The beauty of
workflows and models
Workflows for research.
Reproducible research.
Professor Carole Goble
The University of Manchester, UK
The Software Sustainability Institute
carole.goble@manchester.ac.uk
@caroleannegoble
RDMF Meeting, Westminster, 20 June 2014
Scientific publications have at least
two goals:
(i) to announce a result and
(ii) to convince readers that the
result is correct
…..
papers in experimental science
should describe the results and
provide a clear enough protocol to
allow successful repetition and
extension
Jill Mesirov
Accessible Reproducible Research
Science 22 Jan 2010: 327(5964): 415-416
DOI: 10.1126/science.1179653
Virtual Witnessing*
*Leviathan and the Air-Pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the
Experimental Life (1985) Shapin and Schaffer.
Scientific publications have at least
two goals:
(i) to announce a result and
(ii) to convince readers that the
result is correct
…..
papers in experimental science
should describe the results and
provide a clear enough protocol to
allow successful repetition and
extension
Jill Mesirov
Accessible Reproducible Research
Science 22 Jan 2010: 327(5964): 415-416
DOI: 10.1126/science.1179653
Virtual Witnessing*
*Leviathan and the Air-Pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the
Experimental Life (1985) Shapin and Schaffer.
“An article about computational
science in a scientific publication
is not the scholarship itself, it is
merely advertising of the
scholarship. The actual
scholarship is the complete
software development
environment, [the complete
data] and the complete set of
instructions which generated the
figures.”
David Donoho, “Wavelab and Reproducible
Research,” 1995
datasets
data collections
standard operating
procedures
software
algorithms
configurations
tools and apps
codes
workflows
scripts
code libraries
services,
system software
infrastructure,
compilers
hardware
Morin et al Shining Light into Black Boxes
Science 13 April 2012: 336(6078) 159-160
Ince et al The case for open computer programs
Nature 482, 2012
Biodiversity
marine monitoring and health assessment
ecological niche modelling
Data Intensive Science
Collaborative Science
Pilumnus hirtellusEnclosed sea problem
(Ready et al., 2010)
Sarah Bourlat http://www.biovel.eu
Data discoveryData discovery
Data assembly,
cleaning, and
refinement
Data assembly,
cleaning, and
refinement
Ecological Niche
Modeling
Ecological Niche
Modeling
Statistical analysisStatistical analysis
Analytical cycle
Data collectionData collection
InsightsInsights Scholarly Communication
& Reporting
Scholarly Communication
& Reporting
BioSTIF
method
instruments and laboratory
Workflows: capture the steps
assembly & interoperability
shielding & optimising
flexible variant reuse
pipelines & exploration
repetition & comparison
record & set-up
provenance collection
report & embed
multi-code and multi-
resource experiments
in-house and external
workflow mgment systems
materials
http://www.taverna.org.uk
Preservation Planning &Watch
continuous preservation management
Environment and
users
Repository
access
ingest
harvest
Monitored environment
and usersWatch
Planning Operations
create/
reevaluate
plans
deploy plan
monitored
actions
Monitored content and events
execute action plan
policies
SCOUT
c3po
PLATO
Taverna
workflows
RODA
Long term preservation of digital data. Maintaining scans of newspapers, books,
records of data; Metadata maintenance; large and automated.
Preservation Policy: Collection level Control Policy: Low level actions & constraints
http://www.scape-project.eu/
Workflows (and Scripts and Models) are….
…provenance of data
…general technique for describing and enacting a process
…precise, unambiguous, transparent protocols and records.
…often complex, so they need explaining.
…often challenging and expensive to develop.
…know-how and best practice.
…collaborations.
