Genericity versus expressivity – reflections about the semantics of interoperable research information systems

407 views

Published on

Andrea Scharnhorst, Frank van der Most, Christophe Gueret, Tamy Chambers (IU, Bloomington), Linda Reijnhoudt . Presentation at the ACUMEN workshop, March 8, 2013, Copenhagen

0 Comments
2 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
407
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • O r two?
  • O r two?
  • What is bibliometrics/scientometrics about?
  • O r two?
  • O r two?
  • O r two?
  • Genericity versus expressivity – reflections about the semantics of interoperable research information systems

    1. 1. Data Archiving and Networked ServicesGenericity versus expressivity –reflections about the semantics of interoperable research information systems Andrea Scharnhorst, Frank van der Most, Christophe Gueret, Tamy Chambers (IU, Bloomington), Linda Reijnhoudt Presentation at the ACUMEN workshop, March 8, 2013, CopenhagenDANS is an institute of KNAW and NWO
    2. 2. Andrea Scharnhorst – “science located” •Head of eResearch at DANS and scientific coordinator of the Computational Humanities programme at the eHumanities group of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (KNAW) – DANS=Data Archiving and Networked Services Institute (DANS)
    3. 3. ElectronicArchivingSYstem and NARCIS – Core services (‘products’) of DANS www.easy.dans.knaw.nlDANS as non-proprietary information provider contributes to transparence and accessibility public funded research www.narcis.nl
    4. 4. Overview•How this research started?•Bibliometrics, research information systems and Linked OpenData•The need for core vocabulary•Our proposal•Outlook
    5. 5. What is a “bijzondere hoogleraar”?
    6. 6. Overview•How this research started?•Bibliometrics, research information systems and Linked OpenData•The need for core vocabulary•Our proposal•Outlook
    7. 7. Quantitative studies of science - scientometrics, bibliometrics, informetrics Persons – Organizations - Projects Input Output Processes of knowledge creationNumber of scientists Number of publicationsNumber of PhD students /citationsR&D expenditure Number of PhD studentsInstruments Number of patents….. …..Education Libraries Libraries BooksBooks JournalsData Information Archives Archives Information DataInformation resources provision storage
    8. 8. What is a Research Information System?Ref: KG Jeffery 2008 History of CRIS http://www.eurocris.org/Uploads/Web%20pages/historyCRIS/3HistoryofCRIS.pptSee also: Nick Sheppard. "Learning How to Play Nicely: Repositories and CRIS". July 2010, Ariadne Issue 64http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue64/wrn-repos-2010-05-rpt/
    9. 9. What do we want ?• The dream: single, user-curated, consistent and up to date source that knows everything about someone• Many aiming at being the one
    10. 10. The Dutch situation – many players Metis is very detailed, fed by admin (universities, KNAW) but has a limited on-line interface. CWTS is the ‘Scientific Observatory’ in NL for Research Evaluation; but the databases are not public. NARCIS is the main national portal for those looking for information about researchers and their work.
    11. 11. Courtesy of Nick Veenstra TU/e See: http://ehumanities.nl/vivo-symposium-january-18-2013/
    12. 12. VIVOhttp://nrn.cns.iu.edu/Katy Borner, Mike Conlon, Jon Corson-Rikert, Ying Ding (eds). 2012.VIVO: A Semantic Approach to Scholarly Networking and Discovery, Morgan & Claypool Publishers.
    13. 13. Overview•How this research started?•Bibliometrics, research information systems and Linked OpenData•The need for core vocabulary•Our proposal•Outlook
    14. 14. Different concepts – different data representations Data/Software …
    15. 15. Different concepts – different data representations
    16. 16. Result: Data does not travel well...• Publications from Frank van Harmelen• Decreasing number from system to system 148 38 13
    17. 17. Web of Science has 43 publications
    18. 18. and Google 283 !
    19. 19. Why is information lost ?• Incentives o Keeping one data source up to date is costly o Keeping several is even more so!• Standards o Information that can not be expressed is lost• Confusion o Re-invent the well & (partially) duplicate information
    20. 20. Overview•How this research started?•Bibliometrics, research information systems and Linked OpenData•The need for core vocabulary•Our proposal•Outlook
    21. 21. Conceptual model of the core ontology
    22. 22. Core vocabulary as ‘middle-ware’ US NL
    23. 23. Scope Position International Hoogleraar National National Institutional Institutional Academisch Hoogleraar Individual Individual The core vocabulary proposal crosses the usual multi-purpose Expressivity ontologies at different scales of scope. It has one purpose (the presentation of a researchers career). It does not translate 1:1; but defines shells of meaning (facets). Up-scaled (higher scope) it losses expressivity; down-scaled it gains expressivity in turn for lesser interoperability of the fine-grained information.
    24. 24. Overview•How this research started?•Bibliometrics, research information systems and Linked OpenData•The need for core vocabulary•Our proposal•Outlook
    25. 25. Just another ontology?There is no escape of machine-readable informationexchange and processing.There is a limit at user-provided content.There are institutional and national interests.There is a tension of locally cared information and theglobalization of science.Might not be ‘our’ system, but a system will come!Discourse about this is needed!
    26. 26. VISION I: All research information[change](P. Doorn) 26
    27. 27. Börner K, Klavans R, Patek M, Zoss AM, et al. (2012) Design and Update of a Classification System: The UCSD Map of Science. PLoS ONE 7(7):e39464. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0039464 http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0039464 VISION II: A way for researcher to presented themselves (taylored) extracted from a research information ecosystem 27
    28. 28. eResearch DANS Katy Börner Indiana University Frank van der Most Dirk Roorda Linda Reijnhoudt Visiting fellow DANS-KNAWRene van Horik NARCIS, VisualizationsSustainability and Scientific careers and cultures Queries as annotations,permanence, multi-media of data sharing, ACUMEN CLARIN, Circulation ofsources, APARSEN, NEDIMAH knowledge Peter Doorn Christophe Guéret Albert Moroño Peñuela Ashkan Askpour Semantic web, Semantic web, CEDAR History, information sciences, eHistory, Clarin, Dariah, complex networks IISH Clariah CEDAR, CEDAR Director of DANS PI: WikiReg Leen Breure Cristian Dinu Marat Charlaganov Enhanced publications, WikiReg WikiReg eHistory Thank you for your attention! For more information please contact Andrea.scharnhorst@dans.knaw.nl

    ×