This presenation provides a brief oral history highlighting how literature review has been revolutionized by CrossRef. It will also cover FundRef and why it is so important to Federal agencies. Finally, it mentiones the status of the public access as encouraged by OSTP and how FundRef potentially enables CHORUS to play a major role.

1. How CrossRef Has Accelerated Science and
Its Promise for the Future: A Federal
Perspective
CrossRef Annual Meeting
Cambridge, MA
November 13, 2013
Dr. Walter Warnick
Director, Office of Scientific and Technical Information
Office of Science
U.S. Department of Energy

2. What Is OSTI?
OSTI has the corporate responsibility for
ensuring access to DOE R&D results.
o Public access to unclassified, unlimited
Since 1947!
o Restricted access to classified and
sensitive
o Roles/responsibilities defined in DOE O
241.1B, STI Management
Energy Policy Act of 2005
“The Secretary, through the Office of Scientific and Technical
Information, shall maintain within the Department publicly
available collections of scientific and technical information
resulting from research, development, demonstration, and
commercial applications activities supported by the Department.”
2

3. What Does OSTI Do?
We make DOE R&D results findable and accessible, not just
within DOE, but globally
We make other people’s R&D results findable, bringing
worldwide R&D to DOE and beyond
Premise: Science advances
only if knowledge is shared.
Corollary: Accelerating the
sharing of scientific knowledge
accelerates the advancement
of science.
3
“If I have seen further, it
is only by standing on the
shoulders of giants.”
—Isaac Newton, 1676
MISSION
To advance science and sustain
technological creativity by making
R&D findings available and useful to
Department of Energy (DOE)
researchers and the public.
Accelerating the spread of knowledge
inspires everything we do at OSTI.

4. How Do We Do It?
DOE STI Program
 OSTI coordinates with POCs
across the complex.
 DOE R&D results are:
• Collected from DOE offices,
labs, and facilities, as well
as university grantees and
financial assistance awardees;
• Preserved for re-use; and
• Made accessible via multiple
web outlets.
 Interagency and international
4
exchanges/partnerships leverage
access and use of DOE R&D
results.
DOE supported journal articles are
part of the OSTI R&D Information
Flow

5. What Else Does OSTI Do?
Federated Products
Integrates a range of R&D results (reports,
patents, citations, eprints, etc.) from DOE
information products.
Databases and websites offer over 200
million pages of science information from
R&D agencies of the U.S. government.
Provides over 400 million pages of science
information from databases and portals
from the governments of 70+ countries.

6. Key remaining “gap” is in DOE’s ability to
fully account for and provide access to
journal articles resulting from DOE
research. . .
JOURNAL ARTICLES

7. DOE: Direct Descendant
of the Manhattan Project
oDOE produced the first nuclear
reactors.
oDOE produced the first atomic bombs.
oDOE is now the largest U.S. funder
of physical sciences ~ $5B.
OSTIgather created at both conclusion unclassified, emanating
• To was science info, the classified and of the Manhattan
Project. Project
from the
• To keep current with new developments and preserve &
disseminate as appropriate
7

8. Unique
Experiences years,
For the past several
organizations such as OSTI,
noting that survivors of the
Manhattan Project are passing
away, have collected oral
histories to preserve those
unique experiences.
General Leslie Groves and David Lilienthal
discuss the transfer of responsibility for
atomic energy research and development
and weapons production from the Army to
the civilian Atomic Energy Commission.
There is another kind of unique
knowledge and experience that is
fading away …
and this is particularly germane
to CrossRef and this audience.
8

9. Revolutionary Change
CrossRef has totally revolutionized what it means to do a
literature review.
CrossRef has uniquely captured the power of the web for
science.
We need our own oral histories to preserve unique
experiences of doing an in-depth literature review
before the internet or the web.
9