…first class citizens of research
…support the process of research
Reproducibility = Hard Work
Code in sourceforge under GPLv3:
http://soapdenovo2.sourceforge.net/>5000 downloads
http://homolog.us/wiki/index.php?title=SOAPdenovo2
Data sets
Analyses
Linked to
Linked to
DOI
DOI
Open-Paper
Open-Review
DOI:10.1186/2047-217X-1-18
>11000 accesses
Open-Code
8 reviewers tested data in ftp server & named reports published
DOI:10.5524/100044
Open-Pipelines
Open-Workflows
DOI:10.5524/100038
Open-Data
78GB CC0 data
Enabled code to being picked apart by bloggers in wiki
[Scott Edmunds]
Data Operations in Workflows in the Wild
Analysis of 260 publicly available workflows in Taverna, WINGS, Galaxy and Vistrails
Garijo et al Common Motifs in Scientific Workflows: An Empirical Analysis, FGCS, 36, July 2014, 338–351
Research Method Stewardship
Management, Publishing, Preservation
Workflows &
Scripts
Services &
Codes
Standard
Operating
Procedures
Descriptions
Standards
Portal
Different systems
Formats
Web Services
Code Libraries
Executables
Models &
Algorithms
Mark-up Languages,
Mathematical
descriptions
Standards
BioModels
Victoria Stodden, AMP 2011 http://www.stodden.net/AMP2011/,
Special Issue Reproducible Research Computing in Science and Engineering July/August 2012, 14(4)
Howison and Herbsleb (2013) "Incentives and Integration In Scientific Software Production" CSCW 2013.
Data Stewardship
Making practices
Sustainability
Management planning
Deposition
Long term access
Credit
Journals
Licensing
Open source / access
Best Practices for Scientific Computing http://arxiv.org/abs/1210.0530
1st
Workshop on Maintainable Software Practices in e-Science – e-Science 2012
Stodden, Reproducible Research Standard, Intl J Comm Law & Policy, 13 2009
Software
ModelsWorkflows
Services
Data Stewardship
Best Practices for Scientific Computing http://arxiv.org/abs/1210.0530
1st
Workshop on Maintainable Software Practices in e-Science – e-Science 2012
Stodden, Reproducible Research Standard, Intl J Comm Law & Policy, 13 2009
Software
ModelsWorkflows
Services
Making practices
Sustainability
Management planning
Deposition
Long term access
Credit
Journals
Licensing
Open source / access
Jennifer Schopf, Treating Data Like Software: A Case for Production Quality Data, JCDL 2012
Software release paradigm
Some of your data isn’t data
Not a static document paradigm
• Release
research
• Methods in
motion.
• Versioning
• Forks & merges
• F1000, PeerJ
GitHub….
Pivot around method / software / data
rather than paper
Citation semantics: software as was? software as is?
The multi-dimensional paper
Replication Gap
1. Ioannidis et al., 2009. Repeatability of published microarray gene expression analyses. Nature Genetics 41: 14
2. Science publishing: The trouble with retractions http://www.nature.com/news/2011/111005/full/478026a.html
3. Bjorn Brembs: Open Access and the looming crisis in science https://theconversation.com/open-access-and-the-looming-crisis-in-science-14950
Out of 18 microarray papers, results
from 10 could not be reproduced
Out of 18 microarray papers, results
from 10 could not be reproduced
reusereproduce
repeat replicate
Drummond C Replicability is not Reproducibility: Nor is it Good Science, online
Peng RD, Reproducible Research in Computational Science Science 2 Dec 2011: 1226-1227.
Methods
(techniques, algorithms,
spec. of the steps)
Materials
(datasets, parameters,
algorithm seeds)
Experiment
Instruments
(codes, services, scripts,
underlying libraries)
Laboratory
(sw and hw infrastructure,
systems software,
integrative platforms)
Setup
same experiment
same set up
same lab
same experiment
same set up
different lab
same experiment
different set up
different experiment
some of same
validate
Drummond C Replicability is not Reproducibility: Nor is it Good Science, online
Peng RD, Reproducible Research in Computational Science Science 2 Dec 2011: 1226-1227.
reusereproduce
repeat replicate
DesignDesign
ExecutionExecution
Result AnalysisResult Analysis
CollectionCollection
Publish /
Report
Publish /
Report
Peer
Review
Peer
Review
Peer
Reuse
Peer
Reuse
ModellingModelling
Can I repeat &
defend my
method?
