11

Giving researchers credit for their data phase 3 pitch

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Giving researchers credit for their data phase 3 pitch
Page 2: Giving researchers credit for their data phase 3 pitch

“Carrot” for data deposit “Submit data paper” button on repository

Researcher gets– Another publication/citation opportunity

– (Data preserved)

Publisher gets– More data paper submissions

– Better quality (metadata already curated by the repo)

– Link referrals from data repositories

Repositories get– More data deposits

– Better metadata

Funders get

– More re-use

– More impact

Page 3: Giving researchers credit for their data phase 3 pitch

Phase 1 – Feasibility Study RDA Publisher Workflow Analysis

– Straw Man spec for Helper app/API

Questionnaire for Repositories and Publishers

– Confirm requirements

– Gauge interest in proposal

Overwhelmingly positive feedback

– Offers of collaboration

Page 4: Giving researchers credit for their data phase 3 pitch

Schematic

Researcher

Helper App

DataRepo

Partial Package

(SWORD+)

Complete Package

(SWORD+)

Publisher

DataPaper

Data Deposit

Submit

Refs(Zotero)

Etc.(Upload)

Docs(O360/

G-Docs)

FeedbackDOI+Metadata

Page 5: Giving researchers credit for their data phase 3 pitch

Phase 2 – Proof of Concept Detailed API Spec (SWORD2/DataCite) Protoype helper app “Data Paper Companion”

– Fedora Repository/Hydra

– Sword Client/ServerRuby Gems

Community building

– F1000 Research, Elsevier(Data in Brief and Mendeley), ORCID, RDA/THOR

– Many more collaboration offers than we could handle

● Figshare, OJS, Dryad, Nature...

– Presentations/outreach

Join up with “Streamlining Deposit”

Page 6: Giving researchers credit for their data phase 3 pitch

Phase 3 – The Business Case We started to look for indications of the time this app

would save scholars to quantify the possible benefits...

We were expecting to measure efficiency gains of maybe tens of minutes per submission or a bit more...

What we found rather exceeded our expectations!

And explains why everyone was so keen...

Page 7: Giving researchers credit for their data phase 3 pitch

#submissionsystems

Page 8: Giving researchers credit for their data phase 3 pitch

#datamanagement

Page 9: Giving researchers credit for their data phase 3 pitch

Phase 3 - Consolidation Demonstrate real paper(s) published using the workflow

Join forces with Streamlining Deposit team– UX expertise

– Align metadata requirements

– Expect repo-led and publication-led workflows to co-exist

– Need to “close the loop”

Sustainability– Steering Committee to initiate governance structures

– API Spec as a formal publication

● Code as a reference implementation/test harness● Include generalised version of Streamlining workflow

– THOR project – identifier ecosystem for research entities

– Jisc shared services

– ORCID

– Cloud hosting: Azure (Microsoft Research), AWS

Page 10: Giving researchers credit for their data phase 3 pitch

Phase 3 - Expansion Expanding reach/integration

– More outreach activities

– Updated SWORD modules for EPrints, Dspace, OSP

– Work with structured repositories such as EBI, NCBI etc. (domain/data specific)

– Take up other publisher offers: Nature, OUP

– Datasets in ORCID

– Journal Policy Registry as a reference source

Roadmap (not development) for additional use cases

– Multiple datasets

– Other people's data

– Embargoed data (DataShield?)

– Automated publication

– Not just data papers

– REF/Impact friendliness

Page 11: Giving researchers credit for their data phase 3 pitch

Resourcing PI & Project Manager - Lucie Burgess/Neil Jefferies (Bodleian), Fiona Murphy (MMC Ltd)

– Community engagement

– Overall co-ordination

Lead Developer - Anusha Ranganathan (Digital Nest)– Some hands on development

– “Cloud ready” build process for helper app

– Primarily co-ordination/support of partner technical efforts

UX Specialist – Stephann Makri (City)

– Streamline/optimise Data Paper Companion experience

Technical Author (tbd)– Formal API specification document

– Developer guidelines

Partners (F1000Research, Nature, OUP, Elsevier, Figshare, OJS, Microsoft Research etc.)

– Outreach, technical partners, Steering Committee, governance