10. My Own Oral
History
Having done such a pre-internet
literature review for my own PhD
almost 40 years ago, let me offer a
brief oral history.
Royal Sabre Portable Typewriter 1973-1974
Note: Most PhD students need not do a full blown
literature PhD students need only add recent literature to an
Typically, review.
already existing lit review.
Note: I was not the typical student.
My dissertation capitalized on my research project at the U.S.
Naval Research Lab, where I was employed. None of my faculty
Thus: I had to dosuch topics. lit review from scratch.
had specialized in a full blown
10

11. Lit Review of 40 Years Ago
Entailed:
 The use of massive volumes of a citation index.
 Looking up keywords related to the dissertation.
 Gathering citations to journal articles in the stacks at
the
University’s library.
 Sitting at a desk perusing for hours the
volumes of a citation index
 Writing down relevant citations.
 Walking through the library and pulling journals
and finding articles.
11
 Examining hard copy and making notes by hand.

12. Lit Review of 40 Years Ago
Because the indexing was of necessity quite crude, most of
the articles I reviewed turned out not to be relevant to my
dissertation.
But the only way I could find this
out was to check out hundreds of
articles personally: Find the right
volume of a journal, and examine
each article one at a time.
For relevant articles, I had to copy the citation info by hand
and also capture the meat of the article by hand.
12

13. Lit Review of 40 Years Ago
Then I had to scour the list of references at the back of
relevant articles…
and determine if it was necessary to find that journal in
the stacks and, if so…
examine the referenced article. And repeat.
I spent a solid, intense month at the U of
MD library doing my literature review.
13
It was insufferably tedious.
It was among the most miserable months
of my life.

14. Compare My Experience to Today
Thanks to CrossRef
 First, you need not even visit the library; you can
remote in.
 Second, your searches can be much more precise
as you can use multiple key words and various
Boolean tools to bypass irrelevant articles.
14

15. Lit Review of Today
 Third, you can call up the article’s abstract and
read the full text with the click of your mouse. You
need not walk anywhere to find it.
 Fourth, for relevant articles, you can cut and paste
the citation information and also electronically
capture the meat of the article.
 Fifth, for references at the back of relevant articles,
you can immediately call each one up by linking on
the DOI and examine it.
15

16. Progress!
Rather than spend a month
doing a literature review, I
estimate that less than two
days would be required.
Voila, tedium is gone. And time is freed up to do
constructive work on the experimental and analytical
parts of the dissertation. Science is accelerated!
16
CrossRef was key to making this possible.
This is real progress in science information
management.

17. OSTI … CrossRef … FundRef
OSTI has been in the business of making STI available for
decades.
OSTI has been partnering with publishers in this pursuit for a long
time, as well.
OSTI is committed to being a leader in making the web work for
DOE science, and in recent years, OSTI has worked especially
closely with scholarly publishers on a number of initiatives to
improve access to DOE R&D results.
Two of those collaborations, CrossRef and FundRef, promise to
be integral components of the DOE public access solution that
OSTI hopes to unveil.
17
OSTI joined CrossRef in 2005. Why did it do so?

18. DOE: First in Line at CrossRef
The Motivation
Have DOIs assigned to the 5,000 technical
reports generated by DOE’s R&D program each
year so that they could be reliably cited by
journal articles and by other technical reports.
18

19. Pioneering
OSTI was pleased to join CrossRef in pioneering this firstof-a-kind government-private partnership because we
believed that coupling the vast resources available at
Information Bridge with the reference-linking capabilities of
CrossRef would advance OSTI’s mission of making DOE
research results more accessible.
Ever since, when available, DOIs have
been added to records in OSTI
databases for technical reports,
accomplishment reports, and theses
and dissertations.
Today OSTI and CrossRef are
partnering to make it easier to
access 171,000 science research
reports available electronically on
19
OSTI’s SciTech Connect site.

20. Why Is FundRef Important to R&D
Funding Agencies like the Department of
Energy?
As part of our mission, OSTI collects, indexes,
disseminates and preserves DOE sponsored R&D
results:
 Books/monographs
 Conference papers and proceedings
 Program documents
 Technical reports
 Theses and dissertations
 Journal articles
Of these, journal articles represent the greatest
20challenge.