Can I review / reproduce
and compare my results /
method with your results /
method?
Can I review /
replicate and certify
your method?
Can I transfer your
results into my
research and reuse
this method?
* Adapted from Mesirov, J. Accessible Reproducible Research Science 327(5964), 415-416 (2010)
Research Report
PredictionPrediction
MonitoringMonitoring
CleaningCleaning
RDataTracker and DDG Explorer
Build into the workflows of research….
[Barbara S. Lerner and Emery R. Boose]
Components
Dependencies
Change
• 35 kinds of annotations
• 5 Main Workflows
• 14 Nested Workflows
• 25 Scripts
• 11 Configuration files
• 10 Software dependencies
• 1 Web Service
• Dataset: 90 galaxies
observed in 3 bands
• Multiple platforms
• Multiple systems
José Enrique Ruiz (IAA-CSIC)
Galaxy Luminosity Profiling
specialist codes
libraries, platforms, tools
services
(cloud)
hosted
services
commodity
platforms
data collections
catalogues software
repositories
my data
my process
my codes
integrative
frameworks
gateways
Instrument Entropy
all experiments become less reproducible
Zhao, Gomez-Perez, Belhajjame, Klyne, Garcia-
Cuesta, Garrido, Hettne, Roos, De Roure and
Goble. Why workflows break - Understanding
and combating decay in Taverna workflows, 8th
Intl Conf e-Science 2012
Mitigate
Detect, Repair
Preserve
Partial replication
Approx reproduce
Verification
Benchmarks
Environmental Ecosystem
Joppa et al SCIENCE 340 May 2013; Morin et al Science 336 2012
Black boxes
Mixed systems, mixed stewardship
Distributed,
hosted systems
Workflow Planning &
Watch of Workflows
Watch
Operations
Planning
Env & Users
Repository
plan
deploy
monitor monitor
monitor
access
ingest,
harvest
Decay, Service Deprecation,
Data source monitoring,
Checklists,
Minimal Models
Workflows, myExperiment
Workflows for managing workflows
portability
variability tolerance
[Adapted Freire, 2013]
preservation
packaging
provenance
gather dependencies
capture steps
track & keep results
provenance
gather dependencies
capture steps
track & keep results
versioning
host
service
Open Source/Store
Sci as a Service
Integrative fws
Virtual Machines
Recompute, limited
installation, Black Box
Byte execution, copies
Descriptive read,
White Box
Archived record
Read & Run, Co-location
No installation
Portable Package
White Box, Installation
Archived record
Levels of Reproducibility
Coverage: how
much of an
experiment is
reproducible
OriginalExperimentSimilarExperimentDifferentExperiment
Portability
Depth: how much of an experiment is available
Binaries +
Data
Source Code /
Workflow
+ Data
Binaries +
Data +
Dependencies
Source Code /
Workflow
+ Data +
Dependencies
Virtual Machine
Binaries +
Data +
Dependencies
Virtual Machine
Source Code /
Workflow
+ Data +
Dependencies
Figures +
Data
[Freire, 2014]
(Dynamic) Research Objects
• Bundle and relate multi-hosted digital resources of a scientific experiment or
investigation using standard mechanisms, Currency of exchange
• Exchange, Releasing paradigm for publishing
http://www.researchobject.org/
• Bundle and relate multi-hosted digital resources of a scientific experiment or
investigation using standard mechanisms, Currency of exchange
• Exchange, Releasing paradigm for publishing
http://www.researchobject.org/
(Dynamic) Research Objects
• Bundle and relate multi-hosted digital resources of a scientific experiment or
investigation using standard mechanisms, Currency of exchange
• Exchange, Releasing paradigm for publishing
http://www.researchobject.org/
(Dynamic) Research Objects
OAI-
ORE
W3C
OAM
H. Van de Sompel et. al. Persistent Identifiers for
