Building Repositories of eprints in UK Research Universities Bill Hubbard SHERPA Project Manager...

Building Repositories of eprints in UK Research Universities

Bill HubbardSHERPA Project Manager

University of Nottingham

repositories and e-prints . . .

research material available on the web cross-searchable rapid dissemination institutionally based

‘e-prints’

‘e-prints’ are electronic versions of research papers and other similar output

‘pre-prints’ (pre-referred papers) ‘post-prints’ (post-refereed papers) other material

– conference papers, book chapters, reports, etc.

key is subject’s quality control– particularly peer review

archives, repositories and OAJ

archives repositories open access journals

why use OAI repositories

dissemination of research impact of research access to research easy integration with current practice

publication & deposition

publication & deposition

Author writes paper

publication & deposition

Author writes paper

Submits to journal

publication & deposition

Author writes paper

Submits to journal Deposits in e-print repository

publication & deposition

Author writes paper

Submits to journal

Paper refereed

Deposits in e-print repository

publication & deposition

Author writes paper

Submits to journal

Paper refereed

Revised by author

Deposits in e-print repository

publication & deposition

Author writes paper

Submits to journal

Paper refereed

Revised by author

Author submits final version

Deposits in e-print repository

publication & deposition

Author writes paper

Submits to journal

Paper refereed

Revised by author

Author submits final version

Deposits in e-print repository

publication & deposition

Author writes paper

Submits to journal

Paper refereed

Revised by author

Author submits final version

Published in journal

Deposits in e-print repository

benefits for the researcher

wide dissemination – papers more visible– cited more

rapid dissemination ease of access cross-searchable value added services

– hit counts on papers– personalised publications lists– citation analyses

why “institutional”?

institutions have centralised resources:– to subsidise repository start up– to support repositories with technical / organisational

infrastructures– to deal effectively with preservation issues over the long term

institutions get benefits:– raising profile and prestige of institution– managing institutional information assets– encourages an institutional identity in intellectual output

SHERPA -

Securing a Hybrid Environment for Research Preservation and Access

development partners– Nottingham (lead), Edinburgh, Glasgow, Oxford, Sheffield,

Leeds, York, British Library and AHDS

funding: JISC (FAIR programme) and CURL duration: 3 years, November 2002 – November 2005

Nottingham eprints

Nottingham eprints - search

Nottingham eprints - record

Arc

Oaister

Google search

Citebase

Citebase - citation analysis

repositories set up in each partner institution test papers being added negotiations with publishers discussions on preservation of eprints work on IPR and deposit licences advocacy campaigns starting sharing experiences and formulating strategies

SHERPA - progress

Summary

open access repositories are good for research institutional repositories offer one solution supplementary to current practice easy to adopt assistance is available

http://www.sherpa.ac.uk

bill.hubbard@nottingham.ac.uk

issues

collection policy preservation IPR cultural differences and changes

OAI, OAIS, BOAI

OAI - Open Archives Initiative– “Open” - interoperable archives with an open architecture

OAIS - Open Archival Information System reference model– “Open” - open for comments and contributions; the

reference model for archives is developed in an open forum

BOAI - Budapest Open Access Initiative– “Open” - freely accessible, open access

successful archives

arXiv - http://www.arxiv.org/– Set up 1991 at Los Alamos– Now based at: Cornell University– Covers: Physics, Mathematics, Computer Science– Contents: 250,000 papers (pre-prints and post-prints)

other archives:– CogPrints - Cognitive Science– RePec - Economics working papers

centralised subject-based archives

issues

collection policy preservation IPR cultural differences and changes

collection policy

document type– pre-prints v. post-prints; authors: staff, students, others?

document format– HTML, PDF, Postscript, RTF, ASCII, etc.

submission procedures– mediated / DIY; file formats

metadata quality standards– self-created metadata

research preservation issues

selection and retention criteria preservation metadata preferred formats life-cycle management cost models . . . one view is that it can all be set aside for now . . .

IPR

author permission and licensing terms copyright and copying compliance with publisher copyright terms

cultural differences and changes

different subject cultures– pre-print culture e.g. Physics– pre-print averse e.g. Medicine– Require: different policies or different archives?

changing the status quo– advocacy and support

SHERPA - next stage

work on IPR, Deposit licences, Metadata, Preservation increased advocacy within partner institutions support services: document conversion, archiving, IPR

advice, and metadata creation adoption of Associate Partners

Citebase - references

Nottingham eprints - process

Nottingham eprints - about and menu

Citebase - abstract