21. Closing the Journal Lit Gap
All agencies are challenged to answer the basic question:
what journal articles are generated by the agency’s R&D program?
FundRef is poised to make answering
this question effortless.
This is why OSTI has been a strong supporter of FundRef from
the beginning.
21

22. 2013 OSTP Memo – Increasing Access
to the Results of Federally Funded
Research
 Released Feb 22, 2013
www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/ostp
_public_access_memo_2013.pdf
 ….ensuring that, to the greatest extent…the direct results of
federally funded research are made available and useful.
“Such results include peer-reviewed publications and
digital data.”
 Applies to agencies with >$100 million in R&D
expenditures
 Recognizes publishers services are essential for
ensuring the high quality and integrity of scholarly pubs,
critical to continue.
22
 Directs use of a 12 month embargo as a guideline;

23. Criteria for a DOE Public Access Model








Enables LONG-TERM free access by the public to the “best available
version” of peer-reviewed scientific and technical information sponsored by
DOE.
Enables single search box of all DOE-sponsored research literature without
requiring that articles be in a centralized collection.
Maintains a comprehensive metadata collection in order for the agency to
fully account for its scholarly output.
Preserves the freedom of researchers to promote and disseminate their
research, i.e., preserves researchers’ choice in selecting the journal to
which they wish to submit manuscripts
Recognizes the value added by publishers in providing high-quality scholarly
communications and research tools and accommodates flexible publisher business
models.
Promotes the Version of Record for each article.
Minimizes cost to DOE.
Encourages coordination and collaboration among agencies, institutions, and the
publishing community.
DOE public access gateway meets these criteria.

24. CHORUS … Publishers’ Contribution to
Agencies’ Public Access Obligations
What is it?
The Clearinghouse for the Open Research of the United States
A public-private partnership to increase public access to
federally-funded, peer-reviewed publications.
What does it do to support agencies' public access solutions?
 Uses FundRef to identify journal articles resulting from federal
funding. Thus FundRef informs the agency that a
manuscript/Version of Record (VoR) exists.
 Provides an API service to help agencies populate public access
systems with article metadata and DOIs. Thus FundRef leads the
agency to a manuscript/VoR so that it can be made full-text
searchable.
 Supports agencies using decentralized public access models.
 Facilitates public access to 'best available version' -- either the VoR or
the accepted manuscript
FundRef is essential to the CHORUS
service.
24

25. CHORUS … Publishers’ Contribution to
Agencies’ Public Access Obligations
The DOE Plan for public access has been
constructed so that it can work with
CHORUS or SHARE or on its own.
The DOE Plan for public access will
leverage FundRef.
25

26. CHORUS … Publishers’ Contribution to
Agencies’ Public Access Obligations
Major CHORUS Milestone achieved Nov. 8,
2013: the DOE public access gateway linked
to thousands of manuscripts via CHORUS, all
full-text searchable.
(Launch date for the DOE public access
gateway
not yet set.)
26

27. DOE Plan for Public Access
OSTP directed federal science agencies to develop
plans for making the results of research they fund
with guidance to be publicly available within a year
of publication.
 DOE’s plan is before OSTP as required.
 Our plan is a natural evolution and extension of



27 
ongoing public dissemination capabilities and
systems.
Proven software.
Proven architecture.
Existing ingest and dissemination tools.
DOE was already positioned for fast and efficient

28. DOE Plan for Public Access
 OSTI believes FundRef is a great way for publishers
and funding agencies to work together.
 Research agencies like DOE are accountable for the
results of their expenditures to Congress and to the
public.
 Publications in the peer-reviewed literature represent
an important output of those expenses, but they have
been difficult to track and quantify until now.
 Public access will expose DOE journal literature to the
public
28

29. Questions
?
OSTI: advancing science and sustaining
technological creativity by making R&D
findings available to DOE researchers and
the public.