Scholarly Assets and the Web: The Need for an
Unambiguous Mapping 9th International Digital
Curation Conference; Trusty URLs
H. Van de Sompel et. al. Persistent Identifiers for
Scholarly Assets and the Web: The Need for an
Unambiguous Mapping 9th International Digital
Curation Conference; Trusty URLs
Sys Bio Research Object
Adobe UCF
Research Object
Bundle
ORE PROVODF
• Aggregation
• Annotations/provenance
• Ad-hoc domain-specific
specification
OMEX archive
Systems Biology:
Needed a common
archive format for
reuse across tools
The research lifecycle
IDEAS – HYPOTHESES – EXPERIMENTS – DATA - ANALYSIS - COMPREHENSION - DISSEMINATION
Authoring
Tools
Lab
Notebooks
Data
Capture
Software
Repositories
Analysis
Tools
Visualization
Scholarly
Communication
Commercial &
Public Tools
Git-like
Resources
By Discipline
Data Journals
Discipline-
Based Metadata
Standards
Community Portals
Institutional Repositories
New Reward
Systems
Commercial Repositories
Training
[Phil Bourne]
Acknowledgements
• David De Roure
• Tim Clark
• Sean Bechhofer
• Robert Stevens
• Christine Borgman
• Victoria Stodden
• Marco Roos
• Jose Enrique Ruiz del Mazo
• Oscar Corcho
• Ian Cottam
• Steve Pettifer
• Magnus Rattray
• Chris Evelo
• Katy Wolstencroft
• Robin Williams
• Pinar Alper
• C. Titus Brown
• Greg Wilson
• Kristian Garza
• Donal Fellows
• Wf4ever, SysMO, BioVel, UTOPIA and myGrid teams
• Juliana Freire
• Jill Mesirov
• Simon Cockell
• Paolo Missier
• Paul Watson
• Gerhard Klimeck
• Matthias Obst
• Jun Zhao
• Pinar Alper
• Daniel Garijo
• Yolanda Gil
• James Taylor
• Alex Pico
• Sean Eddy
• Cameron Neylon
• Barend Mons
• Kristina Hettne
• Stian Soiland-Reyes
• Rebecca Lawrence
• Alan Williams
Editor's Notes
how, why and what matters
benchmarks for codes
plan to preserve
repair on demand
description persists
use frameworks
partial replication
approximate reproduction
verification
/ Minute Taking
It examines the debate between Robert Boyle and Thomas Hobbes over Boyle's air-pump experiments in the 1660s. In 2005, Shapin and Schaffer were awarded the Erasmus Prize for this work.
Ballast water in shipping lanes
invasive species risk assessments
When the tools are integrated on the Lifewatch portal, we will have access to the enviornmental data through the workflow.
Global marine layers used in our study came from Bio-Oracle (http://www.biooracle. ugent.be/) with a resolution of 5 arc-minutes (9.2 km) (Tyberghein et al. 2012),
and were used to study abiotic factors such as mean sea surface temperature (SST) (°C), mean surface salinity (SSS) (PSU) and mean photosynthetically available
radiation (PAR) (Einstein/m2/day). Other marine layers used in our analyses came from AquaMaps (http://www.aquamaps.org/download/main.php) with a resolution of 30 arc-minutes, i.e. 1 km2 (Kaschner et al. 2010).
If layers are needed from SMHI, they can be uploaded via the workflow.
Not all things are batch
VPH-Share opens a VNC connection spawned instance.
Taverna Interaction Service
Users interact with a workflow (wherever it is running) in a web browser.
Interaction Service Workbench Plug-in
Collecting, processing and management of big data
Metagenomics, genotyping, genome sequencing, phylogenetics, gene expression analysis, proteomics, metabolomics, auto sampling
Analytics and management of broad data from many different disciplines
Coupling analytical metagenomics with meaningful ecological interpretations
Continuous development of novel methods and technologies
Functional trait-based ecology approach proposed by Barberán et. al 2012.
