CrossRef at SciELO15 Conference 2013


Published on

Published in: Business, Technology
1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Thank you for having me.I’d like to describe in detail a couple of CrossRef services and then touch on some of the others
  • In the late 1990’s as scholarly publishing was moving rapidly on-line the opportunities for new services very quickly revealed that some technological benefits presented logistical challenges. Linking was (and is) THE fundamental principle of the nature of being on-line.Its likely one of the first features publishers tried to build into their on-line content was the hyper-text linking of bibliographic references Certainly they found it straight forward implementing citation links to other content of their own, but, linking to the content of other publishers was fraught with business as well as technical problems.
  • From an implementation perspective the “techies” needed to understand how to build a hyper-link to another publisher’s site. This means they needed to know web server addresses for each partner site as well as the unique URL syntax that each publisher had in place to get to a specific piece of content.Further, the business folk needed terms & conditions between each linking partner which meant sometimes lengthy negotiations setting up each bilateral agreement. Hyper linking bibliographies was about to become impossible.
  • The solution was CrossRef which solved both of these problems. The technological solution was to use the DOI. This replaced the need to know unique server addresses with a single Web address of a proxy, DX.DOI.ORG.Further since the DOI is based on indirection the impact of changing URLs was eliminated. As a participating link partner needed to change their URL syntax they also simply updated the indirection of their DOI and therefore other link partners did not have to make any changes. On the business side, CrossRef developed a single terms & condition agreement which all members sign when joining. The agreement describes the uniform benefits each member receives as well as their obligations to the organization.
  • While the majority of members are based in the US many of them have an international presence. 84% of our members are categorized as ‘small’ but a majority of our revenue comes from a half dozen or so largest members. Most members directly join CrossRef, but to facilitate small publisher’s participation we have created the concepts of ‘sponsored publishers’ and ‘represented members’. In these models a larger organization performs all transactions with CrossRef on behalf of their cliental. These arrangements have the benefit of centralizing fee management and technical transactions for small publishers who simply do not have the capacity or desire to do these tasks on their own. [ Mention IBICT ]
  • Publishers use CrossRef DOIs to link to content, usually from the references at the end of articles. Users click on those DOI-based links and are referred via the CrossRef database to the cited article at it’s correct location on the web.If content moves the publisher only has to update the CrossRef database once, and all of the publishers that are linking to their content using DOIs will be redirected to the content in its new location.
  • Along side the registration of DOIs and the capture of article metadata, the backbone of CrossRef’s core service centers on the discovery of DOIs. Authors mostly follow very specific citation guide lines that dictate how an article is described in the bibliography. Since reference style still follow rules put in place when printed pages were a concern we have the need to translate from formatted citation to DOI. CrossRef’s Query service is built to perform this task in automated environments where one-and-only-one result can be processed. The machinery building the links for a given citation can not deal with ambiguity. CrossRef does not charge any fee or even require membership to perform Query operations to look up DOIs. We believe there should be few barriers to encourage dissemination and use of DOIs .
  • A DOI is a simple identifier that should best be expressed in a URL form. The prefix is assigned to a member who uses it for all their DOIs. However, it is not safe to assume who the publisher is based on a DOI’s prefix since DOI’s can be transferred from one owner to another (for example when a journal changes ownership). The suffix is assigned by the publisher and must be unique within the domain of a given prefix. Our guidelines suggest that the suffix be opaque. But as this example shows often a transparent suffix coveys something about the item being identified as this one seems to mention the journal abbreviation and year of publication.
  • Having said a lot about DOIs, I need to make a clarification.CrossRef is not just about DOIs. DOIs are a tool, an important tool and one that is a common denominator in most everything we do. But CrossRef is mainly about providing services to the community which are built upon the metadata associated with DOIs. DOI registration is one of those services and all our services benefit from content having standardized identifiers.
  • Having covered the core CrossRef service, now I’ll dive into a more recent initiative that also needs wide spread adoption for it to succeed
  • In 2011 Fred Dylla Executive Director and CEO of AIP brought forward a problem whereby funding organizations were unable to easily track the research output generated as a result of their funding. In 2012 he was able to report on the progress of an emerging solution.
  • The problem: up until now funding attribution usually is buried in the article text in no uniform way (if at all) making it nearly impossible to harvest.
  • With the recent and ongoing increase in a call for accountability from governments, funding bodies need much better visibility as to the measureable products derived from the funds they provide. Instead of having to interrogate the multiple participants involved in the work flow of research Fundref recognized that scholarly publications are one, if not a major, output that can be readily tracked to determine the productivity of these research funds
  • Fundref was proposed by CrossRef members and has been developed in cooperation with several major funding bodies like the US Department of Energy and the Welcome Trust. The pilot phase concluded in early 2013 and FundRef is now open to all members. There is no fee to members for participating in FundRef and the is no fee to anyone who wishes to use the data.
  • The FundRef Registry is a common taxonomy of funding body names compiled and maintained by CrossRef. The goal is to have as much of the fundref metadata refer to this taxonomy, but the ‘other’ option is available so that authors and publishers can enter whatever funding organizations are appropriate for their publications. Such non-Registry names will not initially be given a DOI and are not considered to be officially in the Registry. Efforts will be made to curate these names and add them to the Registry over time.
  • This is the current FundRef data-flow. Under agreement Elsevier is performing FundRef Registry curation [CLICK]. They provide the data to CrossRef who distributes it under the open CC license [CLICK]. During manuscript submission authors are asked to provide funding information, hopefully, using the taxonomy of names [CLICK]. Publishers then include funding data as part of the article’s metadata they deposit with CrossRef when they register the DOI for the article [CLICK]. Finally the public, including funding organizations, can query CrossRef [CLICK]to identify the content associated with specific funders or awards and grants.
  • While there are certainly sources other than CrossRef for cited-by information, ours is a product of the member’s own metadata. Consequently of course it is only as comprehensive as the data members put in, however, most of our larger members are now participating as well as many smaller members. There is no fee to participate in Cite-By and the technical effort is minimal since the required data must be submitted as part of CrossRef’s core service.
  • This is an article, which has been given a DOI, from the Journal of the Brazilian Society of Ecotoxicology, who is a CrossRef member,but is not yet participating in Cited-BY
  • Were they to participate in Cited-By they’d find that 9 articles from 7 other journals have cited this article[discuss google data]
  • Having cited-by data then enables the offering of additional services to readers by listing the DOI links to those articles. This interlinking between journals and publishers be it references or cited-by is the fundamental core benefit of being a CrossRef member
  • This is the count of cited-by links available in CrossRef as of last weekwhich results from participation by only about one third of the deposited DOIs. Lots of opportunity to grow.
  • The page on the left is the document that the publisher has uploaded, and the three sections you can see under the 'match overview’ on the right are where the system has found this text elsewhere in the one of the iThenticate databases:one section of matching text is from an internet source, one from a CrossCheck member, and one from a publications database which would contain content from places like Gale or EBSCOEditors would look at the areas on the right and make an assessment of the similarities being reported.Of the databases against which each submitted document is compared one is the CrossCheck database which is populated by iThenticate pulling full text copies of all articles for each participating member.
  • Having journals hosted on-line affords many opportunities for advanced services to readers. Possibly one of the most important is to inform readers of changes that affect the content in a material way with the most glaring being retractions. Most publishers offer this information in some way on their web site. What CrossMark does is to present this information in a uniform way across all participating members.
  • And CrossMark is setup to work in PDF documents as well. As long as the reader is on-line
  • Thank you.
  • CrossRef at SciELO15 Conference 2013

