academia, beginning in undergraduate studies curricula. Key Objective 4: Engage with the chemistry community in Germany through a wide range of measures to create awareness for and foster the adoption of FAIR data management. Initiate processes to integrate RDM and data science into curricula. Offer a wide range of training opportunities for researchers. Key Objective 5: Explore synergies with other consortia and promote cross-cutting development within the NFDI. Key Objective 6: Provide a legally reliable framework of policies and guidelines for FAIR and open RDM.


Author(s):  
Liah Shonhe

The main focus of the study was to explore the practices of open data sharing in the agricultural sector, including establishing the research outputs concerning open data in agriculture. The study adopted a desktop research methodology based on literature review and bibliographic data from WoS database. Bibliometric indicators discussed include yearly productivity, most prolific authors, and enhanced countries. Study findings revealed that research activity in the field of agriculture and open access is very low. There were 36 OA articles and only 6 publications had an open data badge. Most researchers do not yet embrace the need to openly publish their data set despite the availability of numerous open data repositories. Unfortunately, most African countries are still lagging behind in management of agricultural open data. The study therefore recommends that researchers should publish their research data sets as OA. African countries need to put more efforts in establishing open data repositories and implementing the necessary policies to facilitate OA.


2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iain Hrynaszkiewicz ◽  
Varsha Khodiyar ◽  
Andrew L Hufton ◽  
Susanna-Assunta Sansone

AbstractSharing of experimental clinical research data usually happens between individuals or research groups rather than via public repositories, in part due to the need to protect research participant privacy. This approach to data sharing makes it difficult to connect journal articles with their underlying datasets and is often insufficient for ensuring access to data in the long term. Voluntary data sharing services such as the Yale Open Data Access (YODA) and Clinical Study Data Request (CSDR) projects have increased accessibility to clinical datasets for secondary uses while protecting patient privacy and the legitimacy of secondary analyses but these resources are generally disconnected from journal articles – where researchers typically search for reliable information to inform future research. New scholarly journal and article types dedicated to increasing accessibility of research data have emerged in recent years and, in general, journals are developing stronger links with data repositories. There is a need for increased collaboration between journals, data repositories, researchers, funders, and voluntary data sharing services to increase the visibility and reliability of clinical research. We propose changes to the format and peer-review process for journal articles to more robustly link them to data that are only available on request. We also propose additional features for data repositories to better accommodate non-public clinical datasets, including Data Use Agreements (DUAs).


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Graham Smith ◽  
Andrew Hufton

<p>Researchers are increasingly expected by funders and journals to make their data available for reuse as a condition of publication. At Springer Nature, we feel that publishers must support researchers in meeting these additional requirements, and must recognise the distinct opportunities data holds as a research output. Here, we outline some of the varied ways that Springer Nature supports research data sharing and report on key outcomes.</p><p>Our staff and journals are closely involved with community-led efforts, like the Enabling FAIR Data initiative and the COPDESS 2014 Statement of Commitment <sup>1-4</sup>. The Enabling FAIR Data initiative, which was endorsed in January 2019 by <em>Nature</em> and <em>Scientific Data</em>, and by <em>Nature Geoscience</em> in January 2020, establishes a clear expectation that Earth and environmental sciences data should be deposited in FAIR<sup>5</sup> Data-aligned community repositories, when available (and in general purpose repositories otherwise). In support of this endorsement, <em>Nature</em> and <em>Nature Geoscience</em> require authors to share and deposit their Earth and environmental science data, and <em>Scientific Data</em> has committed to progressively updating its list of recommended data repositories to help authors comply with this mandate.</p><p>In addition, we offer a range of research data services, with various levels of support available to researchers in terms of data curation, expert guidance on repositories and linking research data and publications.</p><p>We appreciate that researchers face potentially challenging requirements in terms of the ‘what’, ‘where’ and ‘how’ of sharing research data. This can be particularly difficult for researchers to negotiate given that huge diversity of policies across different journals. We have therefore developed a series of standardised data policies, which have now been adopted by more than 1,600 Springer Nature journals. </p><p>We believe that these initiatives make important strides in challenging the current replication crisis and addressing the economic<sup>6</sup> and societal consequences of data unavailability. They also offer an opportunity to drive change in how academic credit is measured, through the recognition of a wider range of research outputs than articles and their citations alone. As signatories of the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment<sup>7</sup>, Nature Research is committed to improving the methods of evaluating scholarly research. Research data in this context offers new mechanisms to measure the impact of all research outputs. To this end, Springer Nature supports the publication of peer-reviewed data papers through journals like <em>Scientific Data</em>. Analysis of citation patterns demonstrate that data papers can be well-cited, and offer a viable way for researchers to receive credit for data sharing through traditional citation metrics. Springer Nature is also working hard to improve support for direct data citation. In 2018 a data citation roadmap developed by the Publishers Early Adopters Expert Group was published in <em>Scientific Data</em><sup>8</sup>, outlining practical steps for publishers to work with data citations and associated benefits in transparency and credit for researchers. Using examples from this roadmap, its implementation and supporting services, we outline how a FAIR-led data approach from publishers can help researchers in the Earth and environmental sciences to capitalise on new expectations around data sharing.</p><p>__</p><ol><li>https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-00075-3</li> <li>https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-019-0506-4</li> <li>https://copdess.org/enabling-fair-data-project/commitment-statement-in-the-earth-space-and-environmental-sciences/</li> <li>https://copdess.org/statement-of-commitment/</li> <li>https://www.force11.org/group/fairgroup/fairprinciples</li> <li>https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/d375368c-1a0a-11e9-8d04-01aa75ed71a1</li> <li>https://sfdora.org/read/</li> <li>https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2018.259</li> </ol>


2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 113-121 ◽  
Author(s):  
John I. Ogungbeni ◽  
Amaka R. Obiamalu ◽  
Samuel Ssemambo ◽  
Charles M. Bazibu

This study investigates the roles of academic libraries in propagating Open Science. The study is a qualitative survey based on literature review. Various definitions of open science from different scholars and schools of thought were examined. Research articles on the effects of open science on research and the place of academic libraries in scientific research were reviewed. Open science enhances collaborations and sharing of resources among researchers. Metadata related activities are more prevalent due to open science. Open science has increased the relevance of science to our environment and world issues like privacy and the rightful author of scientific data are still some of the challenges facing open science. Academic libraries continue to take steps to be involved as key players in the propagation of open science through advocacy, building of institutional data repositories and serving as hubs for scientific collaboration among others. Academic libraries have to do more in the area of advocacy and provision of data repositories.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document