Example of an extreme of the software issue
Multi-code experiments
platform
libraries, plugins
Infrastructure
components, services
infrastructure
Variety:
common metadata models
rich metadata collection
ecosystem
Validity:
auto record of experiment set-up, citable and shareable descriptions
curation, publication,
mixed stewardship
third part availability
model executability
citability, QC/QA. trust.
Social issues of understanding the culture of risk, reward, sharing and reporting.
C3PO content profiling tool
What kind of platform are my users running on
Purpose: show how the system components work together and support the overall conceptual framework we are building on.
The example story that we use is a real-world case from the British Library where a plan was created previously with Plato3
This kind of scenario is very common, of course - it could have been one of many other organisations that have similar, in particular digitized, collections. In parallel to the Plato case study we are relying on, we had conducted several others that led to different conclusions; and the same problem structure applies to the case study we just conducted in SCAPE with the SB-DK. Hence, the tools demonstrated here apply equally across many scenarios - the concepts used are completely scenario-agnostic, and decision support applies equally across scenarios, content sets, and organisations.
Running migration tools
Designing for reuse is hard
No closing the feedback loop
Off site collaboration (behind closed doors and invisible)
Poor reciprocity – find, grab, piss off
Not much reuse (too specific)
Components
Enclaves and groups are better
File and forget
Most workflows decay.
Group enclaves
Personal archives rather than sharing
Credit…..
Designing for reuse
Curators Credit?
Funded?
Blue-Collar.
Personal and institutional visibility
Scholarly (citation metrics)
Federate workloads
Unpopular with the big data providers.
Hell is other people’s metadata Jean-Paul Satre
Invisible vs nonintrusive (discreet but controlled)
credit
Takes time, fears for description
Non-intrusiveness vs control and invisible
Off site collaboration
Not much reuse (too specific)
Components
Enclaves and groups are better
File and forget
Most workflows decay.
Designing for stewardship
“As a general rule, researchers do not test or document their programs rigorously, and they rarely release their codes, making it almost impossible to reproduce and verify published results generated by scientific software”
An aside
TOLERANCE
The explicit documentation of designed-in and anticipated variation
methods matterresults may vary
Added afterwards.
1. Required as condition of publication, certain exceptions permitted (e.g. preserving confidentiality of human subjects)
2. Required but may not affect editorial/publication decisions
3. Explicitly encouraged/addressed; may be reviewed and/or hosted
4. Implied
5. No mention
59% of papers in the 50 highest-IF journals comply with (often weak) data sharing rules.
Alsheikh-Ali et al Public Availability of Published Research Data in High-Impact Journals. PLoS ONE 6(9) 2011
conceptual replication “show A is true by doing B rather than doing A again”
verify but not falsify
[Yong, Nature 485, 2012]
The letter or the spirit of the experiment
indirect and direct reproducibility
Reproduce the same affect? Or same result?
Concept drift towards bottom.
As an old ontologist I wanted an ontology or a framework or some sort of property based classification.
Reproducible Research Environment
Integrated infrastructure for producing and working with reproducible research.
make reproducible, born reproducible
Reproducible Research Publication Environment Distributing and reviewing; credit; licensing etc
FAIRport* ReproducibilityFind, Access, Interoperate, Reuse, PortPreservation - Lots of copies keeps stuff safe
Stability dimension
Add two more dimensions to our classification of themes
A virtual machine (VM) is a software implementation of a machine (i.e. a computer) that executes programs like a physical machine. Virtual machines are separated into two major classifications, based on their use and degree of correspondence to any real machine: System
Overlap of course
Static vs dynamic.
GRANULARITY
This model for audit and target of your systems
overcoming data type silos
public integrative data sets
transparency matters
cloud
Recomputation.org
Reproducibility by ExecutionRun It
Reproducibility by InspectionRead It
Availability – coverage
Gathered: scattered across resources, across the paper and supplementary materials
Availability of dependencies: Know and have all necessary elements
Change management: Data? Services? Methods? Prevent, Detect, Repair.
