Scholze liber 2015-06-25_final

1.249 Aufrufe

Veröffentlicht am

Researchers require infrastructures that ensure a maximum of accessibility, stability and reliability to facilitate working with and sharing of research data. Such infrastructures are being increasingly summarised under the term Research Data Repositories (RDR). The project re3data.org – Registry of Research Data Repositories – began to index research data repositories in 2012 and offers researchers, funding organisations, libraries and publishers an overview of the heterogeneous research data repository landscape. In December 2014 re3data.org listed more than 1,030 research data repositories, which are described in detail using the re3data.org schema (http://dx.doi.org/10.2312/re3.003). Information icons help researchers to identify easily an adequate repository for the storage and reuse of their data. This talk describes the heterogeneous RDR landscape and presents a typology of institutional, disciplinary, multidisciplinary and project-specific RDR. Further, it outlines the features of re3data. org and it shows current developments for integration into data management planning tools and other services.

By the end of 2015 re3data.org and Databib (Purdue University, USA) will merge their services, which will then be managed under the auspices of DataCite. The aim of this merger is to reduce duplication of effort and to serve the research community better with a single, sustainable registry of research data repositories. The talk will present this organisational development as a best practice example for the development of international research information services.

Veröffentlicht in: Wissenschaft
0 Kommentare
1 Gefällt mir
Statistik
Notizen
  • Als Erste(r) kommentieren

Keine Downloads
Aufrufe
Aufrufe insgesamt
1.249
Auf SlideShare
0
Aus Einbettungen
0
Anzahl an Einbettungen
60
Aktionen
Geteilt
0
Downloads
7
Kommentare
0
Gefällt mir
1
Einbettungen 0
Keine Einbettungen

Keine Notizen für die Folie
  • general information (e.g. short description of the RDR, content types, keywords)
    responsibilities (e.g. institutions responsible for funding, content or technical issues)
    policies (e.g. policies of the RDR, incl. URL)
    legal aspects (e.g. licenses of the database and datasets)
    technical standards (e.g. APIs, versioning of datasets, software of the RDR)
    quality standards (e.g. certificates, audit processes)
  • Information icons help researchers to easily identify an adequate repository for the storage and reuse of their data.
  • US 654 GER 196 UK 176 CAN 65 FRAN 49 JPN 42 AUS 45 CH 33 IND 27 NED 28 CHN 23 DEN 17
  • Certification 231
    Open Access 1066 (access to repo, access to data, data upload)
    Persistent Id 388
    All Aspects 88

    Access to Repository
    Access to Data
    Data Upload

  • HSS 52 Archaeology Data Service ads , CLARIN-ERIC
    Life Sciences 21 NeuroMorpho, cancerData
    Natural Sciences 34 astronomy dataverse network, Easy Dans, pangaea
    Engineering 11 3tudatacentrum
  • Scholze liber 2015-06-25_final