    1. 1. When collaboration is more than a nice idea Chuck Koscher Director of Technology Sci ELO Conference São Paulo, Brazil October 22-25 2013
    2. 2. In 1999 a small group of publishers met at the Frankfurt Book Fair. They had a problem. Reference linking was an expanding challenge
    3. 3. Bilateral agreements
    4. 4. • Provides services publishers cannot accomplish alone - they require collaboration • 16-member international board of directors from membership • Commercial, societies, nonprofits, university presses, Open Access publishers 66% non-profit – 1777 Members – 4400 publishers – 1700 Libraries • All subjects: STM, humanities, social science, professional
    5. 5. Who is ? • Members from 76 Countries 20 Countries with the Largest # of CrossRef Members 500 400 300 200 100 0 133
    6. 6. User accesses cited article in Journal B User clicks on CrossRef DOI reference link in Journal A Guo W, Wang ZY, Wang YL, Zhang ZP, Gui JF. Isolation and characterization of six microsatellite markers in the large yellow croaker (Pseucosciaena crocea Richardson). Mol Ecol Notes, 2005, 5(2): 369– 371. [CrossRef] DOI directory returns URL
    7. 7. <query key="key"> <author>Clow</author> <issue>1</issue> <year>1988</year> <first_page>715</first_page> <journal_title>Journal of Climate</journal_title> </query> Clow GD, McKay CP, Simmons Jr. GM, and Wharton RA, Jr. 1988. Climatological observations and predicted sublimation rates at Lake Hoare, Antarctica. Journal of Climate 1:715728 Anyone can use CrossRef to turn these Into these<0715:COAPSR>2.0.CO;2
    8. 8. DOI Clicks
    9. 9. Metadata Services Built on
    10. 10. Another example of essential collaboration
    11. 11. a standard way to report funding sources for scholarly research
    12. 12. The Registry is the cornerstone of FundRef The FundRef Registry provides a common taxonomy of over 5000 funding body names that FundRef participants should use to normalize Funder Names and IDs for deposit. Hierarchy Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs parent to: Animal Health and Veterinary Laboratories Agency
    13. 13. Query to identify funded articles (& data) Taxonomy of funder names Funder Name Registry Metadata identifies funding source members authors Use pick-list to identify funders
    14. 14. Powered by iThenticate • Cross-publisher reference linking • Cross-publisher Cited-by linking • Cross-publisher metadata feeds to CMS Affiliates • Cross-publisher originality screening • Cross-publisher update service • Cross-publisher funder identification • Cross-publisher text and data-mining
    15. 15. Cited-by information is available from multiple sources CrossRef’s service is an essential complement
    16. 16.***&pwd=***&doi=10.5132/jbse.2007.01.011
    17. 17. 365,176,670
    18. 18. Powered by iThenticate • Cross-publisher reference linking • Cross-publisher Cited-by linking • Cross-publisher metadata feeds to CMS Affiliates • Cross-publisher originality screening • Cross-publisher update service • Cross-publisher funder identification • Cross-publisher text and data-mining
    19. 19. # of Documents Uploaded to iThenticate by CrossCheck Publishers 110,000 100,000 90,000 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000
    20. 20. Powered by iThenticate • Cross-publisher reference linking • Cross-publisher Cited-by linking • Cross-publisher metadata feeds to CMS Affiliates • Cross-publisher originality screening • Cross-publisher update service • Cross-publisher funder identification • Cross-publisher text and data-mining
    21. 21. Powered by iThenticate • Cross-publisher reference linking • Cross-publisher Cited-by linking • Cross-publisher metadata feeds to CMS Affiliates • Cross-publisher originality screening • Cross-publisher update service • Cross-publisher funder identification • Cross-publisher text and data-mining
    22. 22.