Execution and Making Environments: Skills/Infrastructure to run it: Portability and the Execution Platform (which can be people…), Skills/Infrastructure for authoring and reading
Description: Explicit: How, Why, What, Where, Who, When, Comprehensive: Just Enough, Comprehensible: Independent understanding
Documentation vs Bits (VMs) reproducibility
Learn/understand (reproduce and validate, reproduce using different codes) vs Run (reuse, validate, repeat, reproduce under different configs/settings)
Electronic lab notebooks
Issues: non-secure html using http inside secure https iframe in ipython doesn’t work – need to update interaction service to deliver on https.
I’ll come back to iPython notebook later
Client package (currently under development, will be available via Python Package Index (PyPI) for installation for all major platforms (Linux, Mac, Windows)
Allows for calling Taverna Workflows available via Taverna Player
List of available workflows can be retrieved from the BioVel Portal (Taverna Player)
Users can enter the input values using Ipython Notebook (these values can be then results of the code previously run in the Notebook
The outputs from running the workflow (the results) are returned to the Notebook and processed further
The full workflow run and the overall process (provenance) can be saved in the Ipython Notebook format
For an example (static for now), see
http://nbviewer.ipython.org/urls/raw.githubusercontent.com/myGrid/DataHackLeiden/alan/Player_example.ipynb?create=1
the goldilocks paradox
the description needed to make an experiment reproducible is too much for the author and too little for the reader”
just enough just in time
No just ONE system. Many systems.
Bewildering range of standards for formats, terminologies and checklists
The Economics of Curation
Curate Incrementally
Early and When Worthwhile
Ramps: Automation & Integrated Tools
Copy editing Methods
the reproducibility ecosystem
For peer and author
complicated and scattered - super fragmentation – supplementary materials, multi-hosted, multi-stewarded.
we must use the right platforms for the right tools
The trials and tribulations of review
Its Complicated
www.biostars.org/
Apache
Service based ScienceScience as a Service
Shapin 1984
Boyle’s instruments
Check numbers of workflows
The how, why and what
plan to preserve
prepare to repair
description persists
common frameworks
partial replication
approximate reproduction
verification
benchmarks for codes
“lets copy the box that the internet is in”
black boxes
closed codes & services, proprietary licences, magic cloud services, manual manipulations, poor provenance/version reporting, unknown peer review, mis-use, platform calculation dependencies
Mixed systems, mixed stewardship, mixed provenance, different resources
Decay monitoring, traffic lights contribute to Watch/Monitoring
Customise to User characteristics, e.g. their version of workflow engine
myExp and RODL provide both Operations and Repository
Next steps:
Planning component
Explicit roles of archival and curation organisations
Scientific users play different roles but it tends to be the same user
Considering SCAPE brings up some questions about wf4ever
What are the high level policies for workflow preservation?
Who’s playing the role of, e.g. Curator or Archival Organisation?
So far, use cases tend to have the same individual playing multiple roles rather than different individuals.
Who’s our Designated Community?
Meta-Question: How do we answer these questions?
Opportunity to develop workflow preservation policies.
FAIRport* ReproducibilityFind, Access, Interoperate, Reuse, PortPreservation - Lots of copies keeps stuff safe
Stability dimension
Add two more dimensions to our classification of themes
A virtual machine (VM) is a software implementation of a machine (i.e. a computer) that executes programs like a physical machine. Virtual machines are separated into two major classifications, based on their use and degree of correspondence to any real machine: System
Overlap of course
Static vs dynamic.
GRANULARITY
This model for audit and target of your systems
overcoming data type silos
public integrative data sets
transparency matters
cloud
Recomputation.org
Reproducibility by ExecutionRun It
Reproducibility by InspectionRead It
Availability – coverage
Gathered: scattered across resources, across the paper and supplementary materials
Availability of dependencies: Know and have all necessary elements
Change management: Data? Services? Methods? Prevent, Detect, Repair.