    1. 1. Making Research Data Repositories Visible – The re3data.org Registry Frank Scholze | Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, KIT Library Heinz Pampel, Paul Vierkant | GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences, LIS LIBER 2015 | London, June 26, 2015
    2. 2. Background European Commisson. (2014). Horizon 2020 Annotated Model Grant Agreements. Version 1.6.2 .Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/grants_manual/amga/h2020-amga_en.pdf • Funders' data policies • Example: European Commission
    3. 3. Background NPG (2013). Availability of data and materials. Retrieved from http://www.nature.com/authors/policies/availability.html PLOS (2014). PLOS Editorial and Publishing Policies. Retrieved from http://www.plosone.org/static/policies.action • Journal Data Policies • Nature Publishing Group • “[...] authors are required to make materials, data and associated protocols promptly available to readers without undue qualifications. “ • PLOS • “PLOS journals require authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception.“
    4. 4. Reproducability and trust
    5. 5. re3data.org - Mission • global registry of research data repositories • covers all academic disciplines • helps researchers, funding bodies, publishers, libraries and scholarly institutions to find research data repositories • promotes a culture of sharing, increased access and better visibility of research data Pampel, H. et al. (2013). Making Research Data Repositories Visible: The re3data.org Registry. PLOS ONE, 8(11), e78080. http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0078080
    6. 6. Schema Vierkant, P., et al. (2014). Schema for the Description of Research Data Repositories. Version 2.2. http://doi.org/10.2312/re3.006 39Properties 2.2Version Based on Analyses, Feedback and Experience
    7. 7. Icons Vierkant, P., et al. (2014). Schema for the Description of Research Data Repositories. Version 2.2. doi:10.2312/re3.006 The research datarepository provides additional information on its ser vice. The research datarepository provides open/restricted/closed access to its data. The terms of use and licenses of the dataare provided by the research datarepository. The research datarepository provides apolicy. The research datarepository uses apersistent identifier system to make its provided data persistent,unique and citable. The research datarepository is either certified or suppor ts a repository standard. RESEARCH DATA REPOSITORY GENERAL INFORMATION POLICY LEGAL ASPECTS TECHNICAL STANDARDS QUALITY STANDARDS
    8. 8. Quality Requirements: • be run by a legal entity, such as a sustainable institution (e.g. library, university) • clarify access conditions to the data and repository as well as the terms of use • have focus on research data
    9. 9. Workflow
    10. 10. simple search box filters results icons
    11. 11. RDR Typology • Institutional • Disciplinary • Multidisciplinary • Project
    12. 12. RDR indexed by re3data 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Aug-12 Sep-12 Oct-12 Nov-12 Dec-12 Jan-13 Feb-13 Mar-13 Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 Oct-13 Nov-13 Dec-13 Jan-14 Feb-14 Mar-14 Apr-14 May-14 Jun-14 Jul-14 Aug-14 Sep-14 Oct-14 Nov-14 Dec-14 Jan-15 Feb-15 Mar-15 Apr-15 Indexed Research Data Repositories
    13. 13. RDR by Country 48% 15% 13% 5% 4% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 1% US GER UK CAN FRAN JPN AUS CH IND NED CHN DEN
    14. 14. Icons and numbers From a total of 1260 RDR in re3data (June 2015) 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Certification Open Access Persistent Id All Aspects
    15. 15. Champions by discipline 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 HSS Life Sciences Natural Sciences Engineering From a total of 88 RDR (June 2015)
    16. 16. Integration of re3data in Guidelines • Funder Example: European Commission http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/grants_manual/hi/oa_pilot/h2020-hi-oa-pilot-guide_en.pdf • Institutional Example: Bielefeld University • „Verzeichnisse, wie das DFG-geförderte "Registry of Research Data Repositories", bilden die Grundlage für die Suche nach geeigneten Publikationsorten für die Forschungsdaten. “ Universität Bielefeld (2011): Resolution zum Forschungsdatenmanagement. https://data.uni-bielefeld.de/de/resolution • Publisher Example: Nature Publishing Group • „Physics, astrophysics, astronomy and geoscience databases should be registered with re3data.org.“ Scientific Data (2013): Data policies. http://www.nature.com/sdata/data-policies
    17. 17. Cooperation • Deutsche Initiative für Netzwerkinformation (DINI) • DataCite (MoU, April 2012) • OpenAIRE (MoU, October 2013) • BioSharing (MoU, November 2013) • Databib (MoU, March 2014) • DataCite (Formal cooperation, March 2015)
    18. 18. Dimensions of sustainability TECHNICAL LEGALFINANCIAL ORGANISATIONAL
    19. 19. Organizational sustainability • Merger with DataBib under the auspices of DataCite • re3data.org working group within DataCite • International Editorial Board • Cooperations within Research Data Alliance (RDA) and the research data repository community • Community building and feedback loops during RFC phases (e.g. re3data.org schema)
    20. 20. Technical sustainability • Open interfaces • RESTful API • OpenSearch • Documentation: http://www.re3data.org/api/doc • Used e.g. by OpenAIRE • Open metadata • Documentation: http://www.re3data.org/schema/ • Long-term hosting commitment by KIT
    21. 21. Legal sustainability • Open licenses • CC BY for the website • CC 0 for metadata
    22. 22. Financial sustainability • Technical maintenance financed by DataCite from 2016 • Further development managed by DataCite • Further project funding
    23. 23. Thanks to the team • Michael Witt Purdue University, Distributed Data Curation Center (D2C2) • Roland Bertelmann, Claudio Fuchs, Heinz Pampel GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences, Library and Information Services (LIS) • Maxi Kindling, Jessica Rücknagel, Peter Schirmbacher, Paul Vierkant Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin School of Library and Information Science (BLIS) • Hans-Jürgen Goebelbecker, Gabriele Kloska, Evelyn Reuter, Edeltraud Schnepf, Angelika Semrau, Michael Skarupianski, Robert Ulrich Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), KIT Library
    24. 24. info@re3data.org http://re3data.org With the exception of all photos and graphics, this slides are licensed under the “Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)“ Licence: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

    ×