Execution and Making Environments: Skills/Infrastructure to run it: Portability and the Execution Platform (which can be people…), Skills/Infrastructure for authoring and reading
Description: Explicit: How, Why, What, Where, Who, When, Comprehensive: Just Enough, Comprehensible: Independent understanding
Documentation vs Bits (VMs) reproducibility
Learn/understand (reproduce and validate, reproduce using different codes) vs Run (reuse, validate, repeat, reproduce under different configs/settings)
FAIRport* ReproducibilityFind, Access, Interoperate, Reuse, PortPreservation - Lots of copies keeps stuff safe
Stability dimension
Add two more dimensions to our classification of themes
A virtual machine (VM) is a software implementation of a machine (i.e. a computer) that executes programs like a physical machine. Virtual machines are separated into two major classifications, based on their use and degree of correspondence to any real machine: System
Overlap of course
Static vs dynamic.
GRANULARITY
This model for audit and target of your systems
overcoming data type silos
public integrative data sets
transparency matters
cloud
Recomputation.org
Reproducibility by ExecutionRun It
Reproducibility by InspectionRead It
Availability – coverage
Gathered: scattered across resources, across the paper and supplementary materials
Availability of dependencies: Know and have all necessary elements
Change management: Data? Services? Methods? Prevent, Detect, Repair.
Execution and Making Environments: Skills/Infrastructure to run it: Portability and the Execution Platform (which can be people…), Skills/Infrastructure for authoring and reading
Description: Explicit: How, Why, What, Where, Who, When, Comprehensive: Just Enough, Comprehensible: Independent understanding
Documentation vs Bits (VMs) reproducibility
Learn/understand (reproduce and validate, reproduce using different codes) vs Run (reuse, validate, repeat, reproduce under different configs/settings)
ENCODE threads
exchange between tools and researchers
bundles and relates digital resources of a scientific experiment or investigation using standard mechanisms
ENCODE threads
exchange between tools and researchers
bundles and relates digital resources of a scientific experiment or investigation using standard mechanisms
Three principles underlie the approach:
Identity
Referring to resources (and the aggregation itself)
Aggregation
Describing the aggregation structureand its constituent parts
Annotation
Associating information with aggregated resources.
ROs as Information Packages in OAIS
DOIs – the resolution of a DOI URL is a landing page, not RDF metadata for a client. (designed for people)
HTTP URIs provide both access and identification
PIDs: Persistent Identifiers (e.g.DOIs) tend to resolve to human-readable landing pages
With embedded links to further (possibly machine-readable) resources
ROs seen as non-information resources with descriptive (RDF) metadata
Redirection/negotiation
Standard patterns for Linked Data resources
Bidirectional mappings between URIs and PIDs
Versioning through, e.g. Memento
ENCODE threads
exchange between tools and researchers
bundles and relates digital resources of a scientific experiment or investigation using standard mechanisms
Three principles underlie the approach:
Identity
Referring to resources (and the aggregation itself)
Aggregation
Describing the aggregation structureand its constituent parts
Annotation
Associating information with aggregated resources.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-W4iLjLTrQ&list=PLC44A300051D052E5
Our collaboration with ISA/GigaScience/nanopublication is finally being written up and will be submitted to ECCB this Friday. We will upload a copy to Arxiv after the deadline. - We will continue our workshop at ISMB, with BioMED Central. And Kaitlin will also join us on the Panel. You can find more details about agenda and panel planning in other emails.
Posted on December 11, 2013 by Kaitlin Thaney
Part of the Science Lab’s mission is to work with other community members to build technical prototypes that move science on the web forward. In particular, we want to show that many problems can be solved by making existing tools and technology work together, rather than by starting from scratch.The reason behind that is two-fold: (1) most of the stuff needed to change behaviors already exists in some form and (2) the smartest minds are usually outside of your organization.
Our newest project extends our existing work around “code as a research object”, exploring how we can better integrate code and scientific software into the scholarly workflow. The project will test building a bridge that will allow users to push code from their GitHub repository to figshare, providing a Digital Object Identifier for the code (a gold standard of sorts in science, allowing persistent reference linking). We will also be working on a “best practice” standard (think a MIAME standard for code), so that each research object has sufficient documentation to make it possible to meaningfully use.
The project will be a collaboration of the Science Lab with Arfon Smith (Github; co-founder Zooniverse) and Mark Hahnel and his team at figshare.
Why code?
Scientific research is becoming increasingly reliant on software. But despite there being an ever-increasing amount of the academic process described in code, research communities do not yet treat these products as a fundamental component or “first-class research object” (see our background post here for more). Up until recent years, the sole “research object” in discussion was the published paper, the main means of packaging together the data, methods and research to communicate findings. The web is changing that, making it easier to unpack the components such as data and code for the community to remix, reuse, and build upon.
A number of scientists are pushing the envelope, testing out new ways of bundling their code, data and methods together. But outside of copy and pasting lines of code into a paper or, if we’re lucky, having it included in a supplementary information file alongside a paper, the code is still often separated from the documentation needed for others to meaningfully use it to validate and reproduce experiments. And that’s if it’s shared openly at all.
Code can go a long way in helping academia move toward the holy grail that is reproducibility. Unfortunately, academics whose main research output is the code they produce, often cannot get the recognition they deserve for creating it. There is also a problem with versioning: citing a paper written about software (as is common practice), gives no indication of which version, or release in GitHub terms, was used to generate the results.
What we’re testing
figshare and GitHub are two of the leading repositories for data and code (figshare for data; GitHub for code). Open data repositories like figshare have led the way in recent years in changing our practices in relation to data, championing the idea of data as a first-class research object. figshare and others such as Harvard’s Dataverse and Dryad have helped change how we think of data as part of the research process, providing citable endpoints for the data itself that the community trusts (DOIs), as well as clear licensing and making it easy to download, remix, and reuse information. One of the main objectives here is that the exact code used in particular investigations, can be accessed by anyone and persists in the form it was in when cited.
This project will test whether having a means of linking code repositories to those commonly used for data will allow for software and code to be better incorporated into existing credit systems (by having persistent identifiers for code snapshots) and how seamless we can make these workflows for academics using tools they are already familiar with. We’ve seen this tested with data over recent years, with sharing of detailed research data associated with increased citation rates (Piwowar, 2007). This culture shift of publishing more of the product of research is an ongoing process and we’re keen to see software and code elevated to the same status as the academic manuscript.
We believe that by having the code closely associated with the data it executes on (or generates) will help reduce the barriers when trying to reproduce and build upon the work of others. This is already being tested in the reverse, with computational scientists nesting their data with the code in GitHub (Carl and Ethan, for example). We want to find out if formally linking the two to help ease that pain will change behavior.
We are also looking to foster a culture of reuse with academic code. While we know there are lots of variables in this space, we are actively soliciting feedback from the community to help determine best practices for licensing and workflows.
How to get involved
(UPDATE: Want to help us test? Instead of sending us an email, how about adding yourself to this issue in our GitHub repository? More about that here.)
Mark and Arfon will be joining us for our next Mozilla Science Lab community call on December 12, 2013. Join us to hear more about the project. Have a question you’d like to ask? Add it to the etherpad!
We’re also looking for computational researchers and publishers to help us test out the implementation. Shoot us an email if you’d like to participate.
Posted in Uncategorized.
APIs – DOIs on landing pages for people.
Scientist works with local folder structure.
Version management via github.
Local tooling produces metadata description
Metadata about the aggregation (and its resources) provided by “hidden folder”
Zenodo/figshare pull snapshot from github
Providing DOIs for the aggregrations
Additional release cycles can prompt new DOIs